Independent Broadcasting Authority: briefing

Meeting report

COMMUNICATIONS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
20 September 1999
IBA: BRIEFING
 

The Independent Broadcasting Authority Presentation

IBA website: http://www.iba.org.za

SUMMARY

The chairperson of the IBA, Mr Mandla Langa, gave a lengthy briefing on the IBA. He discussed how the IBA were achieving the mandate set out by the IBA and Broadcasting Acts. He spoke of the many community-based radio stations that have been licensed and the plans to develop community-based TV. He acknowledged that previously disadvantaged groups remain poorly provided for. The IBA's financial problems were mentioned and were later discussed by the committee. It was recognised that the IBA cannot fulfil its mandate because of budget cuts. The IBA / SATRA merger was also mentioned, hearings on the Enabling Bill are scheduled for October and it should be passed early next year. IBA staff morale is low regarding the merger [NOTE this is in contrast to SATRA staff morale - see minutes on SATRA briefing 990907]. Possible amendments to the IBA and Broadcasting Acts have been identified by the IBA and these include a draft of a new Code of Conduct that will hopefully put in place provisions like a Watershed and guidelines for broadcasting violence, especially against women. Finally Mr Langa spoke of the need to clarify the IBA's relationship with the Portfolio Committee and requested regular meetings which were later agreed to by the committee.

MINUTES

The committee chair, Mr Kekana, opened the meeting by mentioning an email he had received from a member of the public. The email spoke of the limited nature of consultations done by the IBA, something that the chair agrees is true. It is impossible to interpret what the public interest is regarding broadcasting when public access to services and information is so limited. Increasingly it seems that if you cannot afford services you are denied the right to access and contribute to them. Mr Kekana believes that a 'Media Elite' is developing who are dominating what we see and hear, and it appears the expression, 'Because it pleases the prince, it should be the way of law' now rings true. A genuine public interest must be ensured, those who do not receive services are still stakeholders and must be involved. Mr Langa then gave his presentation.

Questions to the IBA

Ms D. Smuts (DP): The Broadcasting Act requires the encouragement of black ownership and involvement with broadcasting but black empowerment means more than this. Equity control and ownership will not lead to the changes in programming content that are needed.

Response from Ms Lloyd: We have done much investigation and work-shopping into empowerment. We are trying to empower previously disadvantaged groups in terms of ownership, control and content of broadcasting. To this end we are outsourcing local content programmes.

Ms D. Smuts (DP): Radio ownership is limited to two FM and two AM licences. However your ruling on Kfm did not allow even this. Advertising revenue of radio is on the decrease and many small stations are failing. In a time when we need communication growth might it not be a good idea to allow the development of big players?

Response from Ms Lloyd: Kfm was denied amendments to its licence because of diversity issues. Even though changes would have been within the law they would have led to Primedia Broadcasting and Siphumele owning the majority of shares in Kfm and Cape Talk and therefore controlling two-thirds of English language stations in the Cape area. We felt that this hardly fulfilled our mandate of ensuring that broadcasting is controlled by a diverse range of communities. We do accept the need for strong media players and are encouraging larger players to invest into smaller communities but in this case we felt the encouragement of a big player was inappropriate.

Dr K. Rajoo (IFP, Deputy Chairperson of committees): The IBA seem to be doing a very good job and it is encouraging that although suffering budget cuts they have not run up debts. However what do the IBA need to be totally self sufficient and therefore totally independent? Have bank loans or micro loans been taken out?

Response from Mr Mkumatela: No micro loans have been taken out, we have simply carried out massive restructuring to cope with our budget cuts.

Mr F. Maserumule (ANC): It is disturbing that you have not had community radio licence applications and local content programming contracts applications from many parts of the country. How do you advertise and distribute your information?

Response from Mr Mtimde: I would agree that information is power. However I must stress that licences are not simply granted because frequencies are available. Licences are allocated to redress the imbalances in the availability of broadcasting services and so we are aiming to cover those areas that currently have limited services. Further, community radio licences expire annually so there is continual change that is hopefully leading to better coverage of all areas. We recognise that there is a problem in reaching some communities and this has increased due to the closure of regional offices. We do have community officers who are trying to initiate local involvement and improve rural services but we accept the need to review our strategy of reaching out.

Response from Mr Langa: Improvements in the information that reaches communities is really a matter for the GCIS. The constraints of infrastructure are not for the IBA to resolve.

