LEADER ARTICLE
A False Ring: Ministers to Give it Another TRAI

Over two years ago, when the telecom sector was a mess, and there was talk of convergence, the government set up a group of ministers for telecom and IT, and called it GoT-IT. Its terms of reference were the issues plaguing the sector then. However, the piecemeal approach and inability to shake off lobbies ensured that GoT-IT got nowhere.
Now, with the sector in a bigger mess, the government has set up another group of ministers (GoM) for telecom, and given it eight tasks, which it must address in an attempt to find a solution.Six heavyweight ministers have been roped for the purpose. Their task includes charting a course to unified licences, what to do with old licences in case licences are unified, spectrum availability, intra-circle mergers and acquisitions, imposition of sales tax on telecom services, finding resources for meeting rural telecom targets, convergence, increasing FDI limit in the sector, and, of course, ways of ensuring WLL mobility to Short Distance Charging Area (SDCA) alone.
Whenever confronted with an issue which is contentious or where it needs to buy time or where it needs to extricate a favoured lobby from trouble, governments are known to refer the matter to a committee. It is often remarked in government circles: If you can’t commit, committee it. Depending on the perceived severity of the issue, it can take the shape of a Joint Parliamentary Committee, an empowered committee, a group of ministers or a committee of secretaries, and so on.
Since the latest is only a group of ministers, and not an empowered group of ministers, the group’s decisions would still need to pass through the cabinet. Hence, the decisions taken by the group during its first meeting on September 25 will need cabinet ratification. That is comforting, because the circumstances in which the group has been formed raises some doubts and any decision taken by it would have necessarily to undergo a thorough scrutiny. It’s a different matter that Yashwant Sinha and George Fernandes, two heavyweights in the group, were unable to attend.
The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal delivered its order on WLL Limited Mobility last month. Till then, the government maintained steadfastly that it would honour any direction from the tribunal as well as the regulator. There was a bit of apprehension immediately after the tribunal’s order, but all hell broke loose when the regulator, while maintaining the legality of the WLL services, said that its mobility was not in keeping with the letter and spirit under which WLL was allowed in the first place and, hence, the TDSAT verdict that its mobility be limited to within SDCA be implemented.
By doing so, it derailed not only the plans of WLL proponents, but it seems the minister too, who stated on a TV channel that he is not in a position to implement the TDSAT/TRAI order because there would be litigation, and it is not in line with what he wants to do. At least here is a minister who has the courage to admit that political wishes can override constitutional bodies. The GoM was announced soon afterwards. Would the GoM have come up if the development were in line with the minister’s thinking? But what of the heads of these constitutional/statutory bodies? Why do they remain mute spectators, preferring to be pushed around by ministers who challenge and undermine their authority with impunity?
As for the issues that the GoM must address, it is once again in line with the way decisions are taken — one quota system for this corporate, another for another, interspersed with some innocuous issues. So we know how FDI and intra-circle mergers and acquisitions come in there, as also the move towards unified licensing as well as methods of limiting WLL services to SDCA. Sometimes it conveys that the intention is no more than to pull the wool over people’s eyes. For example, what happens to the restriction on WLL mobility if the unified licensing issue finds favour?
As for the intra-circle mergers and acquisition, there are so many issues there. Would the number of licences be reduced as a result? What happens to the spectrum? Does it become the property of the merged entity? If yes, does it not distort the competitive environment? All the issues mentioned above are fundamental and need to be addressed in some detail, and not in a hurry. It is important because, currently, thanks to the mess in the sector, the regulator has an unenviable job. A hurried decision on some of the issues being tackled will leave the regulator with even more cleaning up to do, which, given the circumstances, is totally undesirable. The only hope is that some in the GoM, with a no-nonsense reputation, will actually turn this into an opportunity by asking the relevant questions. These could pertain to national security, which, although considered a bogey by many, is of utmost importance, or the need to open up the sector further in the name of reforms.
Even more important, one hopes that not only will some of these heavyweights take the task seriously enough to see through the game, but actually make the exercise meaningful by putting paid to the aspirations of a few in the group with suspect interests.