In an interview he highlighted that prior to the Supreme Court judgment of 2012, there was uncertainty with regards to overall policy framework, pricing of spectrum and licensing regime. There are many uncertainties, so fresh investments are getting impacted. However, the scenario changed and resulted in great deal of crystallization into the entire policy environment.
He also added that the cancellation of licenses has impacted investments and investor's confidence for sometime. But, I think uncertainty was the main contributor, so the main challenge was to address that uncertainty and remove all uncertainty with regard to policy, licensing regime and spectrum pricing.
On nation-free roaming issue he said, the policy provision is to remove the burden of paying roaming charges. The whole philosophy of telecom is death of distance. All actions are being worked out to make free roaming a reality.
Below is the edited transcript of his interview to CNBC-TV18.
Q: Many people feel that from the time you have taken charge policy uncertainty in the sector continues, the customer service has deteriorated and most telecom companies are embroiled in one or the other legal battle. Are you disappointed with where this sector has come today?
A: I am not disappointed with where the sector has come today. Number of challenges related to uncertainty on several aspects and uncertainty about the continuance of a large number of operators were required to be addressed.
Prior to the Supreme Court judgment of 2012, there was uncertainty with regards to overall policy framework, pricing of spectrum and licensing regime. There are many uncertainties, so fresh investments are getting impacted. However, the Supreme Court judgment came in 2012 and then the events subsequent to that in my assessment have resulted in a great deal of crystallisation of the entire policy environment. Around 70-80 percent of the uncertainty has been addressed.
Q: Do you think that licenses shouldn't have been cancelled?
A: I would not like to comment on court's decision. However, it is important to note that decision of the government taken on policy is largely motivated by people good and decision in a court of law are taken on the basis of law and rights of various concerned parties. Therefore, entirely it is not correct to expect that both these perspective would result in an identical outcome.
Q: Do you think that it has been the biggest setback for investor confidence for the government's plans to encourage foreign direct investment. The Supreme Court decided to cancel 122 telecom licenses despite many believe that they had been allocated as per government policy, maybe the Supreme Court found that the implementation was faulty?
A: I would not like to comment directly or indirectly on the Supreme Court order. The orders of the Supreme Court are binding under the law of the land. Yes, the cancellation of licenses has impacted investments and investor's confidence for sometime.
But, I think uncertainty was the main contributor, so the main challenge was to address that uncertainty and remove all uncertainty with regard to policy, licensing regime and spectrum pricing. That is something which has been pursued and has happened, in fact as far as investors are concerned, now all the conditions are in place for them to make a very cold and quantitative analysis of all investment options that are available. There are no unquantifiable risks or any regulatory uncertainties which they need to worry about.
Q: When you say that the government is working towards policy certainty as far as policy making is concerned, after the licenses were cancelled, many experts believe that the government did not fight hard enough for these companies for the telecom sector in the court and it allowed the Supreme Court to enter the policy making domain and say that spectrum henceforth should always be auctioned. How the older telecom companies are also now being asked to pay the market-determined price but at this stage do you feel that the government let the telecom sector down by not fighting hard enough for them?
A: I am not sure if everybody would agree with you that it is the government's job to fight court cases on behalf of companies or keeping the interest of companies in mind.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Did govt let telecom sector down? Chandrashekhar argues
Dengan url
http://kebugaranhidup.blogspot.com/2013/03/did-govt-let-telecom-sector-down_31.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Did govt let telecom sector down? Chandrashekhar argues
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Did govt let telecom sector down? Chandrashekhar argues
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar