It is the right time for 5G in India: Trai Chairman R S Sharma

Said if Trai is entrusted with ensuring quality of service, it should have authority to enforce that

At a time when the financial stress in the telecom industry is on the rise, the regulator has floated a consulation paper seeking stakeholders' views on the next round of spectrum auction for multiple bands, including 5G. In an interview, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) Chairman R S Sharma tells Kiran Rathee there’s no reason why India should be left behind. Edited excerpts:  

As a regulator, do you believe there’s financial stress in the telecom industry?

The government has recognised that (the stress) and has put up an inter-ministerial group (IMG). We had also called the industry to tell us as to what we can do as a regulator to ease their financial stress.

Even so, Trai has issued a consultation paper on the next round of spectrum auction for ushering in various bands, including 5G technology. Is it the right time to go for auctions given the financial condition of telecom operators?

The government asked us to do the consultation and therefore, we floated the paper. My views on the matter will be formed after I get inputs from the stakeholders.

But, is the Indian ecosystem ready for 5G as a technology?

Certainly. Why not? Why should India be behind others? What is it that makes India unsuitable for introduction of 5G? It is the right time for 5G in India. It’s not the government which will implement 5G, it’s the industry which will do it. I don’t see any reason why industry won’t be able to execute 5G.

Recently, the Competition Commission of India wrote to the Trai on the issue of predatory pricing. What are your views?

I don’t speak to the press about communications with other regulators. We have a wonderful relationship and there is no question of any relationship problem.

Another burning issue is that of interconnect charges. When can a decision be expected?

We are working on it and it will be announced as soon as we can.

The Supreme Court has termed right to privacy as a fundamental right. The government has also formed a committee to suggest a framework for data protection law. What are you views on data protection and privacy? 

We had issued a consultation paper prior to the Supreme Court decision. Our consultation is limited to the telecom sector data. The decisions or the recommendations of this consultation paper will probably be an input to the larger committee.

The Trai has just conducted an open house discussion on the issue of net neutrality. When can we expect the recommendations on that?

We will work on it and hopefully by the end of September, we should be able to provide our recommendations on net neutrality to the government.

On another controversial matter - call drops - do you think the situation has improved? 

There are 22 circles and multiple players. To make a general comment that things have improved or not improved is not appropriate. We will rather go by the data, which we have put on the Trai website. We have recently come out with the revised quality of service norms and the whole idea is that deficiencies, which were there in the average system, hid many things. Now we have started a new way of grading and getting percentiles. This formula seems to be a better measurement of the response of telecom service provider to the deficiencies in the network.

Your comment on increasing penalty on telecom operators for not meeting quality of service norms.

The idea is if you are not meeting the parameters for one-quarter and if you continue to be in default, the penalty will progressively increase.

What are the other customer-centric measures the Trai is looking at? 

My belief is that the quality of service and the interest of the industry are not contradictory to each other. Ultimately, if the industry offers better quality of service, it will be in the long-term interest of industry players also. I have never believed that improving the quality of service is a step against the industry. It is not. We have made some recommendations to the government for changing the Trai Act, specifically in connection with the quality of service issue, where we are saying that the Authority should have penalty powers. Currently, we issue financial disincentives, but they are not financial penalty in that sense. We have given some proposal to the government for making changes in the Trai Act to make it more effective in terms of ensuring quality of service. If the Trai is entrusted with ensuring quality of service, it should also have the tools and legal authority to enforce that.