Media Development and Diversity Agency Bill: briefing; Committee Programme

Meeting report

COMMUNICATIONS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
12 February 2002
MEDIA DIVERSITY & DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BILL: BRIEFING; COMMITTEE PROGRAMME

GCIS PowerPoint Presentation
Committee's First Term Agenda [please email [email protected] for a copy]
Government Notice on Presidential National Commission [see Appendix 1]

SUMMARY
The Department of Communications presented a concise overview of the items on the agenda for both the Department of Communications and the Portfolio Committee for the first term of 2002. The Bills which will be considered this year includes the Electronic Communications and Transactions Bill, the Media Diversity and Development Agency Bill, Broadcast Act Amendment Bill, an amendment to the Independent Communications Authority and

The Chairperson then raised additional issues to be included in the agenda for the first term.

The Government Communications and Information Service presented a report to the committee on the proposed Media Diversity and Development Agency Bill, and its aims and impact on the telecommunications industry and the South African public at large. Some of the concerns which arose from the presentation include; the precise meaning and use of the term "independence" within the Bill and the role of the State President and Minister of Communications as well as the apparent erosion of the autonomous powers and functions of ICASA by the expansive.
The Chair then reminded members that the objectives and duties of this committee with regard to the Bill are to create greater access to media services and facilities for the less advantaged.

MINUTES
The Chair commenced proceedings by declaring 2002 as the "grass roots" year, as most of the issues to be deliberated by this committee during this year would revolve primarily around increased provision of local access to information and telecommunication services and facilities. It is therefore appropriate that the year commences with deliberations on the Media Diversity and Development Agency Bill, as this Bill deals with precisely these issues. It is about time that the Committee looks closely at the impact that the laws it passes has on communities, and whether it is actually improving the quality of life of its people. For this surely, is the most laudable and important aim of this Committee, and it seems the actual effect is sacrificed at the expense of the broader picture.

Furthermore, it is hoped that the Committee would make "good law", and in this way effectively exercise its oversight function over the various governmental departments falling within its jurisdiction.

The Chair informed members that the programme would begin with a brief outline by the Director General of the Department of Communications (DG) on its plans for the year 2002. This would be followed by a presentation from Mr T Trew from the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) on the Bill.

Briefing by Director General
Mr Andile Ngcaba: Director General, Department of Communications, explained that at a later point in this presentation the establishment of the ICT University will be discussed. This is the product of a joint effort with the Department of Education that marks a dramatic leap forward for the South African media sector. This institution will equip entrants into and current members of the telecommunications industry with the necessary knowledge and skills needed to compete successfully with international standards.

The first issue to be decided by the Department this year is the Electronic Communications and Transactions Bill (ECT), and deliberations have to begin by the end of this week. This is a "remarkable and substantial Bill" because it marks, for the first time in South African history, the recognition of electronic signatures (digital signatures) and electronic documents. The Department has prepared an information booklet on the ECT Bill entitled "Electronic Commerce made simple", which consists of frequently asked questions regarding the ECT Bill.

The second issue to be decided this year is the amendment to the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Act, 13 of 2000, as proposed by the Committee during last year's deliberations on the Telecommunications Act 103 of 1996. The amendment aims to further strengthen the regulatory regime provided by the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) by affording it a more active role, especially in view of the recent surge in E-Commerce activity in South Africa. It is expected that hearings on this issue would commence in March this year.

The third issue on this year's agenda is Broadcast Act Amendment Bill. In the 2001 sessions of this Committee several concerns with this Bill were raised, and those concerns have to be resolved this year. These include the fast-tracking of the licensing of pay-TV in South Africa, as well as ensuring that competition within the industry is maintained and improved. This process should commence by March/April this year.

