1. City of Cape Town input on the National ICT Policy March 2015

2. General Many of the issues raised in the discussion document deal with issues that reflect the current regulatory and legislative environment. This includes the rapid deployment of infrastructure, creation of points of presence, infrastructure sharing, last mile connectivity, Open Access, Spectrum management and the role of local government. In general, the document seeks to address tactical issues that deal with implementation rather than dealing with the underlying strategic, regulatory and legislative issues. The City is of the view that resolving the strategic, regulatory and legislative issues will go further to address the objectives of the NDP for ICT in the country. For example, a proper Open Access regime, managed by a strong and resourced Regulator can deal with the rapid deployment of infrastructure, points of presence, infrastructure sharing, last mile connectivity, open access processes, spectrum management and local loop unbundling, without the need to deal with these as separate matters, which is how they are dealt with in this document.

3. 3.4.5 Broadband and Internet infrastructure: Points of Presence (PoPs) Do you agree that it is necessary to promote the deployment of Points of Presence (PoPs) in all 270 municipalities? If so please motivate whether this should be achieved through obligations on licensees or whether Government should undertake the responsibility. ANSWER PoPs are part of the Infrastructure problem of Open Access and should be dealt with as part of Open Access regulations. Government refrain from building PoPs unless as part of their build out for their operations i.e. where municipalities or provincial government are involved in network development (either in-house or through public outsourcing)

4. 3.4.5.2 Backbone Connectivity The proposals for a Single Backbone Provider and a New Sate Owned National Provider are not a sound basis for progressing the objectives of the Broadband Policy. The provision of backbone connectivity is best facilitated by aggregated procurement AND the proper regulatory conditions for private sector investment. Aggregated procurement (public outsourcing) should occur at a local or provincial level (NOT national) with adequate open source conditions imposed on the infrastructure developed as part of the procurement process. Similarly, licensing of operators should require a commensurate commitment to infrastructure investment for the ability to operate. This is not the same as facilities-based competition as it requires some commitment to infrastructure investment, but not necessarily for full network development.

5. 3.4.5.2 Metro Infrastructure aggregation The document completely underestimates the role of municipalities and local players. The inadequacy of last-mile infrastructure in most areas can best be dealt with at a local level. Rather than talk about ”infrastructure aggregation”, the document should rather be considering infrastructure proliferation and models for management of metro infrastructure. The very problem that this document seeks to address - namely a developmental agenda for telecoms in terms of universal access - is undermined by supporting the proliferation of infrastructure in the commercially attractive metro areas without the imposition of offsets, obligations or open access conditions. Of the options listed, the first two (viz. rapid deployment policy, and use of government facilities) are fraught with problems and contravene the constitutional obligation of municipalities to provide basic services which sometimes conflicts with the ECA and the operators’ requirements for rights of way. There is an assumption that there is need for “co-ordination” which assumes that a “planned and harmonized approach” will deliver a better outcome than currently exists. The advent of an Open Access regulatory environment would do far more for “harmonizing” infrastructure development than the options stipulated.

6. 3.4.5.4 Last Mile Infrastructure Option Two: Advance Local Loop Unbundling and make it accessible as an essential facility on non-discriminatory and reasonable terms and with a price control. This should be supported. Option Three: Mandate open access on all access platforms including fixed, wireless and fibre. This should be supported. If properly implemented, this would override option two (i.e. make it unnecessary). Option Four: The unbundling of the local loop should include bit stream access and other associated IP protocols presently largely controlled by incumbents. This should be supported and can be run in conjunction with options two and three.

7. 3.4.6 Measures to fast track Rapid Deployment of Infrastructure Option Two: The implementation of a Rapid Deployment Policy. Rapid deployment is only seen as urgent in commercially viable urban areas. Municipalities should offset deployment obligations for infrastructure development in low penetration / underserved areas. None of the options proposed addresses the real problem of infrastructure development, which is that commercial operators are seeking rapid deployment in areas that already have infrastructure. A proper Open Access Policy will deal with the availability of infrastructure in these areas, though will not adequately address the issue of the lack of infrastructure in underserved areas.

8. 3.5.2 Open Access Option Two: Adopt the principle for open access, but not provide for a definition. This will lead to confusion and grey areas and should thus be avoided. Option Three: Implement an open access regime, as per the current broadband policy. The implementation of a Open Access regime requires detailed and precise legislation, which does not exist. The Policy is thus necessary but not sufficient. A definitive and detailed set of legislation is required to prevent the commercial operators from running rings around the Regulator.

9. 3.5.3 Infrastructure Sharing An Open Access Policy is fundamental to Infrastructure sharing. This goes beyond the limitations set by local loop unbundling as per Option Three. The Regulator should have the capability to enforce Open Access (option one) and encourage network sharing (option three), which should all form part of new Open Access regulations. These options are thus non-exclusive and subject to a proper Open Access regime with an underlying policy and regulatory framework.

10. 3.7.2 Spectrum Policy Objectives The Current Policy Objectives should be maintained. However, they do need to be acted upon quickly. The Policy objectives date back to 2010 and very little progress has been made in meeting the objectives. In particular, from the municipalities perspective, the following objectives need to be met: Provide for the allocation of spectrum for ‘safety of life’ services; Provide for the allocation of spectrum for government services (municipal service delivery).

11. 3.7.5.2 Spectrum pricing for government services The City supports the proposal of ‘No-Fee Spectrum’ being set aside for government public services. Government and the Regulator should be compelled to analyse public sector spectrum needs and review this every five years.

12. 7.4.2 Role of local government The document is critical of local government as “impeding” the development of infrastructure. The reality, however, could not be further from the truth. Local government, especially the larger municipalities have been leading the field for the development of broadband infrastructure, open access usage of infrastructure, infrastructure sharing, shared radio access networks, Public Internet Access using Wi-Fi and providing broadband access to underserved communities – way beyond and in spite of the existing regulatory and legislative regime. The public outsourcing aggregation model is already being used at local level and increasingly local government has become important in e-government implementation. The proven success of the pragmatic BOTTOM UP approach adopted (through necessity) by municipalities, has a large impact on the developmental rollout of broadband.

13. 7.4.2 Role of local government The document focuses particularly on the approvals requirements of operators for rights of way. The issue that this document seeks to address - namely a developmental agenda for telecoms in terms of universal access - is undermined by supporting proliferation of infrastructure in the metro areas without the imposition of corresponding offsets, obligations or open access conditions. Commercial operators complain of the lack of approval for rights of way, but approving such rights of way is complicated by the naturally limited availability of a physical resource (literally space in the ground) to a large number of players. This is exacerbated by the fact that most refusals are in high density commercial areas - where infrastructure already exits – and where a proper functioning open access regime would have obviated the need for so many right of way applications in the first place! Operators also are apparently ignorant (or choose to ignore) Municipalities’ constitutional obligations to provide of basic municipal services, which often conflicts with the demands of operators.

14. Thank You Leon Van Wyk City of Cape Town Leon.vanwyk@capetown.gov.za Tel: 021 4009050