Mr F. Maserumule (ANC): Everybody complains about their lack of resources. It is not simply how much money you have but what you do with it. Currently 44% of broadcasting delivery revolves around the Johannnesburg area. Resources are ending up where there are already resources while many places have nothing. Surely this unfair distribution can be rectified even with budget cuts?

[No obvious response was made to this question]

Ms N. Mtsweni (ANC): Can the IBA still monitor properly now that provincial offices have closed?

Response from Ms Bulbulia: Monitoring is now done by a centralised reporting department. Monitoring has not been dented by the closure of provincial offices.

Response from Ms Lloyd: Monitoring is probably more problematic. It has to be done via tapes sent to the centralised reporting department which is not always reliable. Further it now tends to be only spot-checking that is done.

Ms N. Mtsweni (ANC): Is the IBA doing enough to encourage local content in programming?

Response from Ms Bulbulia: The 20% local content quota is to be reviewed next year. The White Paper on Broadcasting directs the IBA to develop truly South African broadcasting within ten years. It is very pleasing that community radio has on average 50% local content programming.

Ms N. Mtsweni (ANC): Everybody claims to be doing 'something' to redress the gender balance but what exactly is the IBA doing?

Response from Ms Lloyd: We had planned to have a full time gender officer employed to address gender issues. However due to budget constraints we cannot afford such a position. Therefore we have set up a Gender Committee made up of members of IBA staff. They are meeting to look at gender equality within the IBA and to draw up a policy on making gender a mainstream issue within broadcasting ownership and content. Our plans for a Code of Conduct specifically address the portrayal of violence against women.

Ms D. Smuts (DP): Community radio representatives visited this committee and voiced concern over their licencing. There is no automatic renewal of licences even to stations that are a success. There is also a fear that in future licences will be issued to geographically-based communities and ignore communities of 'interest'.

Response from Mr Mtimde: We recognise that the application procedure is frustrating and time-consuming but we are dealing with applications as fast as possible and amendments to the Broadcasting Act have assisted us. As regards what communities we recognise we are guided by the Act. This defines communities both as geographic and 'of interest' so we grant licences to both.

The following comments were also made regarding how communities are serviced:

Mr R. Pieterse (ANC): A great deal of frustration was expressed by community radio representatives so there must be problems! I cannot accept that there are no problems in the licensing procedure or in the communication of information to licencees.

Mr N. Kekana (ANC, committee chairperson): Various community bodies have met with this committee to discuss their relationship with the IBA. It was clear that the quality of service given to these people is poor. We recognise the constraints on the IBA but this should not mean that officials are not customer friendly. Radio and television must be demystified something that is as much about service as budget constraints.

Mr C. Morkel (NNP): I am interested in how the IBA tries to remain independent and yet still find funding. Could the IBA work with provincial and local governments to gain funding whilst also learning what community interests are?

Response from Mr Mtimde: We are working on a project with the GCIS to establish a Media Development Agency which will work on funding issues. Without our provincial offices we do have less interaction with the provinces than previously.

Mr V. Gore (DP): How is the IBA empowering the disabled? Is e-TV addressing the empowerment of the disabled as promised in their licence application?

Response from Ms Bulbulia: We do take the disability issue very seriously and are dealing with it as regards programme content. This is something that we now consider when issuing licences and if promises are made by potential licencees these will become part of their licence conditions if a licence is granted.

Response from Ms Lloyd: e-TV had a competitive edge in their application because one of their shareholders is a investment group involving the disabled. e-TV do have to fulfil employment conditions regarding the disabled. However this does not guarantee recognition of the disabled within content.

Ms W. Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC): How do the IBA monitor that services promised to the disabled are actually delivered? Very few services are available to the disabled and the availability of signing and subtitles is poor.

[This question was not really addressed except for the promise that more signing is to come]

Ms O. Mndende (UDM): Broadcasting is a freedom of expression yet it is enjoyed by few. How far do complaints commission go? Do complaints fail because they are made against the very people who are running the commission?

Response from Mr Mkumatela: We have two processes to deal with complaints. We have a committee within the IBA made up of both IBA and non-IBA employees who deal with complaints from the public. The industry itself also self-regulates through the BCCSA. Our proposed Code of Conduct should also improve complaints procedures within the IBA.

