Dear Harry and Listers - Thanks for welcoming me to this forum. I will do my best to respond to your various questions. Please my answers to your questions Harry, interspersed in your questions below [in brackets]. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Harry Delano Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:45 AM To: Mugo Kibati Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Vision 2030: ICT and Other Sectors Converged (Day 1) Dear Listers - Ladies and gentlemen, Good morning, and herein lies an opportunity to take part in shaping what should be a very important vision for this nation. I personally trust that opinion and important suggestions here are of huge value, and that it is not late for the Vision 2030 Team to incorporate some in their blue print, and also that this blue print has inbuilt flexibility to make adjustments as much as it is desirable as we move forward to implement. Dear Mr. Mugo Kibati, Welcome on board, and as a vision for this country, we congratulate the team for being bold. I believe the forum here will focus heavily on the ICT Sub-sector. But, just as the Vision 2030 correctly correlates interdependence between different projects on the map, we will not hesitate to point out that ICT needs the rest as enablers, just as the rest needs it. My first question is, what are the clear bench marks to achieve the stated vision for the country, looking at the project pillars listed? How do we measure and audit achievements to date to ascertain whether this ship is on course..? [That's a good question. There are indeed clear targets for the various flagship projects. The level of specificity and clarity varies of course from project to project. In areas such as, say roads, where there is substantial past experience, the targets are clearer. In areas which are new to us and there are several - e.g. Special Economic Zones, the Lamu Port South Sudan Ethiopia Transport (LAPSSET) Corridor, we have to keep refining targets and timelines. In almost all cases, the actual timelines can only really be determined after detailed feasibility or engineering designs are complete. At the Secretariat, we have spent considerable time and effort working on a case by case basis to streamline targets and to try and force implementation road maps and funding models for each project no matter how complex or novel to the implementing agencies. Please visit the website www.vision2030.go.ke which is a continuous work in progress to get a feel of the status of the various projects with respect to set objectives and targets - both medium term as well as long term. Please note that for this first medium term plan running from July 1 2008 to June 30 2013 the focus is essentially on laying the foundations for Vision 2030 which includes lots of structures, systems, planning and even mindset change!] We have been on the website checking out the Key pillars and the enablers; I note that, under the Macro Enablers section, the project in which we have had keen interest falls under the heading " <http://www.vision2030.go.ke/index.php/projects/details/Macro_enablers/2> Energy Generation of 2300MW and distributed at competitive prices" While the endeavor towards generation of enough power, for adequate, quality, reliable and affordable energy is laudable and ongoing, we urgently need to address the question of "distribution" of the same to go lock-in-step with these valiant efforts. I believe Energy distribution should be listed as a "Macro-Enabler", then this way we can now address the question of the monopolized aspect of it that currently is almost crippling and reducing the project to naught, at the expense of progress in other project areas. No doubt ICT sub-sector will be a huge victim. Left unchecked, a monopolized energy distribution network on which everything else hinges as we go forward, could as well be equated to a "national security disaster-in-awaiting". Can the team review the objectives in this area to focus heavily on this aspect also, and propose, pursue and lobby unrelentingly towards a de-monopolized energy distribution design. Let this nation have the benefit of redundancy in this area. Short of this, we are left at the mercy of the current national distributor. At the very best, it might remain a cog in the wheel of this Vision2030. I would wish to draw the team Vision2030 to the tremendous success that we've all witnessed in the Telecommunication subsector, since liberalization was introduced from around 2002/3 and competitiveness brought about the huge dividends that we now reap. We herald this as one of the greatest turning points in this industry. Let's go that route in the energy subsector. [Energy Distribution is indeed under Macro-Enablers and I will check to see why we haven't included it. You raise a major philosophical issue on liberalizing distribution using the success of the Telecom sector as a benchmark. I do not fault you on that but in other jurisdictions such as the US where both the Telecom and Energy distribution sectors were liberalized, the success of the liberalization of energy distribution is in serious question even while the telecom sector has very successfully liberalized. It could a matter of methodology and not liberalization per se but it still gives on pause given that is much more sophisticated and mature liberal market environment. In any case, unbundling has to be the first order of business, followed by careful de-monopolization of each component of the bundle. Generation is already liberalized but not so transmission and liberalization and we are at the nascent stages of unbundling. Also, please note the Rural Electrification has been hived off KPLC to the Rural Electrification Authority in bid towards reducing that monopoly power and for higher efficiency. In the US, states there has been a trend towards state run distribution monopolies. Please email me a concept note and we can open up a discussion at the Ministry of energy.] Harry