SOME weeks ago, GTT and Digicel, our two telecommunication providers, exchanged words in the media as competitors are sometimes expected to do. As consumer advocates we avoid getting involved in such exchanges or appearing to take one side or the other. Our interest and concern are simply to ensure consumers are provided with a quality service, wherever they are, at as reasonable a price as possible and in a more general way to ensure, as far as we are able, that the Government of Guyana is not in any way short-changed by transnational companies. At this time, also, we are particularly anxious that the telecommunications liberalisation process proceeds quickly and smoothly without any persons or companies trying to distract government’s works towards liberalisation.
Over the last few years, GTT has been attacking government for not closing down the Internet cafes which had been providing consumers with cheaper international calls. GTT’s attack on government was that the Internet cafes were conducting an illegal business since they allegedly infringed GTT’s monopoly and Government allegedly lost millions of dollars in revenue. Similar attack has been made on Government for not acting on Digicel for allegedly transmitting data through Suriname.
Consumer people, and also many persons in Governmental circles have been pointing out that GTT has no proprietary rights on technological advances and that such advances could not be prevented from coming to Guyana. And secondly, if GTT feels that internet cafes and Digicel’s Suriname link were illegal operations, they should’ve gone to the courts instead of calling upon Government to fight their case.
The GCA, both publicly and in memoranda to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) have been pointing out that the GTT monopoly contract is void since GTT had long and continuously breached its contract in very substantial ways, adversely affecting consumers. GTT could have tested or affirmed their contract in the courts if they had acted against the Internet cafes and Digicel.
Many consumer people have mentioned to us that GTT recent attack on Government and on Digicel is really an attempt to distract Government and the consumer communities attention from the liberalisation process and to delay it as much as possible. GTT’s apparent hesitancy over a quick liberalisation contracts with their position when the Liberalisation Bill was passed in Parliament in July last year. On that occasion, GTT ran full-page newspaper advertisements with Banner Headline “LIBERALISATION” with three exclamation marks under which was a photo of GTT staff jubilantly welcoming liberalisation. And in prominent green, GTT announced: this means: Lower International rates; Faster Internet; Better Customer Services; Wider Range of Products… With the promise of four such improvements in favor of the consumers, Government would be unlikely to delay liberalisation.
GTT are trying to preempt liberalisation by trying to have higher consumer rates established so that when liberalisation becomes a reality, higher rates will already be there delaying the working of market forces. The consumer would, of course, suffer from such action.
GTT recent attempt to raise landline rates is an example of this. GTT was established in Guyana as a landline company. The overseas call rates were set artificially high so that these international rates would cross subsidise the landline rates. Of recent years, international rates have been falling over the world and all telephone companies including GTT have been experiencing this. Almost all telephone companies have updated their technology to adequately or successfully meet the new competition but GTT, comfortably resting on its monopoly and high rates, did not bother to update technology. They, as a result, have seen their international usage diminishing.
Instead of doing what other telephone companies have done in updating technology, they concentrated on the highly profitable cellular and DSL services. And now, though contractually obligated to cross subsidise the landline rates, they are calling on the landline consumers to pay high rates rather than honoring their contractual obligation by using a small percentage of the non-regulated services massive profits, to do the cross subsidisation.
In any case, the GCA has pointed out that the income which has been earned by the landline could pay to keep the landline a float without any cross subsidisation. Such Income would have been the interest on the US$ 60,000,000 used to establish the cellular business and the rental of approximately US$ 2,000,000 per annum to be paid by the cellular business for the use of the landline copper and fiber optic wires to transmit cellular traffic. The landline is also due for its share of income from its contribution to financing the US$ 30,000,000 on the seacable.
GTT has taken to neglecting the landline: they have been taking an unconscionable time to do landline repairs or have not done so at all; they have failed to supply landlines to the large numbers who are in need of them such as the new housing areas build by Government and private enterprise. And in other ways, they have failed to honour their contract as for example their failure to supply annual Telephone Directories. The Directories were to be of no cost to the consumer and have been so for the last 25 years. The Directories were also of no cost to GTT since it was paid for by the advertisements. Not to publish Directories is anti-consumer action. Talk of putting the Directories online is a cost to the consumer- he has to have a computer and to subscribe to GTT’s DSL and anytime he wants to find a number he has to use electricity. The PUC must insist that GTT produce its annual directory.
The GCA has always thought of GTT being able to be the flagship telecoms company of Guyana and even at this juncture it could still rouse itself to earn that status and accolade despite frittering away the consumer goodwill which former CEO Yog Mahadeo had earned for the company. It could earn that status by quoting consumer goodwill, resuscitating the landline, and bringing greater efficiencies on its all-round services and avoid the temptation of trying to earn revenue by petty schemes such as clandestinely inserting voicemail on the landline without consumer agreement. Would GTT rise to the challenge?