Mr Kekana expressed the need for IBA budget issues to be discussed. Future plans of the IBA and SATRA are expected to be carried out without the allocation of extra money. The IBA and SATRA regulate industries that generate millions of Rand and it is important to acknowledge that regulators need sufficient funds to do this job. However the IBA and SATRA have to compete for these funds with areas like welfare and education that are seen as fundamental government services whilst Communications is often not.

Mr M. Waters (DP): The IBA was granted a R31.5 million budget this year, what did they apply for?

Response from Mr Langa: R42 million.

Ms D. Smuts (DP): It has been objectively recorded that the IBA cannot go on as it is, it is unable to perform its mandated duties on the budget it receives. This has been recognised by the Public Protector and Parliament is required to take action on this matter. This is an issue not only of how much money the IBA gets but how they get their money. We need a better conduit for money to reach independent bodies.

Response from Mr Langa: The conduit of finances especially must be taken seriously and we welcome the chair's commitment to discuss finances.

Response from Mr Mukumatela: Now that the Broadcasting Act has cut our sources and avenues of revenue, Parliament must help us with alternatives.

Mr C. Morkel (NNP): Is the IBA able to receive money from outside bodies or from provincial and local governments?

Response from Mr Langa: We cannot receive money from diverse sources.

Mr Kekana stated that these issues should be discussed more and that the committee should develop its relationship with the IBA. We must identify exactly what the IBA's 'independence' is and yet also identify areas for interaction with this committee. Ms Smuts (DP) proposed that quarterly meeting between the committee and the IBA should occur and that the IBA should never again be in a position of financial crisis without the committee being aware of this. The need for regular interaction was supported by Ms Vos (IFP), Ms Mndende (UDM), Mr Morkel (NNP) and Dr Cwele (ANC). Ms Vos and Mr Cwele also suggested that Mr Kekana needed to maintain continuous communications with the IBA so that interaction could occur as soon as problems arise. Mr Kekana concluded the meeting with the following points:

* The committee and the IBA were now committed to working together to achieve a stable regulating environment.
* The IBA is responsible to the public but also to MPs. The IBA should be informing both people and MPs of how we can gain access to and be involved in broadcasting services.
* The IBA must report back to the committee on the amendments it desires to the IBA Act and the Broadcasting Act.
* There should be interaction between the IBA and the new Competition Commission.
* Regional TV is needed and the committee would welcome an investigation into its viability.

Appendix 1:

The Independent Broadcasting Authority Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Communications

Cape Town 20.09.99

Introduction

On behalf of the IBA I would like to thank the Portfolio Committee for giving us this opportunity to speak to you about the Authority. My name is Mandla Langa and I am the chairperson of the IBA. With me are the councillors of the Authority Mr K. Herold, Ms L. Lloyd, Ms N. Bulbulia, Mr L. Mtimde, Mr L. Mkumatela, and Mr M. Mphahlele. We welcome this chance to highlight our successes and report on the challenges facing us. As you are aware, the Authority, as one of the constitutional bodies in South Africa, is accountable to Parliament through the Portfolio Committee. We look forward to many more such opportunities to meet with you to discuss the issues facing us. In this presentation we will report on how we are achieving our mandate as defined in the Constitution, the IBA Act, and the Broadcasting Act as well as how we are achieving the ends of the National Action Plan for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of December 1998.

Mandate

The IBA was established to regulate broadcasting activities in South Africa in the public interest. Our Act and the Broadcasting Act outline certain objectives we have to achieve in doing this. We will now highlight how we are achieving our mandate:

"Promote the provision of a diverse range of sound and television broadcasting services on a national, regional and local level which, when viewed collectively, cater for all language and cultural groups and provide entertainment, education and information"(Sec 2 (a) IBA Act)

We have received 115 Expressions of Interest for private radio licences in other parts of the country. We however believe it would be important to reflect on the experience gained from the previous round of licencing and conduct feasibility studies before inviting applications in these areas. As can be seen from our Three Year Plan we intend licencing stations in new areas during the 2001/2002 financial year.

