Respected Sir,
Two very important goals of your government are (1) ensuring telecommunication connectivity on a universal basis throughout India and (2) India to become a super power in the IT field by 2008 AD. Both these goals need heavy private sector commitments and investments in the telecom sector, which could be accelerated only if the envisaged convergence between telecom, communication, computer etc properly takes place. It is the said convergence regime which will provide automatically a conflict-free level playing field for all operators private or public, a business environment which will enable the operators to adopt the most appropriate technology and will thus enable them to give telecom services on the most affordable basis to the subscribers/the common man, who will at long last become the center piece of all the action.

Now the proposed Convergence Bill as drafted by Mr Fali S Nariman's Group can lay the foundation of a truly convergent telecom infrastructure provided two very essential concepts are enshrined in the Bill. These are:All licenses given to existing and new operators should be not on the basis of segmentation of various services such as cellular, basic, paging etc., but these licenses are given on area specific basis and are technology neutral.

This will enable the licensee to invest in services which will be affordable by the subscribers, for their felt communication needs and that using the most appropriate technology and economy of scale, two factors which only can ensure the said affordability to be realised. The composite licence regime will also lead to resolution of conflicts between different classes of operators who today are apprehending encroachment of their respective turfs by their respective competitors. The Convergent Bill therefore should talk of Composite Licence only. This area specific license mechanism will enable full utilisation of technology and capital equipment for multiple services will result from the same investment, hence quicker amortisation of capital leading in turn to lower cost of services, a benefit which will be passed on ultimately to the common man. The definition of Composite Licences envisaged in the draft bill should clearly specify its objective as being on area specific basis and technology neutral and as anatural corollary, the concept of separate licences for new services should cease to exist. If a person is given a Composite license, it is not necessary for him to start all the services desired for that area, he may proceed to rollout on a step by step basis, but he would be not obliged to seek separate licenses, every time he wishes to introduce a new service.

The industry is greatly perturbed with media reports that bureaucrats are not inclined to accept the concept of composite licenses and intend to adhere to the system of separate licensing for individual services - a system, which will become obsolete throughout the world in the near future - on the plea that it will be administratively easy to regulate, separate individual licensing. In other words, the bureaucracy wants to continue the system of regulating closely, the development process not facilitating the same, by removing all regulations, which cause delays normal to our bureaucratic process. The system of separate licence will enable the bureaucrats to impose every time hefty license fees or in lieu high entry fees. The hope that TRAI may prevent this to happen has been belied in the recent case of "Long Distance Services" NLDO where entry fees and entry conditions are so high that not a single private operator has come forward to take advantage of what could have been good business.

Sir, your vision & that of your government in giving India a truly affordable and universal telecom infrastructure for the majority of one billion people, thus stands threatened, if the principle of Composite license is given a go-by.

We from the industry have proposed a number of times that the concept of license fees is essentially a colonial mechanism particularly when the operator from whom huge money is extracted would not be using any scarce natural resource such as spectrum. We have pointed out that as a result of high license fees, charges, impositions etc., many value-added services for the common man such as Voice Mail, E-mail, Bulletin Board etc, introduced between 1992-94 did not grow in the measure they should have. Industry, also have pointed out that the method of closed bidding is a form of auction which encourages high commitment to the Government resulting in high cost of services ultimately.

We submit there is the need for a paradigm shift in the mindset of the bureaucrats who has been so far responsible for ensuring induction of private sector investment in the telecom infrastructure, an exercise which when compared with that in China, is at the best, a very marginal success. The process of liberalisation we submit should not be considered as an opportunity to maximise its monitory gains by the Dept of Telecommunication. On the other hand, it should be considered as a process whereby affordable communication would be ensured for the common man in India, particularly those who live below the poverty line. Hence we pray that all mechanisms, such as separate license fees for operators who are not likely to use spectrum or similar resource, closed bidding etc. which while maximising monitory gain of Telecom Department, results in non-affordable communication for the poor, all should be abolished.

Sir, the industry is standing on the crossroads of destiny, if the massive investment that already has been made is to be protected, a proper conceptual and legal framework such as the Convergence Bill, suitably modified, is now quickly finalised and promulgated and meanwhile, Telecom Commission and TRAI restrained from issuing separate licences not based on likely Convergent regime of the near future, but on current trend which will cease.

We are further afraid, all our investments, the enormous effort made and huge employment created all are likely to be endangered. If not only retired and serving bureaucrats but a neutral representative from the industry is not included in the proposed Convergence Commission as a full time member to help the Commission.

In summary we submit the following.