Madam Speaker, South Africa would not, in fact, have had a problem with a lack of competition in the infrastructure layer if the Electronic Communications Act had not contained the one section that we opposed in that law. The Electronic Communications Act is Parliament's law. It is also our law.
We reconceptualised the Convergence Bill as it was, to deal not only with convergence but also with competition. The absence of competition that has slowed us to a snail's pace was - let it be said - the product of policy failure, which gave Telkom too long an exclusivity period and then tried to introduce a duopoly under adverse conditions.
Legislating in a policy vacuum in 2005, we threw the sector open to competition, except for that one section. Section 5(6) prevents Icasa, the Independent Communications Authority of SA, from issuing invitations to apply for network licences above a certain scope.
A properly empowered regulator applies its expert mind precisely to such matters - how to stimulate and create incentive investment and competition in areas where it is lacking. The Electronic Communications Act, however, contains a red robot: Everyone has to wait until our hon Minister issues policy directions in terms of which Icasa can issue an ITA, invitation to apply, not only for the big networks but also for any licence for in which a state-owned entity holds 25% or more. The light remained resolutely red.
Then enters the hon Public Enterprises Minister to turn the light from red to green. Unfortunately, he did so, of course, using the only entities over which he holds sway - the SOEs.
I would like to say that the DA, like every party in nearly every country in the world, is opposed to a return to state telecoms, and I mention that because our hon Minister described a paradigm shift in Africa, which, I think, we must be really careful about.
The case for liberalisation in telecoms is conclusive, but our telephone minister number two - as I nicknamed the Public Enterprises Minister - made proposals that sounded as if they had, in fact, the potential to break the bottleneck in terrestrial backbone facilities provided, of course, that they remain limited to a wholesale, cost-oriented offering to operators.
Infraco, in other words, had the potential to serve the goals of the pro- competitive Electronic Communications Act. Now, Infraco could not simply be deemed a licence under its own Act, for legal reasons and also because it must fit the logic of the Electronic Communications Act. It had to be brought into Icasa's domain. Regrettably, the amending Bill tabled by our hon Minister brought it firmly into her own domain, rather than the regulator's.
The DOC, Department of Communications, leapt at the opportunity to introduce an effective parallel licensing regime under which it could license its own SOEs to perform strategic infrastructure interventions - and we are talking here only about infrastructure interventions. Sentech, of course, already is supposed to play such role - one wonders.
However, such a provision as the one tabled, unconstrained, was far too vague and broad. Our communications committee has instead placed this provision within the Electronic Communications Act's policy direction- making section, where it is automatically subject to checks and constraints. It is the logical place to put it since that makes it the extension of section 5(6), which is essentially exception to the general Electronic Communications Act prohibition on ministerial influence upon licensing decisions.
Let me say that it remains regrettable that this amendment does not open the ITA - which is to follow - to private sector entities that do wish to build infrastructure.
It is no more than a form of damage control against the ambitions of both telephone ministers. However, because it goes someway to achieving such damage control, we will, today, support it. As our colleague, the hon Manie van Dyk, supported Infraco but made many warnings, we echo those very same warnings.
We do warn against the return to state telecoms. What we need is not the competition between two Ministers, which we are going to get. They are already competing with each other on undersea cables to the east and to the west of our continent. What we need is real and open competition. Thank you. [Applause.]