* However, while many parts of the country, primarily the big cities, do have a wide range of national, provincial and local services, in many small towns and in rural areas there is little or no choice. We have noted on several occasions that already advantaged audiences have benefited most from the democratisation of the airwaves. With the licencing of four year community stations, this is being addressed to some extent, though there are many areas of the country where we have not received applications. In the Northern Cape for example, as you can see from the screen, [map of NP shown with areas covered by community radio] there was previously only one community radio station which was based in Kimberley. We have just granted three four year licences - one in Kimberley, one covering Upington and the surrounding areas and one in the Calvinia area. As you can see there are still vast areas in this province where there are no alternatives to the public broadcaster. These communities are thus denied access to for example news about their local community.

The Authority has identified the problem and is looking at solutions. Primarily it appears that there is a lack of knowledge amongst communities about their right to establish stations, and how to set up a station. The IBA has had to close down provincial offices and cut back on its communication capacity and budget. We cannot therefore adequately address this need. We can only reserve frequencies in under-served areas and try to think of creative ways of getting the message across. All of you for example could inform your constituencies about their rights.

"A range of programming in the Republic's official languages must be extended to all South Africans as circumstances permit" (Section 3(6) of the Broadcasting Act)

"Protect the integrity and viability of public broadcasting services" (Sec 2(d) IBA Act)"

"Encourage ownership and control of broadcasting services by persons from historically disadvantaged groups" (Sec 2 (f) IBA Act)

Further, whilst we might award the licence based on the apparent extensive ownership and control of the applicant by historically disadvantaged groups, afterwards many of these groups cannot raise the necessary finance because of the alleged conservatism of financial institutions.

* The Authority has defined "historically disadvantaged groups" to include, amongst others, black people, women and people with disabilities. Applicants with significant and meaningful ownership by members of these groups are considered most favourably. We also favour mass-based organisations over individuals noting amongst other things that the dividends can be used more effectively to address the many disadvantages still faced by the majority of South Africans due to our history.
* While these principles are still important, we have more questions than answers about how to realise the ideals behind the principles. Have we transformed industry, for example, if some of these groups sell their shares for huge profits to say white owned companies shortly after licensing? These groups have made money, but what has been achieved in regards to transformation of broadcasting in South Africa? How do we ensure that this ownership translates into real diversity of content? How much have we really achieved in ensuring that those most disadvantaged, for example, black women also have ownership and control of the industry, or has empowerment come to mean benefits to black men and white women?
* We have recently refused two applications for amendments to licences for Kfm in Cape Town and Kaya FM in Johannesburg because these changes would have amongst other things reduced the control by historically disadvantaged groups. These decisions were difficult and controversial in some circles, but we believe they were essential. If we continue to gloss over the lack of real economic empowerment, we will never redress the legacies of apartheid. If we negate the very reasons why stations were granted licences in the first place, we make a mockery of our Act and of the constitution.
* In recognition of all this, the IBA has commissioned an evaluation of our successes and failures in meeting our mandate in terms of empowerment. This study has identified weaknesses and suggested some solutions to ensure we achieve our mandate. We will be having a workshop soon to chart a way forward and to again identify the end goals of this object and reflect on the ways to achieve them.

Once this report is finalised, we will forward it to you. We believe there are important lessons to be learnt from this not only by the IBA, but by government and by other institutions established to achieve transformation. One key issue is the lack of finance which historically disadvantaged groups have access to.

"The IBA must ensure that private and community broadcasting licences, viewed collectively, are controlled by persons or groups of persons from a diverse range of communities in the Republic" (Sec 2 (I) IBA Act)
# In terms of the community sector, this objective has been reached to a certain extent. Each of the 80 one year licensees are owned by different structures from their communities. With the licensing of four year stations there will be many more stations on air.
# In terms of the private sector, as can be seen from the slide several new big media groupings have emerged since the establishment of the IBA. A number of medium and small investment groups such as those listed on the screen now have shareholdings in the broadcasting industry. Diversity of ownership is one of the key considerations in deciding whether to grant a licence or an amendment to a licence.
# There are though several complexities which the IBA has to consider. Firstly we have to weigh up whether we achieve this object best by licensing many small groupings, or by facilitating the establishment of several large players. We have tried to achieve both these objectives - and to ensure regional diversity in ownership as well.
# In our Reasons for the refusal of the transfer of the Kfm Licence (which you have been given), we noted that if this were approved, Primedia Broadcasting and Siphumele would together own the majority of shares in both Cape Talk and Kfm. This we stated defeated the ends of this section of the Act.

