|
Volume 15, No. 21, 23 June 2016 |
|
|
|
Red Alert Broadcast Digital Migration: So why are we waiting, for how long and what are the issues, in fact? |
By David Niddrie
Don't hold your breath for affordable, genuinely high-speed data access on your phone or laptop. It could be a very, very long time coming.
The frequency spectrum for high-speed broadband is there. And the White Paper on Information and Communications Technology (ICT) policy due to be released shortly by Telecommunications Services Minister Siyabonga Cwele apparently suggests mechanisms that will keep prices affordable for ordinary South Africans.
So why are we waiting, and for how long?
Communications Minister Faith Muthambi didn't say so in her Parliamentary budget speech last month, but at the rate her digital migration programme is moving, it could be nearly 700 years before frequency spectrum needed for high-speed broadband is available.
The parts of the frequency spectrum (the radio waves used by radio, TV and mobile phones) needed for high speed broadband are currently in use to distribute analogue TV signals (the TV channels you watch if you can't afford DStv). So moving TV signal distribution to digital distribution, which uses a separate part of the spectrum, is an essential first step towards affordable high-speed broadband. The process of moving TV distribution is known as “digital migration”.
Digital migration is complicated by the fact that to be able to watch digital TV on your current TV, requires a digital receiver and aerial. And digital receivers cost several hundred rand.
Because many of South Africa's 13-million-odd TV households can't afford that, the government decided to subsidise the digital receivers - set-top boxes (STBs) (or decoders).
And to allow for distribution of 5-million subsidised STBs, it approved an open-ended “dual illumination period” during which both analogue and digital TV signals would be sent out by the broadcasters so those who hadn't yet received or bought STBs (analogue viewers) and those who had (digital viewers) could watch TV. The dual illumination period started in February this year.
So far, so good …
But to ensure South Africans get digital TV as soon as possible (and the part of the frequency spectrum necessary for affordable high-speed broadband was freed up) you'd expect STBs to be pouring into shops and being installed quickly in the five-million home that get the subsidy.
In fact, since the digital migration started late last year, just 3 000 have been distributed, and just 30 000 households have been registered to receive subsidised STBs. At that pace, registering households will take about 84 years, and getting STBs into all South African households will take more than 800 years.
Muthambi's budget speech included two concessions to speed things up. She has suspended the rule that households have to possess a valid TV licence - good idea: only about 7.7 percent of households have one (although it raises the question of why the rule was imposed in the first place). And she has announced that the dual illumination period will end when 80 percent of households have STBs.
That will save a bit of time - about 200 years in fact. That's a relief … at the current STB roll-out rate, we'll only have to wait about 600 years for affordable, high-speed broadband.
If that sounds ridiculous, there are a few more complications, most of them financial.
Sentech, the national signal distributor, has built and paid for most of the digital television network: so it's ready. But distributing TV signals isn't cheap, so who is going to pay for requiring broadcasters to get Sentech to distribute the TV channel signals twice (the “dual” in the dual illumination period)? Muthambi's budget speech doesn't say, and the small print of her budget doesn't mention it. So there's no money for it this year - never mind the next 599.
Then there is the cost of STBs. The subsidy programme was worked out on the basis that the government would subsidise, not give away, STBs - households would pay what they could, and the government would pay the rest. Government allocated a budget of about R1,5-billion to do so.
It did so on the basis that STBs would cost R400 each - and the volumes required would push the price even lower.
Muthambi's Department of Communications has commissioned just three “manufacturers” to provide 1,5-million of the 5-million STBs for subsidy qualifying households - and she approved payment of R1,05-billion. This breaks down to R684 per STB, 71 percent (R284) higher than it should be.
And with just a third of the 5-million STBs she needs, she's already allocated most of the budget.
The only bit of good news is that National Treasury's stopped payment and is investigating whether the three companies even have the capacity to produce STBs.
Three months ago Minister Muthambi received the report commissioned by Treasury into the tender process and the capacity of the three “manufacturers” to actually produce (rather than illegally import) STBs. She hasn't released it, and has so far done nothing about it - although the report apparently found irregularities in the tender process, and that two of the three “manufacturers” have no equipment, premises or workers to make or assemble STBs.