The fourth issue on the agenda for 2002 is the amendment to the Post Bank Bill, that aims to separate the Post Bank and the Post Office, so that each is considered a separate and autonomous entity by the law. The Post Bank would then be corporatised to allow it to address the plight of the "ordinary" South African citizens by affording them a choice of financial institutions. It will be remembered that the Post Bank has historically been used primarily by the disadvantaged and less privileged citizens for savings purposes. The most recent figures indicate that the Post Bank has registered as many as three million of these savings accounts, that range from less than R500 to thousands of rands. The statistics also show that some of these accounts have been active for more than 40 years, which clearly illustrates the local communities' need for such a facility. This then reiterates the commitment to "grassroots" interests and development as alluded to earlier by the Chairperson. The aim here is to encourage and facilitate the prevalence of stokvels and various other local societies, and a portfolio from the Post Bank on this issue is expected. Furthermore, as indicated by this year's agenda, the Department will be chairing a colloquium which the Members of this Committee are encouraged to attend. The purpose of the colloquium is to engage in discussions with these societies, stokvels, hawkers and so forth, concerning the money-saving structures they have engineered within their respective communities. This should take place in March this year.

The final matter on the 2002 agenda is the appointment of the new ICASA councilors that should be completed by April this year. The current councilors should be able to give their current employers 60 days notice, so that the final candidates may be submitted to the President for final confirmation in April this year.

The DG proceeded to draw the following ancillary issues to the attention of the committee. Firstly, the anticipated Broadcast Bill establishes to advisory bodies: the digital and production advisory bodies. A preliminary report from both these bodies will be presented to the Department in the foreseeable future. The report from the digital advisory body is eagerly anticipated in terms of its objectives and achievements to date, as its role within the industry will play a vital part in any future development of this industry. These bodies will consists of eminent members of the industry who are not in any way affiliated to government. In this regard the Department kindly requests that approximately a day and a half is set-aside in March/April this year to advise the Minister of Communications on these issues.

Secondly, a review of the National Address System (NAS) has to be undertaken during the second term of this year, so that a process of enacting the legislative proposals for the NAS may be ascertained. It aims to fix addresses to the homes of South African citizens who are currently forced to function without fixed residential addresses, and thus a strategy has to be devised to resolve this problem. Yet such a plan has to comply with the Postal Services Act in any attempt to modernise the present NAS to accommodate further growth and the population and the consequent need for additional addresses.

Thirdly, the status of emergency communication calls (i.e. the 112 calls) has to be finalised, and the date on which these will be launched has to be set. A new radio station in Krugersdorp has just successfully completed a trial run of this new facility, with the result that the provision of this radio network on a national basis within this year will be provided. The Department has advertised for tenders for the erection of call centres, the closing date for responses to the advertisement has passed, and all that remains is for the Department to finally adjudicate on this matter. The Department aims to present a progress report in this regard to this Committee in the second term, and input from this Committee is eagerly anticipated.

Discussion
Ms M Smuts (DP) requested clarity from the DG on the following issues: firstly, the precise reason for the proposed ICASA Amendment, and secondly, the amendment to the Broadcast Act in terms of "pay-TV".

The DG replied that he did not wish to delve into too much detail on these matters. Members had to remember that it was decided last year by this Committee during its deliberations on the Telecommunications Amendment Bill, that references to the ICASA Act in that Bill would rather be enacted separately as amendments to the ICASA Act of 2000. This, then, is the purpose of the proposed ICASA Act amendments.

With respect to the "pay-tv' amendments, the DG informed members that the entire digital environment, which includes satellite and pay-TV, affords the biggest potential for growth within the South African telecommunications industry and competition internationally. Yet for ICASA to successfully regulate these facilities it needs enabling provisions in the Broadcast Act Amendment Bill as soon as possible. The particular clauses to be targeted here begin at Clause 2 of that Bill, so that healthy competition within the industry is ensured. Yet a detailed discussion of these issues should be postponed until the Department submits a written presentation to this Committee in the near future.

The Chair then suggested that recourse could possibly be had to Rule 159, so that this Committee may have the opportunity to familiarise itself with the issues raised by the Department before the Bill is formally tabled.

The DG replied that the Department has in fact prepared a draft Bill that it intends submitting to Members before it is formally tabled.

The Chair responded favourably, but insisted that proper procedure has to be followed.