This section also raises debate about the Sections of our Act which limit ownership to two FM and two AM licences. As is clear from the quote on the screen from our Kfm decision, we believe such a debate should note the distinction between owning stations in the biggest markets in South Africa and in smaller markets.

"cater for a broad range of services and specifically for the programming needs in respect of children, women, the youth and the disabled" (Sec 2 (e) Broadcasting Act)

Other achievements

We would like here to briefly list some of the other achievements accomplished this year:

* Firstly we are very proud that we successfully monitored broadcasters over the elections. This was the first time the IBA undertook this task and we believe we played an important role in ensuring the public was given sufficient information by broadcasters to enable them to make an informed choice about which party to vote for. We have given you each a copy of our election report.
* Another important achievement has been the correction of previous lack of financial controls in the IBA. We have appointed an internal auditor and established an audit committee and are now sure that the finances of the Authority are managed in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Practice and relevant legislation. We have developed financial policies and also adopted a Code of Ethical Practice for both councillors and staff.
* We have achieved Y2K compliance and have measures in place for ensuring proper support and business continuation into the millennium.
* We have processed 192 licence applications this year
* We have released a South African Music report which reviewed the performance of broadcasters with regards to local content requirements.
* We have published a Position Paper on the definition of advertising, the regulation of infomercials and the regulation of programme sponsorship. The paper includes a uniform definition of advertising for all broadcasters, regulations on the amount of infomercials broadcasters may screen and regulations on which programmes may be sponsored.
* We will shortly gazette the frequency plan after public consultation. This is the first time this plan has been formalised. It will be reviewed annually.
* We have developed a Position Paper on self-help stations which will regulate the licensing of these stations.
* We also have ongoing meetings of the Joint Liaison Committee between SATRA and the IBA as directed in the Telecommunications Act.

Future Plans

We have identified many of these already. They are contained in our Three Year Plan which has been handed to you. It should be noted that this plan is dependent on budgets, so the time taken to achieve these objectives could be extended.

We will highlight some of these plans. In the current financial year we aim to still accomplish the following (apart from ongoing licensing activities and monitoring of stations):

* Finalise the satellite Position Paper;
* Transfer the SABC licences after incorporation, in line with the requirements of the Broadcasting Act;
* Hold an inquiry to develop regulations on ownership and control, foreign ownership and Cross Media Control as required by the Broadcasting Act.

During the 2000/2001 financial year we plan to achieve the following:

* License satellite broadcasters;
* Develop a regional television policy and potentially license regional television operators
* Review the local content quotas
* Host a forum for African regulators, RIARC/ACRAN. RIARC is the French acronym for the African Communication Regulatory Authorities Network. The first conference of this body was held in 1998 in Gabon. It was unanimously decided that South Africa should hold the next bi-annual meeting in the year 2000. The chairperson of the IBA will then take over as the chair of this body for the next two years. We are negotiating with several government departments re this conference to discuss what assistance they can give us.
* We have also been asked to host and chair the 2001 meeting of the International Regulators Forum. The international recognition of the IBA's achievements in broadcasting regulation is something we value greatly.

Structures

What resources do we have and or need to achieve all of the above? That is the obvious next question.

During the previous financial year we had to drastically reduce our expenditure in order to meet our budget allocation of R31.5m. The current 98/99 budget is R28,5 m. This has placed constraints on us achieving the Three Year Plan within the original time frame.

One of the reasons for this is our capacity. As a result of budgets cuts the IBA has recently restructured the organisation. This resulted in amongst other things:

•  the cutting of 22 IBA positions
• the reduction of the number of departments from 10 to 5
• the closure of the IBA's provincial offices

At the same time, there has been, and will continue to be, an increase in the number of broadcasters which we need to license and monitor. This has put a great deal of strain on our resources.

