Interviews of short-listed candidates for appointment as Counsellors at ICASA: day 3

Meeting report

Interviews of Candidates for ICASA Council
The following questions were asked to the short-listed candidates:

●Members asked the candidates to share their views regarding universal access of telecommunications.

●Candidates were asked to demonstrate how their qualifications would impact on work of the Council and what they would contribute if they were appointed as a councillor.

●One candidate who was a full time Telkom employee was asked why she had not influenced her employer's price structure if she claimed to be a champion consumers needs.

●Members asked candidates to explain the mechanisms they would employ to make sure that prices would drop.

●One candidate was asked to elaborate on her submission concerning consumer protection legislation. She was asked why Telkom was found to have employed bully tactics by monopolising certain parts of the industry to the extent that it was fined by the Competition Tribunal.

●Candidates were asked whether they were familiar with Section 6 of the Icasa Act dealing with disqualification of candidates. They were then asked whether there was anything that would lead to their disqualification.

●Members asked the candidates how they could juggle their time if they had many other commitments.

●Members asked the candidates if they were familiar with Section 14 of the Icasa Act, which dealt with information leaking. They were also asked how they would deal with checks and balances.

●Candidates were asked how they were going to deal with confidentiality if appointed as Icasa councillors.

●People had been appointed to be councillors and they passed information to their former employers due to their loyalty, candidates were asked how they would deal with such a scenario.

●Some candidates were asked what were their views regarding local loop unbundling.

●Candidates were asked how they deal with conflict of interest regarding their shareholding in industry players.

●Candidates were asked to elaborate on the proposed funding model for Icasa.

●Members asked what role could be played by Icasa in expanding accessibility of the ICT sector to all the people of South Africa.

●Candidates were asked the reason that Icasa work sometimes overlapped with the role of the Competition Commission, and how could that be resolved.

●Icasa was susceptible to influence from the private sector and the government, candidates were asked how they would ensure that Icasa remained neutral in their decision making without fear or favour.

●Candidates were asked whether they possessed the necessary skills to function as Icasa councillors as the King Report lll on good governance stipulated.

●Candidates were asked what changes they would implement if they thought the Icasa structure was flawed.

●Some candidates were asked how they would handle Telkom listing because it was widely perceived as a flawed exercise.

●Termination of call charges had been widely viewed as the prime contributor to the expensive cell phone call rates. Candidates were asked how they would have handled it if they were appointed.

●Candidates were asked to name their strengths and weaknesses.

●Members asked the Candidates to explain the role of the Minister of Communications in relation to Icasa.

●They were asked whether the policy of managed liberalisation had worked well, if not so what was wrong with it and how it could be improved upon.

●One candidate said that “the process of Digital Migration was running in the same spot” i.e. it had been taking too long to be implemented. He was asked to explain what he viewed as a problem and how he proposed to solve it.

●Candidates were asked how they could ensure that Icasa got more revenue from spectrum allocation.

●A candidate who was involved in the manufacturing of set top boxes for Digital Terrestrial Television, was asked why manufacturing guidelines were left out.

●Candidates were asked how they would be able to ensure that all broadcasters had complied to the local content quota's.

●Members asked what could be done to enhance Icasa image.

●Candidates were asked to pose any question to the Committee with regards to the interview process.

Other Matters
The Chairperson mentioned that the SABC board would brief the Committee on the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) report but the some of the things in the report including criminal investigations were sub judice.

Ms M Morutoa (ANC) suggested that the SIU report should not disclose the names of the people charged.

Ms M Shin (DA) explained that when a person had been formally charged, his name was in the public domain already because the court records were public documents. There was no harm in discussing the issue in Parliament.

Mr G Schneeman (ANC) suggested that the Committee should delay the briefing for a later date.

The Committee agreed to hear the report the following Tuesday, 11 September 2012.

The meeting was adjourned.