Mr S Abram (UDF) requested the DG to clarify the position with regard to the corporatisation of the Post Bank proposed by the Post Bank Bill. Members will remember that the Post Bank is traditionally a deposit-receiving institution that serves primarily to provide substantial relief to the poorer citizens of the South Africa. At grassroots level, ordinary citizens need access to such a facility that provides an important yet basic service in a "simple" or non-complex manner. Is it then the intention of the Department to change the Post Bank into a banking institution with formalised and substantially more complicated procedures? This surely cannot be the case, as Post Banks provide an important and, it is argued, necessary service to the poorer citizens of South Africa.

The DG said that the Department agrees wholeheartedly with these assertions seeks, via the amendment, to instill a "culture of savings" at a grassroots level, beginning hopefully with schoolchildren. Thus it is envisaged that the legacy of banking at Post Banks referred to by Mr Abram would be facilitated and perpetuated by the amendment. Furthermore, Post Banks have traditionally only been able to provide savings accounts, but the Companies Act 63 of 1971 would now allow them to both save and lend money. Indeed, once this second service is offered by Post Banks, they would then be regulated by the Banks Act. This Committee is urged to bear the regulatory regime in mind, as well as the particular needs and interests of the ordinary South African citizens when deliberating on the Post Banks Amendment Bill. It should be remembered that the Post Banks very often reach areas and communities that the more formal financial institutions cannot accommodate, and it is thus directly involved with the community in seeking to improve the standard of life of its members.

Mr A M Maziya (ANC) then stated that, on a point of clarification, the purpose of the DG's presentation was not to initiate a discussion of any substantive issues, but rather to merely highlight the primary issues to be handled by this Committee during 2002. Thus any discussions of the substantive issues should be postponed to later sessions when such items are indeed on the agenda.

The DG agreed with this proposal.

Ms M S Vos (IFP) then requested the DG to ensure that both the Department and ICASA furnish this Committee with regular progress reports on the capacity building process, including such matters as the licensing of the Second National Operator (SNO). These could take the form of weekly or monthly reports, detailing whether their authorised capacity allows them to effectively perform the tasks and meet the obligations set by this Committee. These reports should be built into the 2002 programme for this Committee.

The DG agreed completely and undertook to provide the Committee with a comprehensive report on the recent Roadshow initiated by the Department. This project was aimed at engaging in direct discussions with communities regarding the small/medium/micro enterprises (SMME) licensing. The project was a huge success as evidenced by the response of no less that 700 applicants for such licenses. The Roadshow project also brought to the Department's attention the fact that it has to physically go into these areas itself to provide the SMME entrepreneur with business management and business finance training. There is a dire need for such initiatives to assist in the strengthening of the South African economy. In fact, a workshop held in January this year unearthed approximately 500 SMME's, with this figure representing the average in all provinces. The focus now also has to fall on the attention given to the Black Empowerment Groups if the South African economy truly wants to rival the best in the world. In fact, the American Chamber of Business as well as AT&T have urgently requested meetings with the Department to discuss investment opportunities. It is thus clear that the interest in this sector is overwhelming, both nationally and internationally.

Mr Maziya reminded the DG that one of the primary principles of the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) is the improvement of local and regional economies. This is precisely what the Post Banks facilitate by providing their unique service to regional investors and business people in their specific geographical area. This, then, is one of the most important and laudable objectives of the Post Bank.

The DG voiced his approval; indeed, the proposed colloquium referred to earlier plans to ascertain, from the various provinces, their view on the precise role of the Post Bank within the regional areas, and the benefits thereof.

Ms Vos drew the Committee's attention to the important and far-reaching matter of the Telkom tariffs debacle. Surely this committee has to deal with this influential issue as well, and re-assess the role to be played by both government and ICASA in this regard. The "bizarre situation" facing this Committee is that ICASA has requested the South African government, as a significant shareholder in Telkom, to mediate the dispute. Surely this Committee cannot allow this to happen, as the conflict of interests inherent in this dilemma are clear for all to see. Meanwhile, the South African public is suffering. It is a matter of public interest that has to be dealt with as soon as possible.