* Concern has been raised about our capacity to monitor all licensees. We have reduced our staff in the Monitoring Unit and have to monitor an ever increasing number of stations;
* One of the other areas which has suffered because of these constraints is public participation in policy development. We do not have the resources to, for example, advertise in newspapers to inform the public that we are asking for comments. We instead rely on informing existing stakeholders and on our web-site. We also rely on our Library and Information Centre - which is acknowledged to be the resource centre of choice for anyone wanting to source broadcasting-related information. While this is used by up to 45 members of the public each week, it is only accessible physically to people in Johannesburg.
* We also cannot hold hearings outside of Johannesburg and have had to reduce the number of public inquiries which we hold each year. This delays the process of policy development and of development of the industry. Meanwhile the Broadcasting Act requires the Authority to develop certain policies such as regional television, community television, satellite broadcasting, subscription services and digital broadcasting. In addition, the Authority must review its local content quotas and its ownership limits. All these issues are best dealt with through the expensive public process of a Section 28 Inquiry.
* The IBA Act requires the Authority to ensure orderly frequency management of broadcast frequencies. The following frequency plans need to be developed:

• Revised FM sound broadcasting frequency plan
• Revised terrestrial television broadcasting frequency plan
• Revised satellite television broadcasting frequency plan
• New digital television broadcasting frequency plan
• New satellite sound broadcasting frequency plan

These plans will be aimed at making the maximum number of frequencies available for broadcasting whilst, at the same time, complying with the requirements of the ITU and the IBA Act.

However, our budget is inadequate to perform these functions fully. We currently have five posts in this department - which is insufficient to perform these tasks. Sentech for example has about 20 staff in their planning department.

The Authority cautions that after the budget cuts, the following functions will not be performed adequately:

• Development and revision of any frequency plans (FM, Television, DAB, DVB, MMDS etc.)
• Technical policy development
• Investigations into new technologies
• ITU and neighbouring country co-ordination
• Liaison on satellite regulations, planning and other issues
• Detail coverage network planning
• Interference complaints
• Involvement in frequency planning and SABS workgroups.

* In addition we have had to cut the Authoriy's overall staff training and development budgets. This impacts severely on our capacity to deliver as we require new skills to cope with the challenges of developing the industry.
* The constraints have also impacted on our ability to ensure that gender issues are mainstreamed within all activities of the Authority. We have established a gender committee to address this, but we do not have the necessary budgets to implement our policies.
* Both staff and Council's travel budgets have been reduced. This has placed constraints on our ability to attend international regulatory forums and to be able to interact with other regulators. Given the globalisation of the media industry, this diminishes our capacity to develop policies.
* Furthermore we believe it is important for us to be able to conduct our own research on issues such as audience requirements. We are unable to do this and often rely on research from industry.

The Merger

Satra and the IBA commissioned Mr Alan Darling from Canada to develop a framework for the merger. He produced a report which was adopted by both Councils with some amendments. This report guides us in structuring the merger.

Whilst we await the Enabling Bill (which we have not seen yet) we are moving ahead in order to ensure we are ready to merge by the end of this financial year.

o A sub-committee made up of councillors of the two Authorities has been established.
o Sub-committees of staff dealing with different aspects of the merger have also been formed.
o A proposed structure of the new organisation has been drafted. This will be finalised after the Enabling Act is drafted, and after management of both organisations has given input.
o The IBA will be moving to Pin Mill Farm where Satra is located in November this year. Whilst we will be located in different office blocks, this move will facilitate the eventual merging of structures.
o The IBA and Satra are currently in the process of advertising for and appointing a CEO for the merged structure. Both of us at the moment have acting CEO's but we would like to appoint a CEO who would be involved in finalising such issues as the organogram of the new organisation.

We believe that there will be hearings of the Portfolio Committee into the Enabling Bill in October. We trust that the legislation will be finalised and the merger will take place at the beginning of the next financial year. There is a very low morale amongst staff at the IBA as they have been told that the merger is imminent since 1997. A number of key staff and heads of department have resigned because of the uncertainty this has created. In the past six months for example three of the four HODs have resigned citing this uncertainty as one of their motivations.

There are several challenges facing both ourselves and Parliament regarding the merger. The key issue is finding ways to ensure that the independence of broadcasting regulation is maintained through the new legislation. We also need to stem fears from industry that broadcasting will be swamped by telecommunications as a result of this merger.

Council issues

The Council has on several occasions raised various concerns regarding terms and conditions of employment. We hope that these will be addressed by the Committee and the Minister.

Portfolio Committee issues

We have already identified several amendments to both the IBA Act and the Broadcasting Act which might be required such as the Code of Conduct for Broadcasters.

In addition we would like to notify you that we are studying several other aspects of the Broadcasting Act which might need urgent amendment. For example Section 4 (2) which we believe is intended to apply only to those satellite broadcasters currently on air without licences, seems to require all current broadcasters to have to reapply for a license.

