Re: [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices. Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy – for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by; Promoting efficient supply of services. Ensuring good QOS Promote advances services Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing. Prevent abuse of significant market powers. Protect consumer rights/privacy rights. Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services. Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum. From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework? My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier. Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental “regulatory framework” for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the “licenser”- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework. It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution. Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best. Kihanya ----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo <jwalu@yahoo.com> To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10. thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya <kihanyajn@yahoo.com> wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory technology-neutral Open Access principles . I would also expect that there would have to bea busines realignment to conform with new entrants at the local lvel who the operators would indeed agree not to want to "take over" asa soon asa a ROI looks good.
On the regulator, the paradigm shift in allowing competition and enforcing it would be key.Competition alone despite all that is siad about it is not known to benefit consumers largely where duopolies or oligopolies exits. product and price shadowing takes centre stage and one is not sure that the alternatives are not exhorbitant.
The regulator must also enforce QOS.
The consumer must be ready for a vibrant market and take up alternatives that make the best "cents".He /She must be able to walk out..and perhaps to an ombudsman(regulator) where QOS is not as per SLA or other "promises.Whining loudly may help(See South Africans vs Telkom SA in the Daily News recently)
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo <jwalu@yahoo.com> To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:11:24 AM Subject: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
I must thank all for your valuable views shared over the last two days regarding the previous theme :- what are the Best Models for Provisioning submarine OFC.
Three models seem to have persisted throughout the discussion, namely, Open Access (EASsy), Private-led (Flag), and our famous Consortium models. Where Mucheru mentions separation of Cable ownership from Cable Management fits in squarely with the Open Access thinking, whereby, the investors in the cable (Govt, Public, Private Companies) appoint an independent management Agent (at a fee) to Operate the Cable on their behalf on a cost-recovery, open access basis. i.e Open to current and future Operators wishing to connect to the landing points or invest further in the cable on equal basis). The cable becomes an essential service or public good, from where Operators can compete to offer (other) Services at a Profit.
Flag- a Private Investment initiative came in with a variant model where the cable is –privately owned but promises to open access to the Landing points - but aims to maximise returns on the investments made on the cable infrastructure by reselling capacity at market rates. They also aim to play only at the Infrastructure level, rather than at all levels, namely Infrastructure (cable) and Services (Network and Application), opting to leave that to ISPs and ASP(Application Service Providers)
Nobody really pushed the Consortium model, but probably Badru did hint strongly for such a model when he mentioned that Commercial interest should be let loose to play dynamically with the market forces. The Consortium model is where a group of Operators get into a private, closed, commercial agreement aiming to build, own and operate a submarine cable with aim of maximising their returns (profit) in the shortest time possible –social connotation notwithstanding.
And this is where the Consumer has suffered. The short-terms interests of investors must be balanced against the long-term social benefits that would accrue from a affordable bandwidth provisions. Alex and LK seem to be voice of the consumer here, urging the Regulator to flex their muscle – probably now and more in future when the OFC is laid-out.
In all this, the various financing options were not so pronounced as noted by Michael J. Apart from IPO recommendation from Kai and Bill, the financing models (Equity, Debt, etc) has not quite come through and I hope someone could make comment on that within the remaining three days as we discuss our next theme:- What is the likely impact of the above models on the existing stakeholders (Operators, Regulator and Consumers)? That is, what do we see as the roles of the above stakeholders in the new dispensation of the Optical Submarine Cable. The efloor is again open and we have two days on this one.
walu. Nb: a Face2Face meeting will follow up after this online discussion where all these issues will be streamlined. ~~~~~000~~~~~~ Theme Reminder: 1) Why OFC (1day) 2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days) 3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days) 4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days) <Ongoing-Open> 5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days) <Pending> 6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (1day) <Pending>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com
the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes, True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office. In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thats what is needed. But how do we start talking of deregulation when we cant agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues. I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party. Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure all these issues must be discussed at one point.... r joseph kihanya <kihanyajn@yahoo.com> wrote: The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices. Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy â for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by; ï§ Promoting efficient supply of services. ï§ Ensuring good QOS ï§ Promote advances services ï§ Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing. ï§ Prevent abuse of significant market powers. ï§ Protect consumer rights/privacy rights. ï§ Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services. ï§ Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum.
From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework?
My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier. Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental âregulatory frameworkâ for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the âlicenserâ- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework. It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution. Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best. Kihanya ----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10. thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory technology-neutral Open Access principles . I would also expect that there would have to bea busines realignment to conform with new entrants at the local lvel who the operators would indeed agree not to want to "take over" asa soon asa a ROI looks good.
On the regulator, the paradigm shift in allowing competition and enforcing it would be key.Competition alone despite all that is siad about it is not known to benefit consumers largely where duopolies or oligopolies exits. product and price shadowing takes centre stage and one is not sure that the alternatives are not exhorbitant.
The regulator must also enforce QOS.
