REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS ON A STUDY TOUR UNDERTAKEN TO THE SOUTH AFRICAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION (SABC), INDEPENDENT COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA (ICASA), NATIONAL ELECTRONIC MEDIA INSTITUTE OF SOUTH AFRICA (NEMISA) AND SENTECH DATED, 16 OCTOBER 2009.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the visit was to orientate and familiarise Members of Parliament with the functions of these State Owned Entities (SOEs) and to examine the alleged deterioration in the state of affairs and staff morale at ICASA. The delegation consisted of the following Members: Mr I Vadi (Chairperson), Mr SE Kholwane, Ms MN Magazi, Mr LN Mkhize, Ms RM Morutoa, Ms WS Newhoudt-Druchen, Ms SR Tsebe (all from the ANC); Ms LD Mazibuko, Mr NJ Van Der Berg (both from DA); Ms JD Kilian (COPE); Mr KM Zondi (IFP) and Ms P De Lille (ID). The secretariat consisted of the following parliamentary staff members: Ms N Skaka (Committee Secretary), Ms N Mbelekane (Committee Researcher) and Mr J Van Der Westhuizen (Committee Assistant).

VISITING THE ENTITIES

On the 6^th of October 2009, the Portfolio Committee on Communications visited two SOEs, namely Sentech and SABC. At Sentech, the Committee met with senior management including the Chairperson of the Board, Mr Colin Hickling.

Sentech

The Sentech delegation presented on the Entity’s products and network services including the new digital equipment. Sentech management also updated the Committee on the Entity’s major projects, that is, Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT), 2010 FIFA World Cup and National Broadband Network Services (NBNS)

The SOE also reported on some of their key challenges, which include:

• Delays in the DTT Spectrum and Migration Regulations Plan
• Concluding the funding and roll out models for the NBNS
• Social mandates versus Return on Investments and Sustainability

Other issues that emerged include Sentech’s inability to meet its roll out targets to the Dinaledi schools, and the fact that they may not be able to achieve the November 2011 analogue switch off date. These shortcomings are attributed to inadequate funds. Furthermore, the Committee raised concerns about a case of spectrum interference. The Entity reported that it has referred one such case to the regulator, ICASA. In addition, Sentech reported that they are working on plans to build offices in Fourways, Johannesburg in order to reduce accommodation costs.

The Committee also toured the Sentech Towers and was shown the state of the art digital equipment that the Entity has acquired.

South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC)

On the afternoon of the 6^th of October 2009, the Committee visited the SABC offices at Auckland Park. Under the leadership of the Chairperson of the SABC Board, Irene Charnley, the public broadcaster made a presentation on the latest developments and plans regarding migration to digital broadcasting. In order to familiarise the Committee with the day to day functions of SABC, Members were given an informative tour of the Auckland Park soapie, sports and news studios.

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA)

On the 7^th of October 2009, the Committee conducted a fact finding mission to ICASA. At the regulator’s offices the Members had an opportunity to engage with a delegation of General Managers from all the regulator’s departments, the ICASA Council and Members of the Communication Workers’ Union. Managers, Council and union members were given an opportunity to air their views on the problems at ICASA.

The main issues that were raised were:

• The poor relations between the Executive managers and Council members.
• The unclear definition of roles and responsibilities of Councillors in working committees.
• The skills shortages

Below are some of the issues emanating from the meetings:

Regional Managers

Capacity problems

· Dated infrastructure and equipment.

· Understaffed (only one person is monitoring spectrum for the whole country – could have adverse effects during the 2010 FIFA World Cup).

Staff related

· Low staff morale.

· Shortage of skilled people in key positions.

· No clear attraction and retention strategies.

· ICASA invests in staff development but operators poach them.

Organisation

• Organisational (organogram) structure is not clearly defined.
• Complaints about Council interference in the day to day operations of the organisation.

Council

• Admitted that relations with the Executive Management have been strained but expressed a willingness to mend the relationship for the sake of the organisation.
• Attributes capacity problems to a change in legislation that was not aligned with the change in Authority.
• Stated that the source of disagreements with the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is based on the allocation of limited resources.
• Expressed their dissatisfaction with the performance of the legal division.
• Reported that they have the power to appoint the CEO who in turn appoints the staff.
• Pointed out that Council has limited involvement in staff recruitment.
• Acknowledged that there are inefficiencies in structure as there are gaps and duplications because the organisation is top-heavy.

Union

• Identified a need for a moratorium on Council members from leaving the Authority to work for network operators.
• Complained that training preference is given to senior levels of staff who then train themselves for greener pastures.
• Want Union involvement in the interviewing process as per labour agreement with the Authority.
• Poor communication channels between Union and Council.
• Concern about a lack of proper performance evaluation systems and the rewarding of poor performance with golden handshakes.
• Disgruntled with ICASA’s organisational structure and organogram which is in operation but is not approved by the Union.
• There is a need to review the three year term of the CEO as the Union believes it is too short.
• Identified a need to revisit the merging of the Postal Regulator and ICASA.
• Troubled by a lack of a clear follow up strategy with regard to licences conditions, particularly for the rural areas, and inefficient licence collecting processes.
• Concerned that ICASA is not very visible and not easily accessible to the public.
• Noted that there is a language barrier between the regulator and the community especially at provincial level.

The Union also raised allegations of wasteful expenditure with regards to:

• Procurement.
• Utilisation of consultants.
• Relocation of the offices of ICASA without performing a feasibility study.

In response, the Committee expressed a need for a follow-up meeting as there was insufficient time to discuss the allegations. Furthermore, the Committee also observed that there was a disconcerting fault line between the ICASA Council and Executive Management, and between the Regulator and the Union. The Committee advised the Council and the Executive Management to take the initiative to find each other before things escalate further. Feedback on this issue is expected in November when ICASA presents its annual report before Parliament.

National Electronic Media Institute of South Africa (NEMISA)

NEMISA came into being as an institution of education and learning, specialising in teaching production and technical skills applicable to the TV, radio and broadcasting industries. In the beginning the Institute catered for mainly rural women. The students were fully subsidised for accommodation and tuition. Nemisa has since grown and developed to cater for all interested students including those who can afford to pay fees. The courses are expensive and therefore Nemisa continues to provide bursaries where possible.

At the Nemisa premises Members were shown impressive exhibitions of student work ranging from animation, graphic design in multimedia, television and radio production. Nemisa management reported that there is a demand to establish the school in other provinces. Although they are based in Johannesburg, the institute recruits students from all provinces of the country.

Achievements include:

• Trained over 600 students in the past financial year.
• Accreditation of programmes by the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA)

Registration of Nemisa as a training institute by SETA.

Challenges include:

• Insufficient funds.
• Dated equipment in the fast changing world of digital technology.
• Recruitment of suitably qualified trainers

Conclusion

This was the first oversight trip that was conducted by the new Committee and it was an eye opener, especially for new members. The study tour was cut short from three to two days because of political commitments. This meant that visits to operators such as Smile, Multi-Choice and Neotel had to be postponed. The Committee found the tour informative and productive as it has broadened the Members’ knowledge and understanding of the entities that report to the Committee. This will go a long way in enhancing the Members’ ability to exercise their oversight duties effectively.