What all of this means is that under Muthambi, the countdown hasn't even started on the 600-odd years we will have to wait for affordable, high-speed broadband.
So South Africans' data costs will remain higher than they are in most other countries, and our data speeds will remain low.
The question that asks itself is: why?
Why are ordinary South Africans waiting longer than ordinary Kenyans, Namibians, Nigerians and many, many other countries to pay less for access to more reliable data networks?
Whatever answers the Department of Communications may give to this, it is interesting to note that the only entity that benefits from the delay is MultiChoice, the company that owns DStv and MNet. DStv operates a 99 percent plus monopoly satellite pay-TV service. MNet has a licence to operate a terrestrial digital television service of eight channels, which will also be watchable only by its paying subscribers.
The longer digital migration is delayed in South Africa, the better it is for both DStv and MNet. DStv can force those South Africans who desperately want to watch South African - and international - sport to subscribe to its service: most South African, European and other football broadcast live is broadcast exclusively by DStv; as is all international and domestic rugby, most domestic and international cricket and boxing, all top tier-motor racing and tennis … etc, etc, etc.
And while South Africa awaits digital migration, MNet is stockpiling its own, subscriber-only STBs. As soon as digital migration really starts, it will flood the market with MNet STBs, using MultiChoice's near-monopoly on sports coverage to force South Africans to pay for content they should be getting free.
Which brings us back to the question: Why is Minister Muthambi, who claims to be acting in the interests or poor, rural South Africans, delaying digital migration?
David Niddrie is a seasoned journalist, broadcast governance and communications industry expert. This is the first of a series of Umsebenzi Online articles on digital migration and its impact on ordinary South Africans. An edited version of this article appeared in the Sowetan on 16 May 2016
The international landscape, trends, dynamics and complexities: United States-Cuba relations and Latin America
By Chris Matlhako and Walter Mothapo
During a recent visit to Cuba marking the 1st of May 2016 celebrations, we met various levels of the Cuban authorities. These exchanges touched on numerous subjects; not least the ongoing process of the 'normalisation of relations' between Cuba and the United States (US), the declining, yet at the same time powerful position of the US in world affairs. This process has generated various interpretations both from foe and friend, and it was indeed a great opportunity to get to the gist of the 'process' from, as it were from the 'horses' mouth'.
There are legitimate suspicions in some quarters based on US's historic belligerence and intransigence regarding its position with respect to socialist Cuba and recent developments in the region of Latin America, particularly in Venezuela, Brazil and Ecuador where the hand of the US undermining of sovereignty, is but visible for all to see. There is also optimism elsewhere, that the normalisation of the frosty relations between Cuba and the US, which predated the Cold War, puts Cuba in a position to turn an important leaf in its process to update its socialist trajectory and overcoming the decades old unilateral economic embargo against it.
Since the famous public handshake between Presidents Raul Castro and the Barack Obama at the FNB Stadium on occasion of the memorial service of the passing on of Nelson Mandela, a flurry of exchanges have taken place between Cuba and the US facilitated by Pope Francis and the Canadian government. As significant movement in this direction, was demonstrated by the voluntary release of US spy Alan Gross, fifty-two political prisoners, and an unnamed non-citizen agent of the US in return for the release of three Cuban agents - three of the Cuban Five, unfairly and illegally imprisoned in the US.
When Obama visited Cuba the discussions and exchanges with the Cuban authorities centred on the contemporary challenges and the recently concluded 7th Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (CPC). Without exception, the Cuban authorities reminded us of the historic relations between the US and Cuba, the US policy towards Latin America and the Caribbean peoples' and the basis of US imperialism on the continent as an important indicator of the direction of the basis of the US exchanges with Cuba. They argued that to the oppressed of the world, particularly the Latin American and Caribbean peoples', victimised for over two centuries but tenacious combatants against the US imperial strategy, believe another world is possible. They maintain that with leaders such Fidel Castro and Raul Castro and the vanguard force, restless fighters for true independence and unity in 'Our America'; they have proved that victory is possible despite the adversary's economic and military power, and worked to build a society based on justice, the most equitable humanity has known; the socialist Cuba.
During the visit of President Obama to Cuba, he amongst others said; "I have come here to bury the last remnant of the Cold War in the Americas. I have come here to extend the hand of friendship to the Cuban people."