With regards to the development of a satellite policy, we believe it is important for all of you to ensure that other SADC countries are informed about this process, and that we begin a process of, where possible, ensuring uniformity and cooperation regarding the licensing of satellite broadcasters. Any satellite broadcasters we license here will be available in these countries and we should cooperate as much as possible.

We believe there is a need for both of us to clarify how we structure the relationship between the Authority and the Portfolio Committee. It has been unclear in the past what are your responsibilities vis a vis those of the Department and the Minister. We believe it would be important for us to schedule regular meetings such as so we can raise issues with you, and you can question us about what is happening at the Authority. Part of this confusion also stems we believe from the need to clarify what is meant by our independence.

We also need to develop processes whereby we can put forward amendments which we need to be urgently considered.

Conclusion

Finally we would like to again thank you for this opportunity. We believe the IBA has played an important role in beginning to make real the right of all people in South Africa to the freedom to receive and impart information. As indicated above we believe, despite the constraints we face, that we have begun the process of transforming and democratising the broadcasting industry in South Africa.

If we measure ourselves in terms of our countries National Action Plan for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (December 1998) we believe we are justifiably proud of what we have achieved.

• Through ensuring a diversity of ownership and of content, we have contributed towards the achievement of the right of equality in the Constitution;
• We have assisted citizens of South Africa in their right to make free political choices through our monitoring of broadcasters during elections;
• We have begun to take up the challenges identified in the plan of diversifying ownership of the media;
• We have begun to achieve the right of all South Africans - including poor people and rural communities - to both access and disseminate information;
• Through our draft Code of Conduct and programming requirements, we have looked at ways to address media stereotyping of women and children as outlined in the plan thus contributing towards ensuring children's and women's rights outlined in the constitution
• Through our local content policies, licensing processes and monitoring of stations we have begun to ensure that local cultures and content are celebrated and valued;