The consumer must be ready for a vibrant market and take up alternatives that make the best "cents".He /She must be able to walk out..and perhaps to an ombudsman(regulator) where QOS is not as per SLA or other "promises.Whining loudly may help(See South Africans vs Telkom SA in the Daily News recently)
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:11:24 AM Subject: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
I must thank all for your valuable views shared over the last two days regarding the previous theme :- what are the Best Models for Provisioning submarine OFC.
Three models seem to have persisted throughout the discussion, namely, Open Access (EASsy), Private-led (Flag), and our famous Consortium models. Where Mucheru mentions separation of Cable ownership from Cable Management fits in squarely with the Open Access thinking, whereby, the investors in the cable (Govt, Public, Private Companies) appoint an independent management Agent (at a fee) to Operate the Cable on their behalf on a cost-recovery, open access basis. i.e Open to current and future Operators wishing to connect to the landing points or invest further in the cable on equal basis). The cable becomes an essential service or public good, from where Operators can compete to offer (other) Services at a Profit.
Flag- a Private Investment initiative came in with a variant model where the cable is âprivately owned but promises to open access to the Landing points - but aims to maximise returns on the investments made on the cable infrastructure by reselling capacity at market rates. They also aim to play only at the Infrastructure level, rather than at all levels, namely Infrastructure (cable) and Services (Network and Application), opting to leave that to ISPs and ASP(Application Service Providers)
Nobody really pushed the Consortium model, but probably Badru did hint strongly for such a model when he mentioned that Commercial interest should be let loose to play dynamically with the market forces. The Consortium model is where a group of Operators get into a private, closed, commercial agreement aiming to build, own and operate a submarine cable with aim of maximising their returns (profit) in the shortest time possible âsocial connotation notwithstanding.
And this is where the Consumer has suffered. The short-terms interests of investors must be balanced against the long-term social benefits that would accrue from a affordable bandwidth provisions. Alex and LK seem to be voice of the consumer here, urging the Regulator to flex their muscle â probably now and more in future when the OFC is laid-out.
In all this, the various financing options were not so pronounced as noted by Michael J. Apart from IPO recommendation from Kai and Bill, the financing models (Equity, Debt, etc) has not quite come through and I hope someone could make comment on that within the remaining three days as we discuss our next theme:- What is the likely impact of the above models on the existing stakeholders (Operators, Regulator and Consumers)? That is, what do we see as the roles of the above stakeholders in the new dispensation of the Optical Submarine Cable. The efloor is again open and we have two days on this one.
walu. Nb: a Face2Face meeting will follow up after this online discussion where all these issues will be streamlined. ~~~~~000~~~~~~ Theme Reminder: 1) Why OFC (1day) 2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days) 3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days) 4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days)
5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days)
6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (1day)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/rebeccawanjiku%40yahoo.com Rebecca Wanjiku, journalist, p.o box 33515, Nairobi.00600 Kenya. Tel. 254 720 318 925 blog:http://beckyit.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.
Thanx Kihanya and all for your comments. Apologies for going off-air over the last 12hrs. Indeed you all need to go through your previous mails and ensure you are uptodate with some belated postings from members... I want to rule that we remain on the above discussion today(we froze to day to Day 8) and then move on tomorrow and part of Monday on our last portion of the discussion: -Conclusions and Reconciling Stakeholder Interests. walu. nb: Kihanya's input maps well with What Roland (2006) had featured @ http://www.ralden.com/C6/A%20Way%20Forward/default.aspx It seems like Regulatory/Market Structure overhauling maybe more crucial than just laying down or provisioning the fiber - irrespective of the Model adopted. --- Rebecca Wanjiku <rebeccawanjiku@yahoo.com> wrote:
the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thats what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we cant agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT
Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure all these issues must be discussed at one point....
r
joseph kihanya <kihanyajn@yahoo.com> wrote: The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices.
From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in
Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy â for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by; ï§ Promoting efficient supply of services. ï§ Ensuring good QOS ï§ Promote advances services ï§ Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing. ï§ Prevent abuse of significant market powers. ï§ Protect consumer rights/privacy rights. ï§ Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services. ï§ Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum. point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework?
My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier.
Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental âregulatory frameworkâ for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the âlicenserâ- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm
The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework.
It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution.
Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best.
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10.
thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory
technology-neutral Open Access principles .
=== message truncated ===> _______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users. In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end. Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million. Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya? Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on. Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless? Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high? In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost. Alex Gakuru Rebecca Wanjiku <rebeccawanjiku@yahoo.com> wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes, True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office. In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thats what is needed. But how do we start talking of deregulation when we cant agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues. I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party. Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure all these issues must be discussed at one point.... r joseph kihanya <kihanyajn@yahoo.com> wrote: The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices. Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy â for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by; ï§ Promoting efficient supply of services. ï§ Ensuring good QOS ï§ Promote advances services ï§ Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing. ï§ Prevent abuse of significant market powers. ï§ Protect consumer rights/privacy rights. ï§ Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services. ï§ Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum.
From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework?
My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier. Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental âregulatory frameworkâ for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the âlicenserâ- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework. It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution. Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best. Kihanya ----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10. thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory technology-neutral Open Access principles . I would also expect that there would have to bea busines realignment to conform with new entrants at the local lvel who the operators would indeed agree not to want to "take over" asa soon asa a ROI looks good.