The DG agreed that this issue has to be clarified, but cautioned that the information gleaned from the media is not always accurate. For this reason the Department, with the assistance of this Committee, has to investigate the issue and ascertain the facts of the matter. The matter is currently sub judice, but this Committee has a vested right in learning the facts directly from the parties involved. Government is not involved at all, as the tariff regime is a matter between the operators and ICASA alone. The Department has not intervened as it shows deference to the delegated powers of ICASA, as the regulator, in these matters.

Mr Waters (DP) requested the DG to inform this committee of the precise manner in which the Post Office would be able to pay back the capital borrowed, as far as the Post Banks project is concerned. Secondly, the DG is requested to explain precisely how the Post Office alone succeeded in "guzzling" R800m in 2001. This is especially surprising in view of the fact that the Department only had a single meeting with the Post Office for the whole of 2001, lasting no longer than an hour. It is thus evident that the expenditure of the Post Office has to be carefully monitored.

The DG answered the first question by stating that the Post Bank is currently no more than a mere division of the Post Office, and is thus not seen as a separate entity. Yet the result of the proposed corporatisation process is to afford the Post Bank its own independent and autonomous (legal) existence and personality upon registration. It would thus have its own accounting and management system, its own board and asset management system. The CEO of the South African Post Office thus needs this Committee's support in effecting these amendments.

Mr Waters added that the Post Office has increased its tariffs to above 15%, whereas the terms of its license agreement strictly prohibit an amount higher than the current Consumer Price Index (CPI), which presently stands at 8%. How is this possible?

The DG explained that it has to be borne in mind that the current management of the Post Office is doing "exceptionally well", and the current CEO has brought the Post Office functioning to "an optimal level" as far as services, personnel morale and general organisation is concerned.

The Chair thanked the DG for his presentation and noted the issues raised during the discussion session. The theme of the discussion session reinforced the initial assertion that this should be termed the year of grassroots development, and this Committee thus has to commit itself to dealing with the "bread and butter" issues affecting all South Africans, especially those less advantaged. In this vein one of the most urgent issues is the Telkom tariffs debacle, as it affects all the members of this Committee, and indeed all Telkom subscribers equally. This Committee thus has a responsibility to resolve this issue as it has put the current system in place that has allowed Telkom to act in the manner it has. Thus all the players involved in the dispute have to be afforded the opportunity to make representations to this Committee so that the latter may devise a more equitable regime within which Telkom may operate. This matter cannot simply be delegated to ICASA to resolve, as it is already fully committed to the very important issue of licensing the SNO, and thus cannot be allowed to be distracted by this Telkom matter.

The Chair then raised the following important items:

-The National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) will be hosting an ICT
strategy workshop. Members should be mindful of this development.

-The Advertising Industry task group has to be afforded the opportunity to brief this Committee. It has been reported that the task group has already had its first sitting of the year, and that good progress is being made. The GCIS is also welcome to submit presentations in this regard.

-Input from and dialogue with the South African Broadcast Corporation (SABC) has to be included in this Committee's programme for this year.

-South African companies are investing in the African continent on a large scale, and companies that have done so must be invited to share their experiences with this committee in terms of the economic and investment environment in those countries. In 2001 the "African Renaissance" as the buzzphrase, and this is no more evident than the report by the 2001 ITU Africa convention that the growth of the mobile telecommunications industry throughout Africa has been "overwhelming".

-Members are once again reminded of the colloquium to take place from 28 February - 3 March this year.

-The Annual Reports from the SABC, ICASA and GCIS in terms of budgetary issues have to be discussed this year as well.

-Reports on the quality of the service of the telecommunications operators are to be presented to this Committee. It has been reported that customers' accounts have and are being disconnected far too regularly, and the primary reason for this is the fact that the environment is not conducive to effective functioning if this service. In particular, is has been alleged that the address system currently employed by the service providers is incompetent, as bills very seldom reach customers with the result that their accounts are disconnected unfairly.

