The SABC has received a major boost in its policy proposal to have pay-TV company MultiChoice and others help it collect licence fees from the public.
This emerged at the hearings held by the department of digital communications on the SABC Bill, which seeks to help deal with funding problems faced by the public broadcaster. The bill places emphasis on ensuring the sustainability of the SABC with various revenue streams.
MultiChoice has more than 8-million subscribers from which the public broadcaster wants the pay-TV channel to collect licence fees on its behalf.
Non-governmental lobby groups in broadcasting have come out in support of the SABC proposal on licence fee collections by others, including streaming services such as Netflix, but they criticised the bill on the funding model.
The SOS Coalition and Media Monitoring Africa, which made a joint presentation on the bill on Tuesday, said that the Broadcasting Act needed a complete overhaul “to ensure that the legal framework of the SABC is fit for purpose in the era of convergence”.
They supported the SABC’s proposal by suggesting an “entirely new public information levy on all non-Sassa (SA Social Security Agency) grant-receiving adults who are able to access public content services of the SABC” be pursued with subscription TV services such as MultiChoice being roped in to help collect licence fees.
The two organisations have proposed a collection system that involves “retailers of devices, subscription television and other operators to assist in the collection thereof”.
SOS Coalition spokesperson Mpho Ndaba said they wanted a new funding model, which had the government playing a bigger role by ensuring that there were more funds being pumped into the public broadcaster and that a public levy be introduced.
Among other suggestions contained in the bill, which the coalition supports, is the proposal that the SABC board be reduced from 13 members to nine members.
The suggestion to have MultiChoice and others help the SABC collect fees was first put on the table during the public consultation process on the department’s “draft white paper on audio and audiovisual content services policy framework”.
The SABC has been struggling financially in recent years, leading to the retrenchments of more than 300 workers.
In its presentation on Monday, the SABC said for it to be able to thrive and fulfil its public mandate, its funding should be secured and safeguarded through the SABC Bill and related regulations.
It said the bill did not provide for further government grant funding for public interest programming, which would impact negatively on its ability to remain sustainable.
“The SABC reiterates its position on scrapping the current TV licence system and replacing it with a public broadcasting household levy as described.”
MultiChoice, which is set to present on Wednesday afternoon has previously during another process by the department submitted that it made no sense for the SABC’s competitors that are private companies to should be roped in to solve the public broadcaster’s problems.
“MultiChoice’s position is clear: private sector operators such as MultiChoice, Netflix or Vodacom cannot be expected to solve public sector financial issues,” MultiChoice has said previously.
The company also took a different view on a proposal in the bill that the power to shift TV licence fee regulations to be shifted from the minister to the regulator, the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa), in consultation with the minister and SABC.
“The bill’s proposal to give SABC veto over regulations that affect it is impermissible: – undermines the nemo iudex in sua causa principle – no person must exercise decision-making power or judgment in his own matter,” MultiChoice had stated.
MultiChoice had previously argued that the white paper process needed to be allowed to be completed as the broadcasting space needed a clear policy direction as opposed to new legislation.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.