On the regulator, the paradigm shift in allowing competition and enforcing it would be key.Competition alone despite all that is siad about it is not known to benefit consumers largely where duopolies or oligopolies exits. product and price shadowing takes centre stage and one is not sure that the alternatives are not exhorbitant.
The regulator must also enforce QOS.
The consumer must be ready for a vibrant market and take up alternatives that make the best "cents".He /She must be able to walk out..and perhaps to an ombudsman(regulator) where QOS is not as per SLA or other "promises.Whining loudly may help(See South Africans vs Telkom SA in the Daily News recently)
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:11:24 AM Subject: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
I must thank all for your valuable views shared over the last two days regarding the previous theme :- what are the Best Models for Provisioning submarine OFC.
Three models seem to have persisted throughout the discussion, namely, Open Access (EASsy), Private-led (Flag), and our famous Consortium models. Where Mucheru mentions separation of Cable ownership from Cable Management fits in squarely with the Open Access thinking, whereby, the investors in the cable (Govt, Public, Private Companies) appoint an independent management Agent (at a fee) to Operate the Cable on their behalf on a cost-recovery, open access basis. i.e Open to current and future Operators wishing to connect to the landing points or invest further in the cable on equal basis). The cable becomes an essential service or public good, from where Operators can compete to offer (other) Services at a Profit.
Flag- a Private Investment initiative came in with a variant model where the cable is âprivately owned but promises to open access to the Landing points - but aims to maximise returns on the investments made on the cable infrastructure by reselling capacity at market rates. They also aim to play only at the Infrastructure level, rather than at all levels, namely Infrastructure (cable) and Services (Network and Application), opting to leave that to ISPs and ASP(Application Service Providers)
Nobody really pushed the Consortium model, but probably Badru did hint strongly for such a model when he mentioned that Commercial interest should be let loose to play dynamically with the market forces. The Consortium model is where a group of Operators get into a private, closed, commercial agreement aiming to build, own and operate a submarine cable with aim of maximising their returns (profit) in the shortest time possible âsocial connotation notwithstanding.
And this is where the Consumer has suffered. The short-terms interests of investors must be balanced against the long-term social benefits that would accrue from a affordable bandwidth provisions. Alex and LK seem to be voice of the consumer here, urging the Regulator to flex their muscle â probably now and more in future when the OFC is laid-out.
In all this, the various financing options were not so pronounced as noted by Michael J. Apart from IPO recommendation from Kai and Bill, the financing models (Equity, Debt, etc) has not quite come through and I hope someone could make comment on that within the remaining three days as we discuss our next theme:- What is the likely impact of the above models on the existing stakeholders (Operators, Regulator and Consumers)? That is, what do we see as the roles of the above stakeholders in the new dispensation of the Optical Submarine Cable. The efloor is again open and we have two days on this one.
walu. Nb: a Face2Face meeting will follow up after this online discussion where all these issues will be streamlined. ~~~~~000~~~~~~ Theme Reminder: 1) Why OFC (1day) 2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days) 3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days) 4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days)
5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days)
6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (1day)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/rebeccawanjiku%40yahoo.com Rebecca Wanjiku, journalist, p.o box 33515, Nairobi.00600 Kenya. Tel. 254 720 318 925 blog:http://beckyit.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com --------------------------------- Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
I must admit, I have never thought of how many internet users Kenya has. A quick google search on '.co.ke' returns 750,000 results. A search on '.or.ke' returns 217,000 results. I wonder if this tallies with Kenic records.....Michuki??? These domains possibly don't have a single user each..so 1 million users sounds outrageous to me. And 1 million domains registered insinuates Kenic collects approx kshs (3000*1 million)...When is Kenic going public?? CIA 'reports' Kenya internet users at 1,054,900 (2005). https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/ke.html Any reports done on this??..and what algorithms/logic are deployed to estimate these stats?? Bill
Alex, I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure. Thank you -- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru <alex.gakuru@yahoo.com> Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet <kictanet@kictanet.or.ke> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: <mucheru@wananchi.com> Cc: <ke-intenetusers@bdix.net> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku <rebeccawanjiku@yahoo.com> wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe that’s what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we can’t agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure all these issues must be discussed at one point....
r
joseph kihanya <kihanyajn@yahoo.com> wrote: The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices.
From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of
Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy – for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by;  Promoting efficient supply of services.  Ensuring good QOS  Promote advances services  Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing.  Prevent abuse of significant market powers.  Protect consumer rights/privacy rights.  Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services.  Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum. the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework?
My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier.
Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental “regulatory framework†for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the “licenserâ€- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm
The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework.
It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution.
Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best.
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10.
thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory technology-neutral Open Access principles . I would also expect that there would have to bea busines realignment to conform with new entrants at the local lvel who the operators would indeed agree not to want to "take over" asa soon asa a ROI looks good.
On the regulator, the paradigm shift in allowing competition and enforcing it would be key.Competition alone despite all that is siad about it is not known to benefit consumers largely where duopolies or oligopolies exits. product and price shadowing takes centre stage and one is not sure that the alternatives are not exhorbitant.
