It is simply impossible in seven minutes to, seriatim, address in any depth the very serious core issues relating this department.

The word "fiasco" springs to mind when one's thoughts focus on, for instance, the antics at the SABC and Telkom's service delivery (both accessibility and affordability).

The words "digital broadcasting" conjure up a looming nightmare scenario of broken promises and one wonders (when one hears the whispers) if yet another scandal is looming around matters relating to the production of the required Set Top Boxes.

The IFP Caucus seriously pondered whether NOT to support this budget as a sign of protest. The consensus finally was to support in the hope yet again that the department (with an alarming vacancy rate of nearly 40 percent in some of its programmes) will manage to miraculously hurdle many of the obstacles of its own making.

This year IFP MPs were required to hold pre-budget workshops with respect to their Portfolio Committees to prepare for the budget vote debates.

Independent persons knowledgeable in their fields - mainly from the private sector and academia - were asked to give their opinions regarding the relevant issues and performances of each Ministry.

The following are some of the comments made about the Department of Communications:

Quote: "The Department is dysfunctional, incompetent and inefficient."; "It is rotten to the core."; "It is a complete mess."; "There is no clear policy-making or implementation."; "Instead of promoting economic growth it stifles it." Unquote.

There is consensus, throughout South Africa, that an industry which contributes billions of rands to the GDP does not deserve the kind of shambling decision-making which has perpetuated year after year - exemplified, for instance, with regard to the undersea cable fiasco which has jeopardized our ability to dramatically increase our available bandwidth.

The total revenue generated by the telecommunications sector increased from R7 billion in 1992 to what is believed, today, to be around R90 billion - six percent of GDP.

As the saying goes: "Houston, we have a problem." So too will Telkom (not to mention those Buffalo and Elephant consortiums!) if it has to pay that R3.7 billion fine for anti-competitive behaviour that the Competition Commission wants to impose. We await developments.

We note this week's news reports of a R90 billion Telkom/Vodacom bid feeding frenzy "for the total ownership of Telkom" - which the department initially said it knew nothing about. Vodaphone is at the same time also circling but has indicated that it has no plans to get involved in discounted BEE deals.

This time it is the ANC's Mr Tokyo Sexwale and last time it was the ANC's Mr Andile Ncgaba and Mr Smuts Ngonyama and Ms Gloria Serobe so on and so forth.

The Government, as custodians for the people of South Africa, owns 38.9 percent of Telkom and the PIC owns 15.3 percent. Let us pray that this latest bid is not an asset-stripping exercise.

Just like the post-94 Telkom sale to Thintana -- where only the American and Malaysian partners ultimately profited -- shouldn't the good citizens of South Africa this time around be given some real facts as to how this potential bargain-basement sale or sales will impact on bringing down telecoms costs?

In the field of telecommunications, the poor continue to subsidize the rich in ownership and in service. The poor pay 300 cents per minute for their pre-paid calls while rich big business pays less than 40 cents a minute.

Year after year we hear in this House that competition (enter Neotel via a parallel Communications Minister Number 2 in Public Enterprises) will bring down prices. Year after year nothing happens. The Networked Readiness Index (a World Economic Forum study) cites a lack of competition in the telecoms sector as a prime factor hindering SA's economic growth and social development.

What is the Department busy with? What is consuming the DG's energies (apart from her work running the ANC political school)?

One thing that has concentrated her mind is ensuring that only African (note: not just South African!) BEE will benefit from landing another deep sea cable on our shores! The mind simply boggles.

While increased bandwidth will ultimately generate billions of rands throughout our economy and provide thousands of jobs, the Department's primary concerns are yet again power and control and determining whose politically-aligned snouts are going to be allowed to feed in the telecoms troughs.

In the time I have left I would like to ask some hard questions which need answers. The IFP wants to know:

• What is the penalty South Africa will pay if we do not have the digital broadband capacity required for the 2010 World Cup in terms of our FIFA commitments?

• Will Sentech really be able to ensure that the ICT infrastructure required is in place by 2010 given the alarm bells already clanging that the funding from Treasury is inadequate?

• Why is ICASA continuing to frustrate smaller telecommunications companies by denying them licenses to lay their own fibre optic cable? The license conversion process in terms of the new Act should have, by now, been completed.

• Is the Post Office "technically insolvent" or not?
  
  We support the budget but clearly with huge reservations.  

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT
Ms Suzanne Vos MP: 083 303 0451