-The service providers are still charging customers for dropped calls, but it seems that no-one knows the free re-connection number. There are still numerous problems with this service and the views of the consumers have to be ascertained regarding the quality of the service provided by the operator.

-Matters regarding "cyber-crimes" will probably be dealt with after the deliberations on the E-Commerce Bill.

-The matter concerning the degree of violence depicted in television programmes, local content and censorship must also be placed on the agenda for 2002.

-A hearing would have to be scheduled to address the issue of universal service within the telecommunications industry. Specific aspects such as infrastructure and facilities and their operation will have to be examined.

-Concerns regarding the Post Office will have to be filtered into the bigger programme this year.

-The training programme planned for this committee will have to be included this year in an effort to "broaden the mental horizons" of its members.

-The South African National Communications Union has expressed concerns about the Telkom tariff, and the Minister's response to these concerns would have to be ascertained.

The DG then requested the Chair to include the following items on the 2002 agenda of this committee:

-The ICT University

-South African Department of (SADC) E-Readiness report, following input from both the World Economic Forum and the Department.

-The United Nations ICT task force, of which the Department is a member.

-The E-Africa Commission

-The Presidential National Commission (PNC) on Information, Society and Development could be asked to present a report to this committee on its strategy to attain an information society.

-The Sector Job Summit is taking place this year, and attendance by this Committee is strongly requested.

-The Department also has to brief this Committee on the proposed privatisation of Intelsat.

-The Department requests that more time be allocated for the media briefings, and the best solution here might very well be to organise a venue away from Parliament itself. The reason for this proposal is to afford an opportunity to this committee to delve into detailed discussion with the Department on the relevant issues, so that both may be better equipped for the media briefings.

Presentation by GCIS
The GCIS presentation was made by Mr Trew, from GCIS. Please refer to the attached presentation.

Ms Smuts stated that the South African media is currently "struggling to survive", and the recent ban on tobacco advertising has been an "absolute blow" to the advertising industry. Furthermore, the decision to abandon of the proposed levy of R60m per annum is welcomed. Mr Trew is thus asked to provide a detailed account of the contribution/s made to the fund by the South African media. This is an important issue as the composition of the board of the Media Diversity and Development Agency (the MDDA) fund is strongly influenced by the participation of the donor/s, who in this case is the media. It has been proposed that the MDDA board would consists of one nominee from each of the four sectors referred to in clause 5(1)(a) of the Bill. However, it is not clear why a detailed appointment mechanism by Parliament has been provided when four of the seven to nine members are nominees from the relevant business sector. Is it to be understood that these nominees are merely representatives of certain interests, or would the GCIS appoint an independent member? In this regard it is proposed that the media itself be allowed to select nominees. Furthermore, GCIS cannot have its own member on the board, as it is supposed to be an independent body.

Mr R D Pieterse (ANC) suggested that the sectoral constituencies not only have a right to nominate someone with the requisite experience, background and knowledge, but also a person who is not currently an active member of the industry. If this route were followed, the concerns regarding the creation of conflicting interests would be avoided.

Ms Vos questioned the manner in which the term "independence" is bandied about in the presentation and indeed the Bill itself.

Mr Maziya requested clarity on the precise meaning of the term "independence" in the Bill.

Mr Trew responded to the concern raised by the Members with regard to the meaning of "independence" in the Bill, and explained that the reference in Clause 2(4) of the Bill specifically provides "without any political or commercial interference". The result of such inclusion is that a disgruntled party may then voice any valid grievance s/he may have with the failure of the board to act independently, or to sacrifice the interests of the constituency for any personal or political interest of the board. The Members are thus assured that the Bill does set an effective mechanism in place by providing checks on the independence of the MDDA. The aim is clearly to "insulate" the board from the conflict mentioned by Members above.

Ms Smuts then contended that the current framework allows for conflict of interests between the member's personal interests and that of the designated constituency. This is inherent in a system that allows members to represent active interests in the industry, unless the occurrence of such conflict could be avoided via comprehensive regulations.