The regulator must also enforce QOS.
The consumer must be ready for a vibrant market and take up alternatives that make the best "cents".He /She must be able to walk out..and perhaps to an ombudsman(regulator) where QOS is not as per SLA or other "promises.Whining loudly may help(See South Africans vs Telkom SA in the Daily News recently)
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:11:24 AM Subject: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
I must thank all for your valuable views shared over the last two days regarding the previous theme :- what are the Best Models for Provisioning submarine OFC.
Three models seem to have persisted throughout the discussion, namely, Open Access (EASsy), Private-led (Flag), and our famous Consortium models. Where Mucheru mentions separation of Cable ownership from Cable Management fits in squarely with the Open Access thinking, whereby, the investors in the cable (Govt, Public, Private Companies) appoint an independent management Agent (at a fee) to Operate the Cable on their behalf on a cost-recovery, open access basis. i.e Open to current and future Operators wishing to connect to the landing points or invest further in the cable on equal basis). The cable becomes an essential service or public good, from where Operators can compete to offer (other) Services at a Profit.
Flag- a Private Investment initiative came in with a variant model where the cable is –privately owned but promises to open access to the Landing points - but aims to maximise returns on the investments made on the cable infrastructure by reselling capacity at market rates. They also aim to play only at the Infrastructure level, rather than at all levels, namely Infrastructure (cable) and Services (Network and Application), opting to leave that to ISPs and ASP(Application Service Providers)
Nobody really pushed the Consortium model, but probably Badru did hint strongly for such a model when he mentioned that Commercial interest should be let loose to play dynamically with the market forces. The Consortium model is where a group of Operators get into a private, closed, commercial agreement aiming to build, own and operate a submarine cable with aim of maximising their returns (profit) in the shortest time possible –social connotation notwithstanding.
And this is where the Consumer has suffered. The short-terms interests of investors must be balanced against the long-term social benefits that would accrue from a affordable bandwidth provisions. Alex and LK seem to be voice of the consumer here, urging the Regulator to flex their muscle – probably now and more in future when the OFC is laid-out.
In all this, the various financing options were not so pronounced as noted by Michael J. Apart from IPO recommendation from Kai and Bill, the financing models (Equity, Debt, etc) has not quite come through and I hope someone could make comment on that within the remaining three days as we discuss our next theme:- What is the likely impact of the above models on the existing stakeholders (Operators, Regulator and Consumers)? That is, what do we see as the roles of the above stakeholders in the new dispensation of the Optical Submarine Cable. The efloor is again open and we have two days on this one.
walu. Nb: a Face2Face meeting will follow up after this online discussion where all these issues will be streamlined. ~~~~~000~~~~~~ Theme Reminder: 1) Why OFC (1day) 2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days) 3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days) 4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days)
5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days)
6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (1day)
______________________________________________________________________________ ______
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________________ ______
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
______________________________________________________________________________ ______ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________________ ______ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/rebeccawanjiku%40yahoo.com
Rebecca Wanjiku, journalist, p.o box 33515, Nairobi.00600 Kenya.
Tel. 254 720 318 925
blog:http://beckyit.blogspot.com/
--------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mucheru%40wananchi.com
Glad to: Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf> Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done. Synopsis: 3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.) 1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society.... <snip> You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411 The two reports are: - Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report... - Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
<snip> 2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors 3. Regulation. What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator. This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices Alex Joseph Mucheru <mucheru@wananchi.com> wrote: Alex, I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure. Thank you -- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure all these issues must be discussed at one point....
r
joseph kihanya wrote: The regulatory framework I am afraid has to have its background against what is and has become current over the last 15 years or so globally. It can be viewed both at the national level and at the international arena. It is important to note that regulation in telecommunications is a public policy matter for any country. Governments must design and implement regulation based on the needs of a particular country and its peculiar historical or other circumstances, of course tending towards best practices.
From the foregoing, it is clear that, in the short term at least, most countries, Kenya included have an interest to regulate telecommunications services provision. The question therefore only remains as to whether the OFC is within the ambit of what may be regulated in the industry. Deregulation is a theme that is in play in most jurisdictions that have achieved above optimal competitive markets. The case of the UK under the Communications Act 2003 and the role of OFCOM are in point. Given that there is no direct call for deregulation even under the National ICT policy 2006, it would appear that the strategies suggested at 3.3.1 in relation to information technology infrastructure would entail a fair amount of regulation. This is especially given the fact that despite encouragement of
Telecommunications regulation in the transition from a monopolistic and largely anti- market based approaches to supply of services, to a market based approach in a liberalized era, mandated most governments and hence societies to seek regulatory oversight. This was against an anticipated reduction of oversight given that market forces/ competition was to guide, in the long term, the development of this industry as in others. Consensus appears to be that in the short term-as a guide/ facilitator to liberalization, regulatory bodies were and are required. It is indeed even anticipated that it is in this transitional stage that the regulators will be so busy ââ¬â for the obvious reasons that the new players may gain dominance very quickly and attain the monopolistic tendencies of the historical operators. Why is regulation in telecommunications important? 1. It authorizes new operators. 2. It removes barriers to entry. 3. It mandates interconnection between players. 4. It oversees the penetration of services in areas that commercial imperatives would not allow or pursue. The objectives of transparent telecommunications regulation are mainly the following; Oversee competitive markets by; ï⧠Promoting efficient supply of services. ï⧠Ensuring good QOS ï⧠Promote advances services ï⧠Enable the maintenance of efficient pricing. ï⧠Prevent abuse of significant market powers. ï⧠Protect consumer rights/privacy rights. ï⧠Facilitate interconnection thereby efficient use of telecommunication services. ï⧠Oversee the optimal use of the finite radio frequency spectrum. the laying of the infrastructure, only so few options will be available, Indeed, in the OFC case, perhaps 2 will be a lucky option for many for the next 5-10 years or more. Do we then need a regulatory framework?