Thank you

# In our Position Papers on the different sectors of broadcasting we have laid down requirements for children's programming. We require applicants to make certain Promises of Performance to show how they will meet the needs of children, women, the youth and the disabled. These promises are key considerations in our deliberations on who should get a licence. For example, e-tv's proposals around programming for the youth and people with disabilities were some of the issues which gave them the competitive edge over other television applicants.
# This year we have drafted a Code of Conduct for broadcasters after public hearings into what should be contained in such a code. Our draft Code is included in your information packs. This will be presented to the Portfolio Committee as a proposed amendment to the current Code in the IBA Act. We have suggested the inclusion of a number of clauses - such as a watershed period before which programming unsuitable to children should not be aired. We have also drafted clauses such as the one on the screen which deal with the broadcasting of violence - noting that special care should be taken during times of the day when large numbers of children might be part of the audience. We have suggested the inclusion of clauses relating specifically to portrayal of violence against women.
# This is perhaps one of the most difficult challenges facing not only the IBA but South Africa as a whole. The IBA was one of the first institutions to try to transform the ownership and control of structures in industry, as one means of transforming our society. We were thus in a way feeling our way in the dark. We are now, along with many other bodies entrusted with ensuring empowerment, having to question whether our achievements in this regard have made any real impact.
# For example, while there are groups and individuals from historically disadvantaged backgrounds now present in the ownership structures of the broadcasting industry, they are not necessarily in control of these stations. Complex shareholding and financing agreements might limit the actual say they have in structures - and often minimise the financial benefits which will accrue to them.
# The Authority considers the viability of public broadcasting services in all its policy development and licensing activities. For example, in our discussion paper on satellite broadcasting we asked how this could be done. We received many different responses to these questions and are considering them in the light of the Act and international experiences.
# The Incorporation of the SABC and the division of the public broadcaster into public and commercial divisions as required by the Broadcasting Act is also intended to ensure the viability of the Corporation. Whilst we had a meeting in March with the Department of Communications and the SABC regarding this, we are still awaiting clarification about the intended time frames for this Incorporation. It is crucial that this happens as soon as possible and that we are informed timeously of the time frames so we can ensure there is space in our work calendar to accommodate the required transfer of licences.
# In terms of the integrity of the public broadcaster, the new Act clarifies the relationship between the SABC and the IBA - which previously was vague. This enables us to ensure for example that the public services of the Corporation fulfil their mandate regarding the airing of local content. We intend to very shortly hold a meeting with the SABC to further clarify our new relationship.
# The Act also places certain obligations on the Authority - for example we have to monitor the Public Broadcasting Charter. This will enable us to more fully play a role in protecting the integrity of the broadcaster.
# The IBA said in the Triple Inquiry Report that the SABC language services should be extended to cover 80% of the target audiences. This is starting to be achieved and the IBA approved the first phase of the public broadcaster's plans in this regard earlier this year. This extends the right to access to broadcasting in listeners' home languages.
# However all of the private radio stations are broadcasting in either English or Afrikaans. Whilst e-tv has made a commitment to using a diverse range of South African languages in for example its news and children's programmes, it also screens primarily English programmes.
# Whilst community radio stations broadcast in many different languages, the Authority has noted our concern about the tendency of these stations to focus on English or Afrikaans - even when these are not the primary home languages of their communities. Where there are competing applicants for a frequency, we favour the station which is most adequately addressing the language needs of their communities. In this way we encourage applicants to use the languages spoken in their areas. However, this is not sufficient to address the problem. The advertising industry appears to exacerbate the issue by primarily advertising on English and Afrikaans programmes, so these are seen as more commercially viable languages. Further, applicants have argued to us for example that parents want their children to learn English because it is the language of status. Broadcasting can certainly assist in making people value their home languages, but more needs to be done by many institutions in this country, and by you in Parliament, if we are to ensure that all official languages are equally valued.
# There have however been some exciting developments regarding language. For example, Khoi languages will soon be broadcast for the first time in South Africa on one of the new community radio licencees in the Northern Cape.
# The IBA began licensing new community and private radio and television stations when it was established in 1994. The Authority also played a key role in the repositioning of the SABC as a public broadcaster, in the privatisation of certain of the Corporation's radio stations and in the reintegration of the TBVC state broadcasters into the SABC.
# We have licensed 87 one year community radio stations, eight new private radio stations and one national private television station. In addition, six ex SABC radio stations in Gauteng, Western Cape, Kwa-Zulu Natal, the Eastern Cape and the Free State were sold to private bidders. A number of stations have also been granted permission to go on air for up to a month as Special Events Licensees. This year alone about 30 special events licenses have been granted for a diverse range of events such as the Hindu festival of Diwali, the elections, youth day etc
# We are currently involved in the licensing of four year community radio stations. We have received 232 applications from around South Africa. This year we have heard 18 applications from the Free State Province, 8 from the Northern Cape, 11 from the Northern Province, and nine from Mpumalanga. During October we will be hearing applications in the North West. We hope to have decided on applications from all over South Africa by the end of next year. Although the processing of these applications is very time consuming, the amendments to the IBA Act passed earlier this year, have enabled us to proceed more cost effectively as we can now delegate the hearings to panels of Council. The process is though still time consuming, as those not present have to read transcripts before participating in decision-making.
# The number of stations is thus growing all the time, however, this does not necessarily translate into diversity. One of the key deciding factors for whether a station will be granted a license is whether or not it will be different from those already existing in the area. In licensing four year community radio stations, we have learnt from our experience of temporary licences. We are thus careful to ensure that the stations we licence will be distinct from private and public broadcasters - both in the way they are run and in terms of the programmes they produce. If listeners cannot distinguish between, for example, a community station and a commercial one when they turn on their radios there is little point to having three different sectors of broadcasting.
# We are currently developing a position paper on satellite broadcasting after public hearings into this issue. We produced a discussion paper in April this year and received over 30 written representations in response to this. We are currently considering all the inputs we received before finalising our policy. The discussion paper has raised some important debates - for example the role of the regulator versus the competition commission in determining policies for satellite broadcasters. We are establishing a working committee with the Commission to begin to map out jurisdictions. A number of representors of representors stated that certain sections of the Broadcasting Act might need to be amended before we proceed. We are studying these opinions and we might need to urgently suggest amendments to the Act for you to consider.
# In the 2001/2002 financial year we will develop a community television policy and license community TV operators. It is unlikely though that these services will be established in say rural communities for some time due to the expense involved.
# As stated in our Position Paper on Private Television we will investigate the viability of establishing Regional Private Television stations during the forthcoming financial year. We will decide on when to license these stations after conducting this study.
# There has been much news in the media about how the new or greenfields licensees are struggling to survive. Punt op Medium Golf went into liquidation though the station did not close down as it was bought by another media grouping.