MINISTER Z. PALLO JORDAN'S REMARKS TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS ON THE IBA REPORT ON THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICES. 29 AUGUST 1995.
INTRODUCTION
The tabling of the Independent Broadcasting Authority's report on its Triple Inquiry in Parliament is an important milestone in the re-regulation of broadcasting in the post-apartheid period.
The IBA was tasked to inquire into three matters:
The resolution of policy on these three matters now makes it possible to achieve the Government's aim of opening the airwaves on a fair and equitable basis and to provide the basis for the three-tier broadcasting system - public, private and community to develop in South Africa.
The three issues addressed by the Triple Inquiry are of such importance that it is and has not been possible to proceed with the opening of the airwaves without those issues being resolved and agreement being reached on each by the elected representatives of the people.
We have never known public broadcasting services in the true sense of the word. The old SABC and TBVC broadcasters were mere instruments of apartheid propaganda that would have done Dr Joseph Goebels proud. They never served the South African public as a whole but were structurally and ideologically committed to the balkanisation of the country and the echoing of His Master's Voice. Since the independent appointment of the new SABC Board in 1993, a painful process of transforming the SABC into a genuine public broadcasting service has begun. The IBA report on public broadcasting aims to assist that transformation process and place the national public broadcaster on a sound financial and structural footing to face the new challenges of providing public communication in a democratic South Africa and in an increasingly competitive broadcasting environment.
With regard to the question of regulating the cross-media control of private broadcasting services, we have inherited a private television company which is owned by the leading Press corporations. One of the key aims of the IBA Act is to promote the provision of a diverse range of sound and television broadcasting services. Concentrations of media power stand in the way achieving broadcasting diversity. This is a matter that needs resolution prior to the licensing of private broadcasters.
THe considerations of nation-building and the forging of an inclusive South African identity are central to the question of local television content and South African music. If we do not create the conditions under which the images and sounds of South Africa and our own unique experience as an emergent nation are reflected, there will always be some doubt cast on our claim to the title of a free independent nation taking its place in the community of nations. In addition, how would the world construe the claim that we have thrown off the shackles of colonialism.
Those who argue that market forces alone should determine what local television or music should be produced could well be condemning the people of South Africa to electronic serfdom. Serfdom to half-a-dozen multinational media corporations who have no interest in nation-building and whose sole raison d'etre is the maximisation of profit by selling their TV programmes at one-tenth of the price which small countries are able to produce them. Appropriate instruments therefore have to be devised to ensure that more favourable conditions are created for South African music, television and film producers. One of these is to require broadcasters, as a condition of their licence, to carry a certain proportion of South African, film, television and music. This is the third issue that must be resolved prior to the issuing of new private licences.
However, the central issue on which Parliament must deliberate is the question of the future of public broadcasting services in South Africa. I would like to say here that I fully support the IBA's recommendations regarding the restructuring of the SABC and the integration of the TBVC broadcasters. The IBA also makes recommendations regarding the financing of public broadcasting services which have considerable merit, but which require the state to make a financial contribution to public broadcasting. This is a question on which I would very much like to hear the view of the honourable members as it has a central bearing on the viability of public broadcasting services.
THE IBA'S APPROACH TO BROADCASTING REGULATION
In order to fully understand the IBA report it is necessary to examine their approach to broadcasting regulation.
Regulating television.
The IBA's primary perspective on terrestrial television (as opposed to satellite TV) is that an unregulated market-driven TV sector would tend toward:
a. entertainment programming;
b. foreign programming.
Market-driven TV will also incline towards Niche programming and choosing specific lucrative market segments.
The key problem with this free market approach is that it destroys public broadcasting services because public broadcasting won't be able to maintain its audience share. In an unregulated market, public broadcasting would be marginalised and the quality and range of television programmes would be severely reduced.
This is the situation in some countries where public broadcasting has a miniscule 2% audience share.
THe key implication of this perspective is that it is necessary to regulate programming on free-to-air terrestrial television - in both its private and public forms.
The chief advantages of regulating programming on public and private terrestrial TV are:
a. One maintains a space for information and educational programming as well as entertainment programmes; b. one creates a competitive environment around all three forms of programming rather than only entertainment programming; c. by creating this competition across all three forms of programming and securing a broad range of programmes, one improves the quality of all TV programming and thereby, also improves the quality of our democracy.
In the South African context an unregulated TV market will be unlikely to deliver to easons:
a. low-income groups are not attractive to the advertisers who essentially pay for programmes delivery; b. indigenous language production on TV is expensive and is ely to be undertaken by market-dr
Hence there is a need for language regulation on both private and public terrestrial TV and provided there are similar programme and linguistic obligations for both private and public terrestrial TV, competition between them will be fair and productive.
In other words, regulated competition between the private and public terrestrial television stations is central to the IBA's approach to terrestrial TV regulation. In this they are following the British model of TV regulation which has consistently managed to produce a broad range and a consistently high quality of TV programming.
I has to be stresses that in talking about programme regulation, the IBA is not referring to regulating the content of any programme. Programme regulation refers to the form of TV programme, that is, whether it is educational, recreational, informative or entertaining. In other words, there is no question of censorship here, of interfering in the actual content of a programme.
