Telecom Act  Passed—Age of Monopoly comes to an End

By Mellica McPherson

At last the long awaited, much deliberated, and controversial Telecommunications Act has been passed, and now Government promises to move swiftly to establish a Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. But before the Bill was actually passed a few unexpected, and unusual actions were taken by some members of the Legislative Council.

Prior to the Minister for Communications and Works, Hon. Elmore Stoutt’s introduction of the  motion for the second and third readings of the Bill titled “Telecommunications Act, 2006,” Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Ralph T. O’Neal rose to draw attention to paragraph 65-66 on the Standing Orders that dealt with the procedure for the withdrawal of Bills in the House. Speaker of the House, Hon. Inez Archibald interpreted paragraph 65-66 of the Standing Order for the benefit of Hon. O’Neal and other Members concerned.

Subsequently, Hon. Stoutt stood once again to move the motion, by whilst he was still on his feet Representative for the Third District, Hon. Julian Frazer  stood and moved “a motion to amend the Bill”. Hon. Frazer cited Standing Order 34, and stated that he wanted Clause 93 of the Telecommunications Act to be removed in its entirety. However, the Speaker of the Legislative Council said that the amendment to the motion raised by Hon. Frazer was premature, therefore she called Hon. Stoutt to move the motion which he did.

The Communications and Works Minister read the objects and reasons of the Bill, before the motion was seconded by Fifth District Representative, Hon. Delores Christopher. 

At that moment Hon. Frazer made another attempt to move his motion once again, but he was told by the Speaker that he had to wait for the right moment in the Sitting. Hon. Frazer then proceeded to contribute to the debate, he told the Legislative Council that there are areas in the Bill  that troubled him. He then proceeded to identifying parts of the legislation that he had problems with.

The Third District Representative later described section 93 (the newly added part of the Bill) as the meat of the Bill.  He said “a section has been plugged into this Bill titled compensation. I am going to take my time with this  because it is the meat of the matter. I see no place in this act  for this section.”

At that moment the Attorney General, Hon. Cherno Jallow stood on point  of clarification, he informed that the document that Hon. Frazer read from was different than the  one he had.

However, Hon. Frazer continued his comments and stated that a compensation section  should be in a contract not in  a Bill: “it finds no reason in this Bill, one, because it’s a one of  situation. ‘This is garbage (referring to section 93. ) You are going to hand this Bill to a Minister, who earlier today announced that he is new to the Ministry. Handing him this Bill to ram down the people’s throat without explaining section 93 to them. They need to explain the reasons for this new section  to the people.’ This Bill is ambiguous, it’s white washing.”

“My Chief Minister would have fired me too because I would not have brought such a Bill to this House, because it is robbing in the hood. I shudder to think that we have been delaying this Bill just to insert this section just to please one man. This Bill is prepared to satisfy one man, there was nothing wrong with this Bill when it came before now, but why is it right now because it has been fixed to satisfy one man: I’m ashamed to see what this House has come to. This Bill came to the House and no one in the public knew what was in it. After we pass this Bill and compensation becomes the order of the day, how much is it going to cost. I sat here today and heard the Minister say that they can’t afford to pay the public servants, but they have money to pay CCT,“ Hon. Frazer commented.

Hon. Delores Christopher announced that she supported the Bill, but agreed with Hon. Frazer that a Bill of that magnitude should have been properly circulated. She explained that it is customary for a Bill like this to have a hearing. “I am confused because the Government was being harassed for not passing the Bill, but now there are questions about the Bill being passed too fast,” she said.

Leader of the Opposition, Hon. O’Neal questioned “why the Government did not use GIS to inform the people about the Bill through the media.”  He stated that he was happy to know that many of CCT’s shareholders are BV Islanders, and although he claimed that he is not against the principle of compensation in the Bill, Hon. O’Neal declared that he didn’t think that it was wise to throw that responsibility for awarding compensations on the Minister responsible Communications and Works.

Education and Culture Minister, Hon. Lloyd Black told the Legislative Council that it was quite clear what the purpose of the Bill is, and  that it was unfortunate that Hon. Frazer did not see the rationale of the section for compensation.

Sixth District Representative, Hon. Omar Hodge categorised the day the Bill was passed as an historical day  in the BVI, and he thanked the telecommunications company for their services over the years. Hon. Hodge also told the members of the Council that there was nothing that was so bad in the Bill that they couldn’t sit down and discuss.

Minister of Natural Resources and Labour, Hon. Eileene Parsons said that she fully supported the Bill.

First District Representative, Hon. Andrew Fahie explained that he does not agree with the part of the Bill that states  that the Commission should report to the Minister, because  it shows political interference. Furthermore, Hon. Fahie said that he had some problems with section 93, but not with the issue of compensation.

Representative for the Second District and the former Communications and Works Minister, Hon. Alvin Christopher told the Council that he would support the Bill, only if Government removed section 93 from it. He said “we can support companies like CCT BoatPhone but we don't have to open the treasury to do so.”

Deputy Chief Minister, Hon. Ronnie Skelton said that “one cannot take away people’s rights and not compensate them. It  is easy to say go to court but it is easier to work out the matter amicably.”

Seventh District Representative, Dr. the Hon. Kedrick Pickering supported the Bill. However, he said that it was important to note that liberalisation does not end when the Bill is passed.                     

Chief Minister, Dr. the Hon. D. Orlando Smith explained that one of the reasons for the compensation clause is to ensure that telecommunications companies will not be able to use private lands for the purpose of setting up their equipment without talks of compensation.

After the debate, Hon. Stoutt moved a motion for the Bill to be read a second time. After that, Hon. Frazer moved his motion to have section 93 deleted from the Bill. Hon. Frazer’s motion was seconded by Hon. Alvin Christopher, but was defeated after a division of the Council where two members abstained from voting, four members voted yes and the other members voted no.

The Telecommunications Act was passed without a division of the Council.