"We both live in a new world, colonised by Europeans", the US President continued, "Cuba, like the United States, was built in part by slaves brought here from Africa. Like the United States, the Cuban people can trace their heritage to both slaves and slave-owners."
However, Fidel Castro rebutted in a lengthy article in his 'Reflections' and said; "Obama made a speech in which he uses the most sweetened words to express: "It is time, now, to forget the past, leave the past behind, let us look to the future together, a future of hope. And it won't be easy, there will be challenges and we must give it time; but my stay here gives me more hope in what we can do together as friends, as family, as neighbours, together."
"I suppose all of us were at risk of a heart attack upon hearing these words from the President of the United States. After a ruthless blockade that has lasted almost 60 years, and what about those who have died in the mercenary attacks on Cuban ships and ports, an airliner full of passengers blown up in mid-air, mercenary invasions, multiple acts of violence and coercion? Nobody should be under the illusion that the people of this dignified and selfless country will renounce the glory, the rights, or the spiritual wealth they have gained with the development of education, science and culture. I also warn that we are capable of producing the food and material riches we need with the efforts and intelligence of our people. We do not need the empire to give us anything. Our efforts will be legal and peaceful, as this is our commitment to peace and fraternity among all human beings who live on this planet."
This aptly captures the logic of Cuba's continued engagement towards 'normalising relations' with the US.
The new US National Security Strategy (US NSS)
Almost a year into his first presidential White House term, President Obama made public the 'new' US National Security Strategy (US NSS). This paper, regarded by many as the roadmap of the country's security strategy and foreign policy, was awaited with bated breath and with great expectations by all and sundry across the world, who have since tried to decode its contents and determine its implications for their countries. This strategy has been critical in advancing the US interests in the recent period. It offers some key points to understanding the US's perception of its role in the international community and its priorities. Actually, its understanding requires reading the fine prints and interpreting what lies behind the rhetoric. That's only way to determine its real scope and prevent the explicit messages from confusing our thoughts.
In the case of Latin America and the Caribbean, the document affirms that Washington's association with the region is derived from proximity, markets integration and energy interdependence, and from "[…] a widely shared commitment to democracy and elected governments."[i] It recalls that the close historical, cultural and family ties "[…] turn our alliance and cooperation into decisively significant elements to the interests of the United States."[ii]
It then goes to deliberately underline that the US will hopefully work with the people of the region for "[…] advancement of democracy and social inclusion, to ensure the people's safety and security, to promote clean energy and defend the universal values of people in the hemisphere."[iii]
It is also telling in the section that deals with democracy. By using a language that is currently vogue, it states; "[…] the United States is committed to civil society and peaceful political opposition", explicitly encourages US non-governmental organisations to embark on this effort, adding that Washington recognises the 'peaceful democratic movements'.
Simply put, the US will continue offering overt and covert support to destabilising initiatives aimed at preventing the consolidation of political movements and forces capable of jeopardizing its domination plans.
In the new US NSS, the white house insists on its war projections as it lays down that the preservation of its military supremacy has kept the country safe for decades and supported world security, and that its armed forces will remain the cornerstone of its security.
The Obama administration has embraced the smart power with its combination of traditional instruments of hard power - the military and economic actions - and soft power - associated to persuasion through diplomacy - the use of ICT's, the promotion of the American way of life and foreign aid: in summary, the traditional 'stick and carrot' policy adapted to the times. Obama's presidency, the Cuban authorities believe, will on a global scale be tested on various fronts, basically related to ending the war that has lasted over ten years, with the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan (one his campaign promises). While redesigning his strategy for the Middle East and seeking for new formulas to handle the complex Syrian situation and Iranian nuclear programme, he will also have to deal with the debt crisis in Europe. Equally challenging is his handling and calibration of the relations with China and Russia, preventing these nations from having the capacity to wrestle global hegemony from the US.
Consequently, President Obama has been 'forced', in terms of his 'policy of change' with the Latin American region to deliver on his promises, as the US gets steadily isolated and economically irrelevant as the region seeks new and alternative measures of trade, finance, foreign relations and security arrangements as espoused in CELAC, UNASUR, MECASUR, CARICOM and ALBA-TCP.
It is in this context that he has taken the steps in the area of foreign relations, particularly concerning a change of Cuba policy!