My answer is yes and perhaps for tempering, a hesitant qualifier.
Competition laws are likely to be the most fundamental ââ¬Åregulatory frameworkââ¬Â for the OFC as indeed for any other services. It is particular to note that even in the UK the Office of Fair Trading and OFCOM share equivalent powers in relation to fostering competition. The CCK will have to; in the very short to medium term translate from the ââ¬Ålicenserââ¬Â- facilitator of entry- primarily- to a serious competition oversight body with sound, quick and efficient determinations. If I am not wrong the only recorded competition determination relates to the cyber-café association- common pricing attempt- I stand to be corrected. Interconnection determinations have been one- Kencell vs TKL ? This will be countered and perhaps also enhanced by an independent competition body- the workings of the anti-monopolies commissioner under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 504 Laws of Kenya), are highly opaque. Other countries, such as Australia have also undergone a transformation from maintaining industry specific competition principles and statutes for the telecommunication sector to an all inclusive co- competition oversight regime in the interim and a sustainable sole competition / regulatory framework for all industries. As such therefore, regulation for the OFC may be through the competition framework under the CA 1998 or the KICT BILL 2006. Complete lack of regulation may therefore not be an option at all. Whatever business model is adopted, the Key question is whether as a country in acute need of the OFC, we would facilitate its provisioning of services within the country without any regard to any oversight of any sort for whatever purpose. At the international level. The WTO and the ITU also anticipate regulatory oversight in telecommunications too and Kenya, being party to these organizations would be hard pressed to provision services without oversight (if that were possible), especially since the OFC will be extra-territorial. I would suggest that a reading of this Reference paper at the WTO would elaborate on this aspect. See www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/tel23_e.htm
The best regulatory models would for me therefore be within the competition framework.
It would be difficult to try and regulate any/the OFC, singularly, as it would also perhaps border on the unconstitutional, there being a bar againts discrimination under our Constitution.
Sector specific competition regulation under the CA1998 may work in the meantime but in the long run a clear policy that has a generic definition of what significant market power is, would serve the industry best.
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:45:10 PM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
Cool! u r on e-record- we expect something Regulatory from you on or before Day 10.
thanx, walu. --- joseph kihanya wrote:
Thanks Walu for the discussion moderation.
I am doing something on the regulatory framework and will post by day 10.
On operators I would expect that there woulda be a reciprocation in price and QOS issues. I would expect that there would be publicly accessible interconnection agreements under the non-discriminatory technology-neutral Open Access principles . I would also expect that there would have to bea busines realignment to conform with new entrants at the local lvel who the operators would indeed agree not to want to "take over" asa soon asa a ROI looks good.
On the regulator, the paradigm shift in allowing competition and enforcing it would be key.Competition alone despite all that is siad about it is not known to benefit consumers largely where duopolies or oligopolies exits. product and price shadowing takes centre stage and one is not sure that the alternatives are not exhorbitant.
The regulator must also enforce QOS.
The consumer must be ready for a vibrant market and take up alternatives that make the best "cents".He /She must be able to walk out..and perhaps to an ombudsman(regulator) where QOS is not as per SLA or other "promises.Whining loudly may help(See South Africans vs Telkom SA in the Daily News recently)
Kihanya
----- Original Message ---- From: John Walubengo To: kihanyajn@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:11:24 AM Subject: [Kictanet] Day 8 of 10 : - Projected Impact of OFC on the Stakeholders
I must thank all for your valuable views shared over the last two days regarding the previous theme :- what are the Best Models for Provisioning submarine OFC.
Three models seem to have persisted throughout the discussion, namely, Open Access (EASsy), Private-led (Flag), and our famous Consortium models. Where Mucheru mentions separation of Cable ownership from Cable Management fits in squarely with the Open Access thinking, whereby, the investors in the cable (Govt, Public, Private Companies) appoint an independent management Agent (at a fee) to Operate the Cable on their behalf on a cost-recovery, open access basis. i.e Open to current and future Operators wishing to connect to the landing points or invest further in the cable on equal basis). The cable becomes an essential service or public good, from where Operators can compete to offer (other) Services at a Profit.
