ICT Policy and Mobile Competition

ICT Policy and Mobile Competition

Joined: May 27th, 2005, 3:38 am

August 5th, 2007, 11:44 pm #1

Before I start this discussion I would like to say that I fully support the idea of “Mobile Competition” in Papua New Guinea. There is so much potential in mobile communications especially the potential of “wireless broadband” in which mobile carriers could tap into so that no longer should I go to an internet café and discussion issues on scape but I can stay at home at do that also or even while drinking a martini on an imaginary boat that I possess.

Heni Goro gave a very interesting analysis (No such thing as open competition) in the Sunday Chronicles and Heni could not have done a better job as I was still trying to rearrange my thoughts. Please be mindful that the Grand Chief is a very patriotic person and will not be influenced by those outside of Papua New Guinea.

That being said, all competition including the mobile competition needs to take place within a solid policy framework which the Government as the protector of people must set in place. The ICT policy was set-up to protect the natural resource of the people of Papua New Guineans. So what is the so-called natural resource? The natural resource was the scarce AIRSPACE that Papua New Guinea owns.

International laws allows for AIRSPACE boundaries for every country including Papua New Guinea. The same can be said for Papua New Guinea’s sea boundaries which are covered under the International laws. The AIRSPACE and sea boundaries are the only natural scarce resources left where millions of kina can be generated with a solid policy framework for Papua New Guinea. We must be very careful on how our AIRSPACE is being used. Very soon Papua New Guinea will start to think about having its own satellite and move away from depending on Optus.

According to Sunday Chronicles commentary by Heni Goro, “The Net-co, Serv-Co model is the only option available – towards a monopolized regime structured to encourage competition”. I believe that was the message that the Grand Chief was giving out but people where too emotional to rationalize this. Papua New Guinea must control is natural resources and as such Common Carrier is a scarce resource.” It is the nerve center of whole telecommunication operation and only the State can have control over it, not outsiders……”

So where does it leave Digicel, GreenCom, and ServCo who are now access seekers under ICT policy that was passed? They can still operate in Papua New Guinea but it must be under the amended ICT policy which ICCC was instructed to issue to them in the NEC Decision 188/2007. I believe it is in the best interest of Digicel to stop these lawsuits and accept the NEC Decision 188/2007 as the Government is hell bent on protecting its scarce natural resource.


...mE












Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

August 5th, 2007, 11:57 pm #2

Good statement mE.

If highly regarded Papua New Guinean business executives like Gerea Aopi, Anthony Smare and Leon Buskens are supporting the ICT Policy and Telikom it makes me think that maybe the ICT policy is in the interests of all Papua New Guineans.

The anti-ICT policy campaign seems to be driven by the expat business club in Port Moresby and gullible Papua New Guineans are jumping on the bandwagon and campaigning against the ICT Policy and personally attacking Arthur Somare. Smart Papua New Guineans need to look deeper into these issues and make up their minds for themselves.
Quote
Share

Joined: May 27th, 2005, 3:38 am

August 6th, 2007, 12:07 am #3

Anon

Yes.......I believe most people are speaking from hear-say only and not having a look for themselves at the ICT Policy before arguing thier case. I just hope we Papua New Guineans start thinking for ourselves before we loose our most precious resources.

...mE

Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

August 6th, 2007, 2:12 am #4

@...mE

Very interesting.....more debates is healthy....
Quote
Share

Naro
Naro

August 6th, 2007, 7:55 am #5

Me...good points. But what resources are we talking about here? We have already lost our resources through mafia-type organisations such as RH etc...! Will you be able to post on this forum the ICT policy framework so that we all can have a look and debate on this?

Cheers
Naro
Quote
Share

Yu Guess?
Yu Guess?

August 7th, 2007, 7:54 am #6

@ mE

Mi tu laik lukim dispela ICT policy so mi surukim maus bilong NARO long askim blo em long postim ICT Policy.

Thenk yu tumas

Yu Guess?
Quote
Share

Joined: August 7th, 2007, 11:18 pm

August 7th, 2007, 11:30 pm #7

If mE cannot post the extract of the ICT Policy...I'll also try to help. I've already requested a copy from a few friends who has access to them. I sure hope they can give me a copy.

Rex
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

August 8th, 2007, 2:19 am #8

Before I start this discussion I would like to say that I fully support the idea of “Mobile Competition” in Papua New Guinea. There is so much potential in mobile communications especially the potential of “wireless broadband” in which mobile carriers could tap into so that no longer should I go to an internet café and discussion issues on scape but I can stay at home at do that also or even while drinking a martini on an imaginary boat that I possess.

Heni Goro gave a very interesting analysis (No such thing as open competition) in the Sunday Chronicles and Heni could not have done a better job as I was still trying to rearrange my thoughts. Please be mindful that the Grand Chief is a very patriotic person and will not be influenced by those outside of Papua New Guinea.

That being said, all competition including the mobile competition needs to take place within a solid policy framework which the Government as the protector of people must set in place. The ICT policy was set-up to protect the natural resource of the people of Papua New Guineans. So what is the so-called natural resource? The natural resource was the scarce AIRSPACE that Papua New Guinea owns.

International laws allows for AIRSPACE boundaries for every country including Papua New Guinea. The same can be said for Papua New Guinea’s sea boundaries which are covered under the International laws. The AIRSPACE and sea boundaries are the only natural scarce resources left where millions of kina can be generated with a solid policy framework for Papua New Guinea. We must be very careful on how our AIRSPACE is being used. Very soon Papua New Guinea will start to think about having its own satellite and move away from depending on Optus.

According to Sunday Chronicles commentary by Heni Goro, “The Net-co, Serv-Co model is the only option available – towards a monopolized regime structured to encourage competition”. I believe that was the message that the Grand Chief was giving out but people where too emotional to rationalize this. Papua New Guinea must control is natural resources and as such Common Carrier is a scarce resource.” It is the nerve center of whole telecommunication operation and only the State can have control over it, not outsiders……”

So where does it leave Digicel, GreenCom, and ServCo who are now access seekers under ICT policy that was passed? They can still operate in Papua New Guinea but it must be under the amended ICT policy which ICCC was instructed to issue to them in the NEC Decision 188/2007. I believe it is in the best interest of Digicel to stop these lawsuits and accept the NEC Decision 188/2007 as the Government is hell bent on protecting its scarce natural resource.


...mE











Relying on others and assuming that what they say is correct is the core of our problems. What you need is the information so that you can reach an independet conclusion. If you arrive at the same position, then thats fine. But if different, then this raises questions and the need for more information.

It could well be the blind leading the blind.

Quote
Share

Joined: August 7th, 2007, 11:18 pm

August 8th, 2007, 2:54 am #9

@Anon

I very much agree with you. Everyone needs to have a look at the policy and make their own conclusion. Papua New Guineans are always ledd by emotions and make comments when they have not sighted facts and figures.

I have a copy of the Telecommunications Act 1997 so I know what the old policy is. I am in the process of getting the ammended ICT Policy 2007 so I can make conclusions depending on analysis.

Rex
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

August 8th, 2007, 5:05 am #10

Before I start this discussion I would like to say that I fully support the idea of “Mobile Competition” in Papua New Guinea. There is so much potential in mobile communications especially the potential of “wireless broadband” in which mobile carriers could tap into so that no longer should I go to an internet café and discussion issues on scape but I can stay at home at do that also or even while drinking a martini on an imaginary boat that I possess.

Heni Goro gave a very interesting analysis (No such thing as open competition) in the Sunday Chronicles and Heni could not have done a better job as I was still trying to rearrange my thoughts. Please be mindful that the Grand Chief is a very patriotic person and will not be influenced by those outside of Papua New Guinea.

That being said, all competition including the mobile competition needs to take place within a solid policy framework which the Government as the protector of people must set in place. The ICT policy was set-up to protect the natural resource of the people of Papua New Guineans. So what is the so-called natural resource? The natural resource was the scarce AIRSPACE that Papua New Guinea owns.

International laws allows for AIRSPACE boundaries for every country including Papua New Guinea. The same can be said for Papua New Guinea’s sea boundaries which are covered under the International laws. The AIRSPACE and sea boundaries are the only natural scarce resources left where millions of kina can be generated with a solid policy framework for Papua New Guinea. We must be very careful on how our AIRSPACE is being used. Very soon Papua New Guinea will start to think about having its own satellite and move away from depending on Optus.

According to Sunday Chronicles commentary by Heni Goro, “The Net-co, Serv-Co model is the only option available – towards a monopolized regime structured to encourage competition”. I believe that was the message that the Grand Chief was giving out but people where too emotional to rationalize this. Papua New Guinea must control is natural resources and as such Common Carrier is a scarce resource.” It is the nerve center of whole telecommunication operation and only the State can have control over it, not outsiders……”

So where does it leave Digicel, GreenCom, and ServCo who are now access seekers under ICT policy that was passed? They can still operate in Papua New Guinea but it must be under the amended ICT policy which ICCC was instructed to issue to them in the NEC Decision 188/2007. I believe it is in the best interest of Digicel to stop these lawsuits and accept the NEC Decision 188/2007 as the Government is hell bent on protecting its scarce natural resource.


...mE











The Grand Thief sold off part of the Harbours Boards operations across PNG to Rimbunan Hijau. Harbours Board directors wouldn't agree so Somare had some of them sacked and replaced with Sepik wantoks.

So don't give us this shiat that Somare is a nationalist. He's a sellout and that's only one example I'm giving you.

Why did Somare, the so called nationalist, also let Ramu Mine be run as an almost exclusive soveriegn Chinese territory with Chinese running everything at the mine?

Don't make me laugh with these constant defences of scumbag somare.

I don't dispute that he used to be that way, but he has completely changed, the old coot.
Quote
Share