The Consumer Guidance Society of India has recommended that the government should first ensure that CAS addresses the critical issue of dismantling the on ground cable monopolies and that choice of selecting the channels rests with consumers, before implementing the system.
According to CGSI chairman Anand Patwardhan, the Cable Networks Regulation Amendment Bill 2002, to be tabled in Parliament tomorrow, offers no protection to consumers against monopolistic cable ops, nor does it seek to redress the grievances of consumers. Patwardhan points out that while the choice of free to air channels to be part of the basic service will now rest with the government while the choice of which pay channels to be offered to consumers will rest with cable ops. While the burden of buying the set top boxes will have to be borne by the viewers, the consumers will also have to pay a higher monthly fee monthly fee for receiving the pay channels, he feels.

"The consumer will have no recourse if a particular pay channel that a consumer wants to see and is ready to pay for is not made available by the cable op. Neither will the consumer have a choice to see the FTA channel of his choice," says Patwardhan. He also terms as discriminatory the bill‘s proposal to "legalise" consumers being charged differently in different areas of the same city, he observes.

A day before the amendments to the Cable TV Networks Regulations Act, 1995, is slated to be introduced in Parliament, information and broadcasting minister Sushma Swaraj lashed out at the broadcasters saying "their pressure tactics would not work with her as CAS is in the interest of cable viewing consumers."
In a meeting with some 25-odd cable operators from various parts of the country, Swaraj said that the government is determined to see the amendments to the Act concerned passed before 17 May when Parliament takes a break.

The minister is reported to have told the delegation of cable operators that "talks of referring the amendments to the Act relating to the CAS to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on IT and Telecom are all delaying tactics which would not work."

According to Vicky Chowdhry,a Delhi cable operator who attended the meeting: "The minister was sympathetic towards the problems of the cable operators and exhorted the broadcasters not to further raise the subscription fee of the pay channels in the interim till the time CAS is implemented as it will be unfair for the consumer."

Another cable operator who attended the meeting said that Swaraj also assured them that a separate notification regarding CAS would be issued for the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh after consultations with the chief ministers concerned if the cable operators thought CAS would benefit the consumer.

The government is initially thinking of implementing the CAS in the four metros - Delhi, Mumbai, Calcutta and Chennai.

No, the amendment to the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 incorporating conditional access (CAS) is not being introduced in the Lok Sabha (Lower House) today as expected by many in the industry, the date has been set for tomorrow, according to sources.
The note is slated to be circulated among members of Parlimanet to allow them to vote on it tomorrow, reveal sources. Meanwhile, a group of the cable TV trade was expected to meet up with information and broadcasting minister Sushma Swaraj to give the cable TV industry viewpoint once again and clarify any doubts that may have arisen out of the protestations of some broadcasters.

Speaking at Panaji (Goa) yesterday to a leading business daily, Swaraj was quite clear that the government would not budge on CAS, and that she was convinced that it would be beneficial for all as it "would bring the much needed transparency in the system."

She insisted that reports that boxes would cost Rs 7,000-8,000 were totally false and misleading, adding that the actual pricing woul be between Rs 1,500-2,500.

She was also highly critical of the group of broadcasters opposing CAS and asked the reporter from the daily: "Do they not want transparency in viewership?"