Flag- a Private Investment initiative came in with a variant model where the cable is ââ¬âprivately owned but promises to open access to the Landing points - but aims to maximise returns on the investments made on the cable infrastructure by reselling capacity at market rates. They also aim to play only at the Infrastructure level, rather than at all levels, namely Infrastructure (cable) and Services (Network and Application), opting to leave that to ISPs and ASP(Application Service Providers)
Nobody really pushed the Consortium model, but probably Badru did hint strongly for such a model when he mentioned that Commercial interest should be let loose to play dynamically with the market forces. The Consortium model is where a group of Operators get into a private, closed, commercial agreement aiming to build, own and operate a submarine cable with aim of maximising their returns (profit) in the shortest time possible ââ¬âsocial connotation notwithstanding.
And this is where the Consumer has suffered. The short-terms interests of investors must be balanced against the long-term social benefits that would accrue from a affordable bandwidth provisions. Alex and LK seem to be voice of the consumer here, urging the Regulator to flex their muscle ââ¬â probably now and more in future when the OFC is laid-out.
In all this, the various financing options were not so pronounced as noted by Michael J. Apart from IPO recommendation from Kai and Bill, the financing models (Equity, Debt, etc) has not quite come through and I hope someone could make comment on that within the remaining three days as we discuss our next theme:- What is the likely impact of the above models on the existing stakeholders (Operators, Regulator and Consumers)? That is, what do we see as the roles of the above stakeholders in the new dispensation of the Optical Submarine Cable. The efloor is again open and we have two days on this one.
walu. Nb: a Face2Face meeting will follow up after this online discussion where all these issues will be streamlined. ~~~~~000~~~~~~ Theme Reminder: 1) Why OFC (1day) 2) Existing Business Models for OFC provisioning (2days) 3) Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days) 4) Best Model (Business+Regulatory) for E. Africans (2days)
5) Projected Impact on Stakeholders (2days)
6) Reconciling Stakeholder interests/Conclusions (1day)
______________________________________________________________________________ ______
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at
http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________________ ______
Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
______________________________________________________________________________ ______ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kihanyajn%40yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________________ ______ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/rebeccawanjiku%40yahoo.com
Rebecca Wanjiku, journalist, p.o box 33515, Nairobi.00600 Kenya.
Tel. 254 720 318 925
blog:http://beckyit.blogspot.com/
--------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mucheru%40wananchi.com
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com --------------------------------- Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and always stay connected to friends.
Alex, Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail. It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?). walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends.. --- Alex Gakuru <alex.gakuru@yahoo.com> wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
<snip> You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
<snip>
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru <mucheru@wananchi.com> wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
oops! ... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:- 1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication. 2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks 3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-) 4. Everyone - to be honest. Briefest I could get. /Alex John Walubengo <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: Alex, Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail. It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?). walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends.. --- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com --------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.
Alex, Just to add to what you say below, my take just by observing the various players in the telecom industry these couple of months, as well as the policy makers and those suppossed to be regulating/implementing these policies is that there is too much "conflict of interest" and no wonder the consumer gets a raw deal! - A regulator that is more concerned with keeping the operators happy rather than looking out for the tax payer paying their salaries not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government foot prints are all over the place... - Operators eager to keep the status quo, but in the meantime trying to out do each other to steal, and or maintain the customer base, fighting dirty comes to mind, or is it capitalism at its best? - A government looking to grow the GDP and hopefully looking to lower the bandwidth price in the process, but being pulled in different directions by the various forces and one can only hope they dont wind up carrying the donkey on their backs!!! LK oops!
... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:-
1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication.
2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks
3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-)
4. Everyone - to be honest.
Briefest I could get.
/Alex
John Walubengo <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: Alex,
Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail.
It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?).
walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends..
--- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/
Lucy,
not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government >foot prints are all over the place...
It was shocking to hear, in contempt of court, they publicly proclaimed that they were not "independent" but just a part of government (at the World Bank breakfast meeting three weeks ago). As far as I know, this contravenes a recent court ruling to the effect that CCK decisions are not tied to government policy. Thus far, CCK is a not a "regulator", perhaps a vested interests, sound proof glass house where consumer cries cannot reach? But welcome to Kenya, and see how our laws are flouted and court played, but when it comes to LICENSES... it is like "god" speaking to sinners. And all the talk about fresh new laws...? When I learnt the poem "who killed Cock Robin" as a child, I had no idea it would make any sense in my grown life. But with the so many official barriers to affordable communication this robin poem <http://www.garden-birds.co.uk/birds/robin.htm> now makes a lot of sense. Have a laughly day. Alex Lucy Kimani <lkimani@comnews.co.ke> wrote: Alex, Just to add to what you say below, my take just by observing the various players in the telecom industry these couple of months, as well as the policy makers and those suppossed to be regulating/implementing these policies is that there is too much "conflict of interest" and no wonder the consumer gets a raw deal! - A regulator that is more concerned with keeping the operators happy rather than looking out for the tax payer paying their salaries not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government foot prints are all over the place... - Operators eager to keep the status quo, but in the meantime trying to out do each other to steal, and or maintain the customer base, fighting dirty comes to mind, or is it capitalism at its best? - A government looking to grow the GDP and hopefully looking to lower the bandwidth price in the process, but being pulled in different directions by the various forces and one can only hope they dont wind up carrying the donkey on their backs!!! LK oops!
... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:-
1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication.
2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks
3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-)
4. Everyone - to be honest.
Briefest I could get.
/Alex
John Walubengo wrote: Alex,
Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail.
It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?).
walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends..
--- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/ _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
Hi Alex and all (Please note that my views/contributions to this debate are personal and do not in any way reflect the official view of the CCK) There is normally quite a lot of tension between commitment and flexibility that all governments face when creating and implementing communications polices and rules. Primarily government is responsible for developing policy, which by extension establishes regulatory authorities which works to a mandate set by the legislation. The role of regulatory authorities is primarily facilitative it is not its role to provide detailed management of the sector and major policy issues should still be decided by government ( in the interest of the public read consumers) with operators themselves taking care of commercial and operational matters. Therefore the independence of a regulator cannot be absolute but it can and should operate with the sustained support of the government with which rests the ultimate responsibility for the health of the sector by the policies governments adopt and implement. Back to Walu's question "how can/should the Consumers as one of the
Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?)"
From a consumer perspective what would be ideal would be to get involved in development of consumer protection policies and regulations which would provide users with all the information required to make informed choices thus deriving benefits from competitive service provisioning. The regulators should also aim at maintaining public confidence through 1. Implementation of suitable consultation mechanisms 2.encouraging good practice by providers as well as provision of universal high quality service, 3. Ensure all providers are treated fairly while assuring consumers if fairness in tariffs transparency in billing as well as opportunity to redress poor performance and/or misconduct
All the above and more should ideally be developed into a set of consumer affairs guidelines applying to all service providers in all categories, be it infrastructure etc and end users. best alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Gakuru" <alex.gakuru@yahoo.com> To: <alice@apc.org> Cc: <ke-intenetusers@bdix.net> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:14 AM Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory ModelsforOFC (Day 8 Cont'd)
Lucy,
not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government >foot prints are all over the place...
It was shocking to hear, in contempt of court, they publicly proclaimed that they were not "independent" but just a part of government (at the World Bank breakfast meeting three weeks ago). As far as I know, this contravenes a recent court ruling to the effect that CCK decisions are not tied to government policy. Thus far, CCK is a not a "regulator", perhaps a vested interests, sound proof glass house where consumer cries cannot reach?
But welcome to Kenya, and see how our laws are flouted and court played, but when it comes to LICENSES... it is like "god" speaking to sinners. And all the talk about fresh new laws...?
When I learnt the poem "who killed Cock Robin" as a child, I had no idea it would make any sense in my grown life. But with the so many official barriers to affordable communication this robin poem <http://www.garden-birds.co.uk/birds/robin.htm> now makes a lot of sense.
Have a laughly day.
Alex Lucy Kimani <lkimani@comnews.co.ke> wrote: Alex,
Just to add to what you say below, my take just by observing the various players in the telecom industry these couple of months, as well as the policy makers and those suppossed to be regulating/implementing these policies is that there is too much "conflict of interest" and no wonder the consumer gets a raw deal!
- A regulator that is more concerned with keeping the operators happy rather than looking out for the tax payer paying their salaries not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government foot prints are all over the place... - Operators eager to keep the status quo, but in the meantime trying to out do each other to steal, and or maintain the customer base, fighting dirty comes to mind, or is it capitalism at its best? - A government looking to grow the GDP and hopefully looking to lower the bandwidth price in the process, but being pulled in different directions by the various forces and one can only hope they dont wind up carrying the donkey on their backs!!!
LK oops!
... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:-
1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication.
2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks
3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-)
4. Everyone - to be honest.
Briefest I could get.
/Alex
John Walubengo wrote: Alex,
Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail.
It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?).
walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends..
--- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâ?Ts what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canâ?Tt agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org
Hi, Sincerely, I agree with you Alice. The problem in Kenya is somewhat summarized in the below email excerpt from distinguished internet and businesses models researcher who has indicated his willingness to come to Kenya to discuss with all stakeholders business, consumers, government, regulator et. al. on the subject matter. The "left" or "right" refers to the heated and polarized global "network-neutrality" debate pitting consumers against providers. He offers a (third alternative and a) way out of the fight (especially now that we have reached reconciliations phase) Furthermore, it is not enough to raise problems yet fail to suggest solutions. It would be most appreciated if KICTANet members collaborated on this open conference. /Alex ----excert---- whether you are from the right or left, we must find entirely new business models that will enable the financing of the next generation last mile networks in an open affordable way. An unfettered private sector is the best way to develop such new business models and services. Some exciting possibilities are starting to emerge such as customer owned and controlled fiber (which has been extremely successful with schools, hospitals and business), Green Broadband, and in far off New Zealand initiatives like CityLink and Inspired Networks in Palmerston. I am sure there are other possibilities - but we need both research programs such as GENI and FIRE to develop new architectures and clever business people not tied to the myopic backward looking carrier world to explore these new business models. ---ends---- alice@apc.org wrote: Hi Alex and all (Please note that my views/contributions to this debate are personal and do not in any way reflect the official view of the CCK) There is normally quite a lot of tension between commitment and flexibility that all governments face when creating and implementing communications polices and rules. Primarily government is responsible for developing policy, which by extension establishes regulatory authorities which works to a mandate set by the legislation. The role of regulatory authorities is primarily facilitative it is not its role to provide detailed management of the sector and major policy issues should still be decided by government ( in the interest of the public read consumers) with operators themselves taking care of commercial and operational matters. Therefore the independence of a regulator cannot be absolute but it can and should operate with the sustained support of the government with which rests the ultimate responsibility for the health of the sector by the policies governments adopt and implement. Back to Walu's question "how can/should the Consumers as one of the
Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?)"