Mr Trew responded that, with regard to the relationship between the board members and their respective constituencies, Clause 10 of the Bill deals specifically with the issue of conflict of interests. The Clause expressly provides that should the community nominate someone with an interest in it, the member would be disqualified from board proceedings, thus effectively avoiding the possibility of any conflict of interests. Furthermore, the process of nomination provided by the Bill also creates greater distance between any direct representation of interest and a broadly representative sector. This process is also premised on accountability and transparency, so that any improper conduct is strictly prohibited and actionable.

Mr Maziya then requested clarity on the role of the President and Minister and their interaction in this particular Bill. Does this particular regime differ from the standard practice adopted in other legislation, or is this the "regular arrangement" for Presidential and Ministerial interaction within the statutory framework?

Mr Trew replied that the proposed regime is in accordance with standard legislative practice.

Ms Vos then suggested that the appointment procedure provided by the Bill is currently structured in such a way that this committee recommends the nominees, but the actual choice of the seven to nine members is then made by the President. Yet the President could, in fact, choose this "independent body" himself without any recourse to this Committee, as provided by the current framework. This important issue has to be reviewed.

Mr Trew said that it is the accepted practice in most statutory bodies that the President himself would select the board of members.

Secondly, she requested clarity on the apparent erosion of the independent functioning of ICASA in view of the apparent strengthening of the Minister's powers in the Bill. The Bill provides that once the Minister has detailed the criteria to be satisfied, she then prescribes the percentage of the yearly budget to be allocated to such projects. It seems as though these ministerial powers severely erode the independent functioning of ICASA within the telecommunications industry regulatory machinery. In fact, the creation of the board itself seems redundant as it seems apparent that the proposed regime allows the Minister herself to "control the show".

Mr Trew stated that the Bill envisages a concurrence between the board and the Minister. In fact, the precise phrase used is "in consultation with", and this clearly does not mean that the board is rendered redundant or that the Minister is the sole arbiter, as suggested by Ms Vos. Indeed, the Bill is based on the sharing of a common interest between the two, with the Minister representing the general public interest.

As regards the apparent erosion of the independence of ICASA, Mr Trew responded that this is not the case as the entire process is done in full consultation with ICASA. The Bill does therefore not erode its autonomy as the MDDA cannot grant licenses, and indeed ICASA is fully supportive of the introduction of the MDDA. This clearly illustrates that ICASA itself does not see the MDDA as posing any threat to the successful exercise of the former's powers and functions. ICASA also views the MDDA as an invaluable ally in providing an effective licensing procedure.

Ms Vos insisted that it could not said that the MDDA would be totally independent and "without any political interference" when it has the Minister "at the helm". The input from the media in terms of the MDDA is vital here, but the key inquiry remains "who is at the helm"? This becomes especially pertinent as far as ICASA is concerned, where the Minister herself stipulates the selection criteria. Although it is ICASA and not the Minister herself who ultimately grants the license, the latter does still play a dominant role in the process as she decides on what grounds the project will be selected. ICASA is thus relegated to nothing more than a "rubber stamp". This is a serious problem that has to be resolved by this committee.

Mr Trew responded that the Ms Vos has failed to recognise the fact that any programme that has not been granted a valid license would not receive any support from the MDDA, simply because it has not met the prescribed conditions. Thus the MDDA does not seek to grant licenses to projects merely because they are supportive of the endeavor, as she suggested, but the process rather operates in the reverse: the MDDA can only pledge support for a project once it has been validly licensed by ICASA.

Ms W S Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) inquired of Mr Trew whether the disabled sector would receive any funding from the MDDA, or whether it would at all be allowed to apply for such funding.

Mr Trew replied that such funding could be allocated in one of two ways: firstly, a programme of this nature has to apply to the MDDA for funds. The MDDA would then, in turn, decide whether the criteria stipulated in the relevant clause have been satisfied in this regard, as the disabled are given a special mention in the Bill. The second manner entails the collection of research by the MDDA to identify the particular areas where media development is needed most. In so doing a particular group, such as the disabled, would be identified as one of the groups with insufficient access to media services and facilities. The MDDA would then liaise with members of that sector to ascertain methods and means to benefit the disabled.

Mr F T Maseramule (ANC) suspected that the Department was reluctant to part with important information that would enable this Committee to arrive at a reasonable and equitable outcome. Perhaps the State Law Advisor could be consulted to explain the reason for the apparent significantly more active role played by the Minister in the Bill than the MDDA itself.

Mr Trew replied that there is no statute that allows only a specific kind of relationship within legislation. Rather, the standard practice is that the nature of the relationship stems from the particular nature of the agency concerned, here the MDDA. There is thus no "information being withheld" and, as mentioned earlier, the Bill actively encourages concurrence between the respective authorities involved.

The Chair reminded the members that the objectives of this Committee with regard to the Bill are to establish a vehicle to ensure that "new voices and channels of opinion are heard at local level". A mechanism to achieve just this is needed, so that the constitutional right to freedom of expression, to media and to receive and impart ideas (Section 16) may be effected. This fundamental right must be enjoyed not only by the elite members of this society, but by all citizens and communities alike, including the "ordinary" citizens at grassroots level. In this regard special attention must be given to the special categories mentioned in the Bill.

It is thus the responsibility of this Portfolio Committee to draft legislation that achieves these stated goals, and for this reason the noble and laudable spirits and purport of the Bill cannot simply be abandoned because it "does not make sense". This Committee has to ensure that the MDDA can function successfully and achieve its objectives. Furthermore, the interpretation of certain the clauses of the Bill have to be examined by this Committee, so that the final product may be something we can all be proud of.

Ms Smuts expressed her strong disagreement for the interpretation given to Section 16 of the Constitution by the Chair. She maintained that upon a proper construction of the wording and consequent meaning of Section 16, it cannot be said to provide that every single South African citizen has the same, unfettered right to freedom of expression and so forth. This cannot be the meaning because then the express inclusion of the "special categories" in the Bill would be of no significant effect. The reason is that, for the purposes of the South African media, all South African citizens already have access to media services and facilities and to treat them otherwise would effectively amount to unfair discrimination on the grounds of disability within the meaning of Section 9 of the Constitution.

The Chair noted the differing interpretation championed by Ms Smuts, but both agreed that this session was not the appropriate forum within which to canvass the debate. There were no further questions from members, and the Chair consequently adjourned the meeting.

Appendix 1:
Gazetted 5/2/2002

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

I, Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri, Minister for Communications, hereby publish the names of the members of the Presidential National Commission on Information Society and Development, as well as the terms of reference of the commission for general information.

DR. IVY MATSEPE-CASABURRI
MINISTER

PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE
I. To advise on:
a) the establishment of a government policy framework on ICT
b) the best structure to foster co-operation and co-ordination and joint action by national, provincial and local government with a view to building ways of attaining a knowledge based society
c) appropriate ways of building a large resource electronic learning materials with local content
d) strategies to make government a model user of information and communication technologies, ICT's with a particular focus on the following key issues:
- developing a single electronic window for government
- developing an electronic government directory
- public service Internet sites to share information within government
- providing public access to government services and information
- providing secure applications and structures
e) how best to create an information society

II. To investigate
a) current government ICT strategies and integrate them
b) ICT in all sectors of the economy for purposes of developing a strategy for each sector of the economy
c) Future work to be done in the information society
d) Future skills for information society
e) Strategies to build a national Information infrastructure for the Information Society
f) How to develop and support ICT-related SMME's
g) How to encourage the use of ICT's by SMME's
h) Ways of enhancing digital literacy among the different sectors of society
i) The optimal application of ICT's in all sectors for purposes of developing a strategy for each sector
j) Development of child centred ICT

III. Establish an ICT related co-ordination structure in government

IV. Focus on developing an e-strategy for the country placing emphasis on the following key areas:
a) e-communication
b) e-education/reaming
c) e-commerce
d) e-business
e) e-health
f) e-government
g) e-agriculture
h) mobile commerce and other related sectors
i) establishment of a ICT related co-ordination structure in government