Cuba's exclusion and failure of isolation
Almost six decades have passed since Cuba was left out of the Inter-America System. Cuba, we were assured stands firm in its resolution to choose its own path and for that purpose its draws spiritual sustenance from its old and recent history. In the recent period, the roles have been reversed - the master country and its instruments of domination stand alone, while Cuba has broken the isolation imposed by the Organisation of American States (OAS) and its mentor. Cuba, it was highlighted has diplomatic ties with over 200 states, including every nation in Latin America and the Caribbean, and is a member of 83 international organisations and mechanisms.
There is a strong global solidarity movement, with South Africa's Friends of Cuba Society (FOCUS) and related organisations, being part of over 2000 friendship associations in over 150 countries, including in the US. For over twenty years now, the UN General Assembly has passed a resolution condemning the blockade.
One of the most significant features of the blockade lately has been the persecution of Cuba's international financial transactions. The Annual Report issued by the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control affirms that, at the end of the fiscal year 2011, the Cuban funds held in escrow by the US amounted to $245 million, resulting in damages for the economic, social and technical-scientific development of the country[iv]. In June 12, 2012 the Treasury Department fined Dutch Bank ING for its financial transactions with Cuba and other countries. The $619 million fine stands as the highest ever imposed by the US government to a foreign bank for its commercial relations with Cuba. In this connection OFAC Director Adam Szubin stated; "Our legal sanctions reflect our main foreign policy and national security interests thoroughly pursued by OFAC. Today's historic announcement should serve as a clear warning to anyone who plans to benefit from avoiding United States prohibitions."[v]
Cuba recently, encouraged countries in the region to strengthen strategies to confront imperialist intervention. Speaking in Venezuela, Cuba's foreign minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla called on the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA-TCP) to strengthen strategies to confront imperialist intervention and coup plots on the continent, this after intensifying external intervention in the internal affairs of Venezuela by the US and the undemocratic constitutional coup of democratically elected President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil. He stressed; "Latin America and the Caribbean have changed, we are no longer, nor will be, the backyard of the United States, we will not allow for the return of the carrot and stick and I repeat that no one can beguile Cuba, which is still under blockade and whose territory in Guantanamo is still occupied, while attempts are to isolate Venezuela."[vi]
The policy of the Cuban Revolution as affirmed by the 7th Congress of the CPC, backed by the overwhelming majority of its people, has been clearly described by President Raul Castro: "[…] the day they are willing to talk we will talk, on equal footing, without the slightest threat to our sovereignty, and treating each other as equals. We are willing to do that directly, without intermediaries, whenever they are ready. But we are not in a hurry, we are not desperate and we have said, - as Fidel said it a long time ago - that we will not talk under the threat of a carrot and stick policy, that time is long passed, it belongs in a different period of time.[vii]"
As Fidel noted in his 'Reflections' article on President Obama's remarks in Cuba, President Obama and the US cannot dictate the terms of engagements with Cuba, nor can they determine the basis for normalisation of relations with Cuba and thus, cannot erase history.
Fidel said: "The native populations don't exist at all in Obama's mind. Nor does he say that the Revolution swept away racial discrimination, or that pensions and salaries for all Cubans were decreed by it before Mr. Barrack Obama was 10 years old. The hateful, racist bourgeois custom of hiring strongmen to expel Black citizens from recreational centers was swept away by the Cuban Revolution - that which would go down in history for the battle against apartheid that liberated Angola, putting an end to the presence of nuclear weapons on a continent of more than a billion inhabitants. This was not the objective of our solidarity, but rather to help the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau and others under the fascist colonial domination of Portugal."
Chris Matlhako is SACP Central Committee member and Secretary for International Affairs. Walter Mothapo serves as a member of the Party`s sub-committee on International Affairs.
[i] A National Security Strategy, May 2010. http//www.whitehouse.gov.sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_stra...
[ii] Ibid
[iii] Ibid
[iv] http//www.cubadebate.cu/noticias/2012
[v] Ibid
[vi] http//www.democracycuba.com/Blog/cuba-confront-imperialist-intervention-venezu...
[vii] Interview with Raul Castro, 31 December 2008. 'La vida es un eterno batallar'
Umsebenzi Online is an online voice of the South African working class, now publishing at least once every week