Related to the question of programme regulation is the issue of local television content. And I want to say this very emphatically. In the 21st century the definition of a country's self-determination as a nation will be its capacity to produce information and not merely to consume it. This means the faculty to produce software which can travel on the information superhighway. A strong Television industry is a key component for building this capacity. We can ill-afford to regard Television as an instrument for transmitting programmes. It is essentially a mechanism for the production of programmes. This is something we should nurture and develop, not by protectionism, but through regulated competition. We need to create the space in which our indigenous TV production capacity can grow, can be tested in the competitive environment of our national TV system, and then inserted competitively into the international information superhighway. The choice we face is whether we, as a nation, are to become a driver on the international information superhighway or whether we will be a mere hitchhiker.
The Ministry is fully behind the IBA's approach to broadcasting regulation of terrestrial television. What needs to be tested in the Parliamentary debate is whether the IBA's actual proposals on how to achieve programme regulation and regulated competition do in fact meet these goals of regulation. In other words, I would like Parliament closely examine the IBA's recommendation on limiting the SABC to two terrestrial TV channels and one satellite TV channel and only allowing a private terrestrial TV channel in 1998. I am not at all comfortable about the proposal on the SABC's TV channels. I am equally concerned that the delay in introducing the private terrestrial channel might overprotect the SABC and defeat the disciplinary aims of regulated competition to improve the quality and range of both public and private TV.
Regulating radio
With regard to the regulation of radio, I am pleased to see that the IBA approach is to licence as broad and diverse a range of public, private and community radio stations as possible. In radio there are not the same constraints regarding frequency availability, finance or programme regulation and the IBA's principle of complementarity of radio services in their regulatory approach is to be commended. Similarly the sale of the SABC's regional commercial services is a positive step in ensuring that the SABC is able to concentrate on its core public service obligations and improve the quality of its public service stations, particularly with regard to
Like the issue of local television content, the question of supporting South African music is very important and I would like to urge radio broadcasters not to see regulations about South African music on radio as restrictions but rather as an opportunity to develop South African music as part of a software industry that will strengthen South African culture as well as South African access to the information highway. The absurd assertion that an obligation to air South African music will encourage mediocrity must be met head-on. No radio broadcaster will be constrained to relinquish quality broadcasters insist on quality should have the opposite effect. In this regard, I would like to recommend to the IBA that it consider whether an incentive scheme for broadcasters playing South African music above the quota is not possible.
THE IBA'S STRUCTURAL AND FINANCIAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICES.
As mentioned earlier, the Ministry fully supports the IBA's recommendations on restructuring public broadcasting services in South Africa. These recommendations include:
With regard to the financing of public broadcasting services the IBA makes a strong case for State financial support for specific public broadcasting functions, namely:
The Ministry feels that it is reasonable for the State to support the national public broadcasting service in this manner. I would be very interested to hear the views of Parliament on this matter, as the question of the relationship between Government and the national public broadcaster is a very sensitive one and it is critical that the independence of the SABC from government control should not be jeopardised. Nevertheless, it is also important that the public responsibilities of the SABC in a democratic South Africa should be supported - particularly with regard to language, the provinces, local TV content and educational broadcasting.
I will be raising these issues with the Cabinet in due course.
PROGRAMME OF LEGISLATION
In the light of the IBA's report and the Parliamentary debate on its recommendations, I will ask the Cabinet to consider a legislative programme on restructuring public broadcasting services. It will comprise a number of Bills:, namely:
1. A Public Broadcasting Services Bill, which will create the framework for the establishment of national, provincial and local public broadcasting services;
2. A Second IBA Amendment Bill to clarify the IBA's jurisdiction regarding the TBVC broadcasters;
3. A National public Broadcasting Bill that will effect the integration of the SABC and the TBVC broadcasters as a new national public broadcasting service as well as provide a new public mandate for national public broadcasting services. The Ministry accepts the IBA's recommendation that the name South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) be retained as the name for this new national public broadcasting service.
4. A Sentech Bill, which will provide for the separation of Sentech from the SABC to become a common carrier;
5. A Third IBA Amendment Bill to give the IBA the power to amend, divide or consolidate any broadcasting licence held in respect of a public broadcasting service, to convert any public broadcasting licence to a private broadcasting licence and to agree to the acquisition of a public broadcasting service by a private broadcaster;
6. A National Public Broadcasting Services Funding Bill, to provide for funding from the State to the national public broadcaster.
7. A Fourth IBA Amendment Act, relating to limitations on cross-media control of private broadcasting services;
8. Amendments to the Radio Act and the repeal of the legislation governing the SABC and TBVC state broadcasters in the past.
All of these Bills will be subject to the outcome of the debate on the future of public broadcasting by Parliament and the Cabinet.
CONCLUSION
I wish to commend the IBA on their Report. One of the most valuable aspects of the report is that it demonstrates the impor- tance of having an independent regulator to oversee the broadcasting sector on behalf of the public. The IBA Report will not please everybody. In the course of debating it within Parliament and the Cabinet and in the public sphere, some of its recommendations may be changed.
However, the IBA has demonstrated its independence by avoiding regulatory capture by any of the powerful interest groups at large in the broadcasting sector - whether public or private. This is an important strength of our new democracy and I think that Parliament and the Cabinet respect and value this independence. Without it we will not be able to open the airwaves and create the diversity of media voices our country needs.