MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMUNICATIONS (SHRI TAPAN SIKDAR)
(a) & (b) No, Sir. A straight comparison of rates of telephone calls etc. between one
country and another may not yield an analytically tenable conclusion because of variations
in cost socio-economic conditions and other factors. For example, according to World Telecom
Development Report of the International Telecom Union (ITU)-1998, the tariff structure in
different countries in 1996 was as follows:
Name of the Residential Telephone
Country Connection charge Rental (monthly) Local Call Charges (in US $ )
India 23 5.4 0.02
Bangladesh 256 3.7 0.04
Ethiopia 48 1.3 0.03
Kenya 37 4.5 0.06
Mozambique 87 5.1 0.04
Nepal 40 3.7 0.02
Tanzania 59 4.4 0.08
Tajikistan 10 1.0 -
Uganda 132 5.7 0.19
Vietnam 243 6.1 0.11
Australia 94 9.1 -
Belgium 143 18.8 0.20
Canada 42 13.2 -
France 60 5.7 0.14
Germany 66 16.3 0.16
Italy 154 10.1 0.20
Japan 669 16.1 0.09
Singapore 56 6.0 0.03
U.K 181 12.9 -
U.S.A 43 12.2 0.09
From the above it is clear that in totality the Telephone charges in India compare
very favourably with those in other countries.
(c) As per the world Telecom Development Report 1998 of ITU details of the monthly rental
charges of 10 developing and 10 developed Countries for 1996 and their monthly Gross Domestic
Products (GDP) per capita are as follows:
Name of the Country Residential Rental charges Average GDP per capita 1995 in (US$ ) 1996 (monthly) in (US$) P.M.
India 5.4 27.97
Bangladesh 3.7 20.10
Ethiopia 1.3 7.87
Kenya 4.5 25.14
Mozambique 5.1 7.17
Nepal 3.7 15.74
Tanzania 4.4 18.80
Tajikistan 1.0 3.09
Uganda 5.7 24.15
Vietnam 6.1 22.67
High income/developed Countries.
Australia 9.1 1820
Belgium 18.8 2350
Canada 13.2 2640
France 10.3 2575
Germany 16.3 2328
Italy 10.1 2020
Japan 16.1 3220
Singapore 6.0 3000
U.K 12.9 1612
U.S.A 12.2 2440
(d) No, Sir.
(e) Does not arise in view of (d) above.