V. Develop a cyber strategy that addresses recent developments in the arena of Information and Communications technology (ICT) such as
a) Convergence
b) Digitization
c) Local content development, amongst others

VI. Advise on internet innovations with a specific focus on
a) Internet development
b) Infrastructure issues
c) Security related issues
d) Universal service and access oriented facilities and applications such as Multipurpose centers, Tele centres, Internet cafes, public information terminals - emphasis should be how they will be used in the information society
e) Development of ICT curriculum for public schools
f) How internet television and multimedia should be deployed
g) Expansion of digital broadcasting infrastructure.

VII. Interrogate the role of
a) youth
b) women in the information society

VIII. Further determine the role of ICT in advancing and addressing
a) rural development
b) urban development
c) issues of disability
d) intellectual property issues

IX. Advise and make recommendations specifically targeted at enhancing ICT skills development in the country

X. Investigate and advise on manufacturing potential of the country in terms of ICT related goods such as computers and so forth

XI. Finally, investigate and advise on appropriate strategy for international ICT environment and recommend how best to engage and benefit from the following Organisation:
a) International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
b) African Telecommunications Union (ATU)
c) South Africa Transport and Communications Commission (SATCC)
d) Internet Co-operation for Names and Numbers (ICANN)
e) Digital Opportunity Task Force (Dot Force)
f) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

ANNEXURE 1
COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION

CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMISSION

1. Ms. Lyndall Shope-Mafole Minister Plenipotentiary:Communication, RSA Embassy France

DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMISSION

2. Mr. Andile Ngcaba Ex-officio member and Alternate Chairperson

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

1. Mr. Eddie Funde South African Communications Forum Chairperson Industry D.Chairperson (Policy)

2. Dr. R. Adam DACST DG Government D.Chairperson (Content)

3. Ms. Bongiwe DOA DG Government D.Chairperson Njobe (Application)

4. Mr. A. Ruiters DTI DG Government D.Chairperson (Technology)

5. Mr. R. Ramaite DPSA DG Government D.Chairperson (Human Resources)

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

1. ESKOM Mr. T. Gcabashe CEO Parastatals Commissioner

2. SABC Mr. P. Matlare CEO Parastatals Commissioner

3. SAPO Mr. M. Manyatse CEO Parastatals Commissioner

4. Sentech Dr. S. Mokone- Matabane CEO Parastatals Commissioner

5. SITA Mr. C. van Schalkwyk CEO Parastatals Commissioner

6. TELKOM SA Mr. S. Nxasana CEO Parastatals Commissioner

7. Trantel Mr. X. Socikwa CEO Parastatals Commissioner

8. CSIR Mr. S. Sibisi CEO/ President Parastatals Commissioner

9. HSRC Mr. M. Orkin President Parastatals Commissioner

10. Vodacom Mr. A. Knott- Graig CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

11. DidataMr. J. Odd CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

12. P.Q. Africa Mr. P. Watt CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

13. MTN Mr. L. ZimCEO Private Companies Commissioner

14. Motswedi Mr. J. Tsotetsi CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

15. Altron Mr. C. Venter CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

16. Spescom Mr. T. Farr CEO Private Graig Companies Commissioner

17. Sangonet Representative Organs of Civil Society Commissioner

18. MRC Dr. Gulube Chairperson Individual Health/ICT Commissioner

19. Central Energy Fund Dr. R. Mokate CEO Individual- economist Commissioner

20. Adv. K. Moroka Individual- legal Commissioner

21. DACST Dr. N. Mzamane Individual-sciences Commissioner

22. University of Pretoria Mrs. A. Venter Lecturer Individual-Health/ICT Commissioner

23. UWC-Gender Ms. P. Serote Individual- Uniteducation Commissioner

Appendix 2:
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS - FIRST TERM [ 14-01-02 - 20-03-02]
PROVISIONAL PROGRAMME [ MDDA Bill] 2002
[AS AT 15 February 2002]