[Kictanet] Day 6 of 10: Best Business & Regulatory Model for provisioning OFC(EASsy, TEAMs, etc)

Marcel Werner mwerner at archway-productions.com
Wed Jan 31 06:31:51 EAT 2007


Contribution to theme 4: Regulatory

In our review of the ICT Bill we (Kenya ICT Federation) miss a 
competitive framework. In our Position Paper of last June we had 
proposed an insert in the Preliminary Section:

3. Competition Framework

(a) Restrictions will not be placed on competition.

(b) All scarce resources including but not limited to radio frequencies, 
rights of way for telecommunications infrastructure, and the top level 
domain name registry will be allocated in the public interest and 
utilized to the fullest.

(c) Kenya will implement the decisions of bilateral and multilateral 
agreements to which Kenya ascribes to such as ITU and WTO.

(d) The industry regulator shall implement 3 a, b, and c, (above) with 
regard to the following themes, on rates, terms and conditions that are 
not discriminatory and that are reasonable and just

i. Interconnection of all service providers

ii. Access to rights of way to existing physical infrastructure and new 
physical infrastructure.

iii. Use of radio frequencies.

iv. The provision of nondiscriminatory access to network elements on an 
unbundled basis

(e) The ICT Sector shall not be subject to higher taxation than other 
sectors, mechanisms to fund universal access notwithstanding.

(f) License fees shall be used strictly for expansion of the ICT sector

More on www.kif.or.ke.

We are currently further improving our ICT Bill position. Comments welcome.

Cheers,
Marcel Werner


John Walubengo wrote:

>Hi All, following the w/end, it maybe appropriate to
>recollect and review how far we have gone in this online
>discussion.
>
>Themes Reminder
>1) Why OFC (1day)
>*it is cheaper(than Satellite option), it is faster, more
>reliable, more secure, has unlimited bandwidth capacity.
>
>2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days)
>*Privately provisioned
>*Consortium provisioned
>*Open Access provisioned
>
>3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
>*No-Regulation
>*Some Regulation
>*Full Regulation
>
>4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days)
><Pending>
>
>5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days)
><Pending>
>
>6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (2days)
><Pending>
>
>So today we start of on Point 4, and wish to hear views on
>what would be the preferred Business and Regulatory model
>for provisioning the Optical Fiber Cable on the E.African
>Coast. Feel free to comment on a previous theme as well.
>
>walu.
>--- Alex Gakuru <alex.gakuru at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Walu,
>> 
>>I dug this interesting read  off google search a while
>>back (78 page)
>>
>>Open Access Models
>>Options for Improving Backbone Access in Developing
>>Countries (with a Focus on Sub-Saharan Africa)
>>Final Draft
>>August 2005
>>An infoDev Technical Report
>>prepared by
>>S P I N T R A C K A B
>>DROTTNINGGATAN 99,
>>113 60 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN
>>PHONE: +46-8-528 00 310 FAX: +46-8-528 00 315
>>WWW.SPINTRACK.COM INFO at SPINTRACK.COM
>>
>><
>>
>>    
>>
>http://www.infodev.org/files/2569_file_OPEN_ACCESS_REPORT.pdf
>  
>
>>/Alex
>>
>>John Walubengo <jwalu at yahoo.com> wrote: Found an answer
>>to my own question <
>>talked about emailing instead of talking to oneself?>>  -
>>anyway...The proposed regulatory framework for EASsy
>>(which
>>purportedly is going the Open Access way) seems to be
>>covered here....  
>>
>>~~~~00-copied below---
>>
>>East Africa: EASSy Project Model Approved      
>>Thursday, 22 June 2006  
>>All countries participating in the development of the
>>East
>>African Sub Marine Cable System (EASSy) have now agreed
>>to
>>implement the project on an 'open access basis,'
>>overcoming
>>a hurdle that had initially threatened to derail the
>>project. 
>>The Policy and Regulatory Adviser of Nepad e-Africa
>>Commission, Dr Edmund Katiti said that the South African
>>government and Nepad's ICT experts had persuaded the
>>countries that were objecting to the change in the
>>project
>>to realise the limitations of the consortium model which
>>they had preferred.
>>
>>The EASSy project involves laying of a fibre optic cable
>>from Mtunzini north of Durban, through landing stations
>>along East Africa to Port Sudan. The cable will link with
>>the countries' national networks at the landing stations.
>>Others would subsequently be interconnected through the
>>networks of landlocked countries like Uganda, Rwanda,
>>Burundi and D.R Congo.
>>
>>When the project was first conceived, it was to be
>>primarily a private sector project. The core investors in
>>the cable infrastructure would determine the retail
>>prices
>>of bandwidth. The project was to be owned and operated by
>>a
>>group of companies that would generate financing; an
>>arrangement known as the consortium model. The South
>>African government and Nepad have recently argued that
>>the
>>consortium model would not achieve the objective of the
>>project – bringing down the costs of communication in
>>the region. They suggested that the model be altered to
>>"open access", where any operator or institution in the
>>participating countries would be allowed to acquire
>>equity
>>if it can afford the agreed contribution.
>>
>>In the open access model, the cable would be owned and
>>operated by the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), a company
>>created to manage the network and establish the price of
>>bandwidth. An Intergovernmental Assembly is to be formed
>>to
>>regulate the costs that the SPV would charge operators.
>>Rwanda will host the headquarters of the SPV in part as
>>recognition of their commitment to the development and
>>promotion of ICTs in the country.
>>
>>After the agreement reached earlier in June, the Nepad
>>e-Africa Commission is working towards the signing of a
>>protocol that would form the legal framework of the EASSy
>>project. The Commission has already prepared a project
>>plan, which it has sent to the member governments to
>>review
>>and comment, a process that take until August, when the
>>protocol signing is anticipated. Construction is expected
>>to commence by the end of 2006.
>>
>>Katiti said they hope to raise a quarter of the funding
>>from equity acquisition payments by companies from the
>>region and then raise the remainder from African
>>financial
>>institutions: African Development Bank, Comesa's PTA
>>Bank,
>>East African Development Bank and others.
>>
>>Source: The Monitor - WDR/Intelecon Regulatory News 
>>
>>    
>>
>http://www.regulateonline.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=780&Itemid=32&relaItemid=877
>  
>
>>walu.
>>
>>--- John Walubengo  wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>What form/level of regulation would be required? Eric
>>>plse
>>>on Open Access, plse elaborate maybe in three
>>>      
>>>
>>paragraphs.
>>    
>>
>>>And maybe also Kai would have a comment on Regulation
>>>with
>>>regard to a Private sector submarine OFC
>>>provisioning....oh
>>>yes, Kihanya (the learned one) may have a point too...
>>>
>>>
>>>walu.
>>>nb: Govt officials are also encouraged to say something
>>>      
>>>
>>-
>>    
>>
>>>members are informed to treat their comments as their
>>>personal and not official postions ;-).
>>>
>>>--- Lucy Kimani  wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Regulation is definately required as even the big
>>>>        
>>>>
>>boys
>>    
>>
>>>of
>>>      
>>>
>>>>the west are
>>>>regulated, in a capitalistic environment (read
>>>>cat-throat) self-regulation
>>>>has not worked, and is sure a recipe for disaster.
>>>>
>>>>LK
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>OK. Looks like Fridays are still fridays -even
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>online.
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Very
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>little activity. Heard from only Harry and
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>Alex...is
>>    
>>
>>>>there
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>anyone out there still logged on to give us their
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>views
>>>      
>>>
>>>>b/w
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>now and 2morrow.
>>>>>
>>>>>walu.
>>>>>--- Harry Hare  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dear Walu,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just checked the dictionary definition of
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>"Regulate"
>>    
>>
>>>>and
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>got these synonyms
>>>>>>- rule, govern, manage, order, adjust, arrange,
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>dispose,
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>conduct,
>>>>>>systematize. Al these sound and are good "English"
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>words
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>cos they give you
>>>>>>the sense of stability, odder and continuity.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>However,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>these may not be so
>>>>>>good "legal" words because law introduces the
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>concept
>>>      
>>>
>>>>of
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>constrain. Then
>>>>>>these words become a burden that regulation is
>>>>>>(especially to the private
>>>>>>sector) and that regulatory frameworks prescribe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On the same breath, I would argue that its not a
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>simple
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>lets have or no,
>>>>>>lets not regulate the OFCs. I think we need to
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>regulate
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>in the sense of
>>>>>>providing continuity by systematizing and managing
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>for
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>the benefit of all,
>>>>>>so regulation should only be used to facilitate
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>and
>>    
>>
>>>>not
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>constrain.
>>>>>>Non-regulation to me sounds chaotic and not
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>sustainable
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>in the long run!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Lets have a "facilitative regulatory framework" so
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>that
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>>the private sector
>>>>>>can do what they do best...invest and get a return
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>on
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>their investment; and
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>=== message truncated ===>
>_______________________________________________
>  
>
>>kictanet mailing list
>>kictanet at kictanet.or.ke
>>http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>>
>>Please unsubscribe or change your options at
>>    
>>
>http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com
>
>
>
> 
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
>http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>kictanet mailing list
>kictanet at kictanet.or.ke
>http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
>Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mwerner%40archway-productions.com
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mwerner.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 165 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20070131/26ba58b1/attachment.vcf>


More information about the KICTANet mailing list