独家

Chandrashekhar:政府没有多少空间来减轻电信公司的负担

钱德拉谢卡尔说,行业将需要筹集或投入资金来投资5G。

Chandrashekhar:政府没有多少空间来减轻电信公司的负担
前电讯管理局秘书R坎德拉
虽然政府可能没有太多的空间来提供任何主要的缓解电信公司,将有必要看看,如果当前的政权AGRSUC是否适用于这些情况。节选自ET Now的采访。


在昨天电信行业遭受重大打击和冲击之后,您认为这是否会在一定程度上缓解部分电信企业的痛苦或担忧?政府愿意听取他们减免会费的请求。
现在说这是否能缓解压力还为时过早。这无疑带来了希望。随着最高法院已经明确了法律立场,现在唯一的选择就是政府干预。所以政府说它是开放的是一个好迹象。但从中得出的结果才是真正重要的。我们拭目以待,看看这次讨论的结果是否足以解决该行业目前所处的混乱局面。

COAI的Rajan Mathews表示,政府需要减少罚款和罚款利息。尽管最高法院说必须支付这些款项,但有可能吗?我理解政府可以延长付款期限,可以错开付款,但是它是否可以减少付款?那不是藐视法庭罪吗?
根据我的理解,最高法院裁定政府所作解释的合法性,这反过来又导致了会费的一定量化。严格地说,它可能不禁止政府,但我认为这是不可行的。因为即使不是完全相反,这也是不恰当的。实际上,改变支付条件以及最高法院的裁决将是极其困难的。我不知道大法院在确定期限和金额的同时,是否真正深入研究了利率等细节。如果这个问题还没有解决,那么就有一些余地去做拉詹建议的事情;利率不应该是商业市场利率,而应该是更低的利率。我认为仅仅把这个问题看作政府和电信公司之间的问题,解决这个问题还不够全面。在某些地方,消费者也非常重要。所有这些问题都可以通过在一个更高的水平上完全重新固定关税来解决,但这既不符合消费者的利益,也不符合国家数字通信公司宣布的意图政策在2018年,它实际上将全民覆盖置于收入最大化之上。所以所有这些方面都必须牢记。

该行业将需要筹集资金或将资金用于投资5G,以扩展到农村地区等等。因此,展望未来,目前AGR和SUC的这种解释是否合适,是政府需要考虑的问题。记住,这场诉讼已经持续了15年。

因此,15年前可能是适当的比例和适当的解释在今天可能并不完全合适。例如,GAIL和Power Grid这样的公司,其电信收入仅占其业务收入的10%,但在校准需求时,它们的全部收入都是考虑在内的。这些都是问题,政府必须做些什么。在所有这些计算中,将行业视为一个整体也是不正确的,因为任何决策和任何量化都会对每个参与者产生不同的影响。这也是我们必须牢记的一点。我认为,现在的传统或公认的观点是,或许我们至少需要三家相当有活力、财务状况良好的运营商。

关注并与我们联系脸谱网LinkedinYoutube
\"Govt<\/figure> Former Telecom Secretary R Chandrashekhar<\/a> <\/strong>says while there may not be much elbow room for the government to provide any major relief to the telcos<\/a>, there will be a need for it to see if the current regime of AGR<\/a> and SUC is appropriate for these times or not. Excerpts from an interview with ET Now.<\/em>

After yesterday\u2019s big blow and shocker for the telecom sector, do you think this will to a certain extent ease the pain or worries for some of these telecom companies? The government is open to hearing out their pleas for relief on dues.<\/strong>
Well, it is too early to say if this would provide some relief. It certainly offers hope. As the
Supreme Court<\/a> has cleared the legal position, the only option now available is for a government intervention. So the government saying it is open is a good sign. But what comes out of it is what is going to be really important. We wait to see if what comes out of that discussion is sufficient to resolve the current imbroglio in which the sector finds itself in.

COAI\u2019s Rajan Mathews says the government needs to reduce the penalty and interest on the penalty. Is it possible despite Supreme Court saying that these payments have to be made? I understand that the government can extend the period of the payment, can stagger the payments, but is it possible for it to reduce it? Will that not be contempt of court? <\/strong>
The Supreme Court, according to my understanding, ruled on the legality of the interpretation that the government has made, which in turns leads to a certain quantification of the dues. Strictly speaking, it may not bar the government, but I do not think that is feasible. Because it would be an impropriety even if it is not strictly contrary. Actually varying the terms of the payment as well as the ruling that the Supreme Court has given would be extremely difficult. I am not aware whether the Supreme Court has actually gone into nitty-gritty like the rate of interest, while fixing the timeframe and the amount. If that has not been fixed, then there is some elbow room to do what Rajan is suggesting; that the interest rate should not be commercial market rate, but a little bit softer rate. I think to view this as merely an issue between the government and the telcos and to resolve that is not comprehensive enough. Somewhere the consumer is also very much in the picture. All these issues can be resolved by complete re-fixation of tariff at a much higher level, but that would not be in consumers\u2019 interest nor will it be in accordance with the declared intension of the National Digital Communications
Policy<\/a> of 2018, which has actually prioritised universal coverage over revenue maximisation. So all these aspects will have to be kept in mind.