As the public is aware, the two main political parties had agreed, most recently in the Communiqué of May, 2003, that the report of the Joint Committee on Radio Monopoly, Non-Partisan Boards and Broadcasting Legislation would provide the main substance and direction for the broadcast legislation. The parties also agreed in the Joint Communiqué that the draft legislation will be the subject of public consultation before its enactment in the National Assembly.

Having perused the draft legislation, the PNC/R has noted that, while aspects of it conform to the recommendations of the Joint Committee, the draft materially departs from these recommendations in other key areas. We have picked up several omissions and inclusions that fly in the face of the letter and spirit of the agreements between the parties on the issue of broadcast policy and legislation. We list below a few such cases:

The Draft Broadcast Legislation
The PNC/R has already made public its displeasure over, firstly, the manner in which the Government released the draft broadcast legislation to the public and, secondly, over several aspects of the draft legislation itself. We must re-emphasise that the report of the Joint Committee, which the legislation was expected to capture faithfully, was fully adopted by the leaders of the two main parties, most recently in the Joint Communiqué, signed on 6th May 2003.

On the issue of the manner of release of the draft, this took place without any attempt being made to give the PNC/R, a major stakeholder and participant in the process of drawing up a broadcast policy and legislation for Guyana, the opportunity to assess the document to assess whether it complied fully with the spirit and letter of the recommendations of the joint committee on Radio Monopoly, Non-partisan State Media Boards and Broadcasting Legislation. The party considers this move by the Government as a demonstration of both its bad faith and manners.

On the issue of the substantive intentions of the legislation, the PNC/R has noted that the government has responded through Robert Persaud, the Government’s propaganda star. We nevertheless wish to reassert our position that several vital aspects of the draft legislation departs materially from the understandings agreed consensually in the Joint Committee. The PNC/R will not be dragged into useless propaganda arguments on sweeping generalisations. Mr. Persaud obviously does not know what he is talking about. We have already identified specific areas where the draft legislation departs materially from the agreements in the committee’s report. These are:

1. Appointment of the Board of Commissioners of the National Broadcasting Authority (NBA).
The PNC/R and the PPP/C agreed in the Joint Broadcast Committee that the National Broadcasting Authority (NBA) be headed by a Board of Commissioners “comprising not less than three and no more than five members who would be selected by the Standing Parliamentary Committee on Appointments and appointed by the President. The chairperson of the Board of Commissioners will be elected by the Board at its first meeting.”

However, in blatant violation of this agreement, the Draft Bill states in Clause (1) to (5) of its Schedule that, among other things, the Chairman will be appointed by the President after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition and one member each will be nominated by consumer groups and the broadcasting community.

These provisions bear little resemblance to the agreements in the Communiqué and are an attempt to give Government the means to exercise control over the NBA. They have no place in the Bill and must be removed.

2. Access to the State-owned media by political parties and the coverage of their political positions and activities.
No mention is made in the draft legislation of the specific agreements under this heading in the Joint Committee Report. The PNC/R believes this issue is of such critical importance that it must find reflection in letter and spirit of the proposed broadcast legislation. We do not believe its exclusion was an oversight.

3. Monopoly in broadcast and diversity of ownership.
The unanimous position of the parties on the issue of monopoly ownership and control of any part of the broadcast spectrum, and in particular that part that facilitates radio broadcast is not adequately captured in Clause 6 (a) of the Draft Bill, which reads: “while recognising the special role of the State-owned media, the broadcast industry is nevertheless open to competition.”

The Broadcast Committee, in addition to the above wording, had emphasised in its broadcast policy framework that (i) all monopolies, whether private or State, should be removed or not be allowed; and (ii) commercial and community licences, taken as a whole, must be controlled by a diverse range of Guyanese persons or groups. Any dilution of these provisions by the PPP/C must also be seen as a breach of the spirit of the agreement.

4. Status of the National Frequency Management Unit (NFMU)
The Broadcast Committee had agreed to present two options to the Leaders of the PNC/R and PPP/C as regards the role of the NFMU in the broadcast licensing process: (i) Option I. NFMU continues to operate separately from the NBA, but an applicant for a broadcasting licence submits his proposal with technical specifications directly to the NBA. The NFMU advises the NBA on the availability of frequency; and (ii) Option II. The NFMU transfers the management of the radio and TV broadcast frequencies to the NBA. The NFMU therefore retains control over frequency allocation and monitoring of the non-broadcast spectrum (communication in aircraft, ships, taxis etc.) Applications for broadcasting are therefore handled by one entity, the NBA.

The PNC/R firmly believes that in any public consultation on the matter, the public must be objectively informed of these two positions. The legislation only contains one.

5. Independence of the National Broadcast Authority
In the Joint Committee, the PPP/C and PNC/R representatives were unequivocal and unanimous that the National Broadcasting Authority (NBA) “must be independent and autonomous within the framework of the Constitution, true to the spirit and letter of its establishing legislation, answerable only to the National Assembly and must serve the public interest and the national good.”

The PNC/R therefore considers, as another demonstration of PPP/C bad faith, the several provisions in the draft broadcast legislation that seek to give the responsible minister the power to issue directions to the NBA. In particular, clause 24 (3) gives the minister broad powers to instruct the Authority to direct licensees to refrain from including in their programming any matter or classes of matters.

The wording of this provision not only violates the agreement but also serves to give the government the authority to censor, a practice which directly contravenes the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression.

6. System of penalties for infringement of broadcast regulations
The two main parties had agreed that the NBA should have the power to “institute a hierarchy of penalties and sanctions for violations of broadcasting law and standards.” The PNC/R therefore finds the several provisions in the draft legislation that impose specific penalties to be a deliberate attempt by the PPP/C to usurp the functions of the NBA in this respect.

These deliberate departures from the agreement between the parties emphatically demonstrate the PPP/Cs continued contempt and insensitivity towards the views and interests of other stakeholders in this country. The PPP/C had similarly only recently shown the country its blatant disregard for the fragile political climate in Guyana with its handling of the procurement legislation.

The PNC/R holds to the principled position, and will so inform the Government, that public consultation on the draft legislation must only begin after the parties finalised the document to ensure it faithfully reflects the agreements and understandings of the Joint Committee on Radio Monopoly. Non-partisan Boards and Broadcasting Legislation. To this end, the PNC/R will propose that the Joint Committee be-activated to work towards this objective within a specified timeframe.

Against this background, we will shortly propose to the Government that the Joint Committee on Broadcasting should be reactivated to:

· Ensure that the draft legislation faithfully conforms to the recommendations of the committee on the issues of a national broadcast policy and broadcast authority, before the draft enters the public consultation process,

· Remove the internal inconsistencies and redundancies contained within the draft; and

· Act as the facilitators of the public consultation process and to therefore be responsible for presenting to the Leaders of the two parties those suggestions from the process that merit incorporation into the legislation.