From a consumer perspective what would be ideal would be to get involved in development of consumer protection policies and regulations which would provide users with all the information required to make informed choices thus deriving benefits from competitive service provisioning. The regulators should also aim at maintaining public confidence through 1. Implementation of suitable consultation mechanisms 2.encouraging good practice by providers as well as provision of universal high quality service, 3. Ensure all providers are treated fairly while assuring consumers if fairness in tariffs transparency in billing as well as opportunity to redress poor performance and/or misconduct
All the above and more should ideally be developed into a set of consumer affairs guidelines applying to all service providers in all categories, be it infrastructure etc and end users. best alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Gakuru" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:14 AM Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory ModelsforOFC (Day 8 Cont'd)
Lucy,
not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government >foot prints are all over the place...
It was shocking to hear, in contempt of court, they publicly proclaimed that they were not "independent" but just a part of government (at the World Bank breakfast meeting three weeks ago). As far as I know, this contravenes a recent court ruling to the effect that CCK decisions are not tied to government policy. Thus far, CCK is a not a "regulator", perhaps a vested interests, sound proof glass house where consumer cries cannot reach?
But welcome to Kenya, and see how our laws are flouted and court played, but when it comes to LICENSES... it is like "god" speaking to sinners. And all the talk about fresh new laws...?
When I learnt the poem "who killed Cock Robin" as a child, I had no idea it would make any sense in my grown life. But with the so many official barriers to affordable communication this robin poem now makes a lot of sense.
Have a laughly day.
Alex Lucy Kimani wrote: Alex,
Just to add to what you say below, my take just by observing the various players in the telecom industry these couple of months, as well as the policy makers and those suppossed to be regulating/implementing these policies is that there is too much "conflict of interest" and no wonder the consumer gets a raw deal!
- A regulator that is more concerned with keeping the operators happy rather than looking out for the tax payer paying their salaries not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government foot prints are all over the place... - Operators eager to keep the status quo, but in the meantime trying to out do each other to steal, and or maintain the customer base, fighting dirty comes to mind, or is it capitalism at its best? - A government looking to grow the GDP and hopefully looking to lower the bandwidth price in the process, but being pulled in different directions by the various forces and one can only hope they dont wind up carrying the donkey on their backs!!!
LK oops!
... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:-
1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication.
2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks
3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-)
4. Everyone - to be honest.
Briefest I could get.
/Alex
John Walubengo wrote: Alex,
Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail.
It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?).
walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends..
--- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâ?Ts what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canâ?Tt agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com --------------------------------- Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
thank you all for the discussions so far, but we did not have much discussions about the consortium model and how it works, and how we can all maximise the benefits, granted all the detailed discussions about business models, regulatory models, and the impact of OFC, we would like to wrap up the discussions by discussing ways to reconcile the interests. we have heard discussions about deregulation and the need to protect consumers from profit-driven investors. How can the interests be balanced. still on regulation, what is the way forward, can regulation issues on OFC be incorporated in the draft policy or do they fit in within the legal regime envisaged under the draft policy? lets get the discussions going and finalise it, we will have a face to face meeting where the PS will attend to all our questions and give an update, regards becky Rebecca Wanjiku, journalist, p.o box 33515, Nairobi.00600 Kenya. Tel. 254 720 318 925 blog:http://beckyit.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------- Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
I think we have gone of the topic completely. And as one of the fighters for an independent regulator, I do not think the situation is that bad. The whole point is the history of where we came from and where we are today. If you take a step back to KP&TC times, they were the regulator, the supplier and even the consumer. We have come such a long way and I must say the pending bill is meant to take us even further in terms of regulation and developments. Alex, relax we have seriously made a lot of progress. I don't remember a time when a consumer would be able to directly address the PS (government) and the service providers in one email and get not only their attention but a response. Let us not lose focus please! -- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru <alex.gakuru@yahoo.com> Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet <kictanet@kictanet.or.ke> Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:14:47 -0800 (PST) To: <mucheru@wananchi.com> Cc: <ke-intenetusers@bdix.net> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Modelsfor OFC (Day 8 Cont'd)
Lucy,
not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government >foot prints are all over the place...
It was shocking to hear, in contempt of court, they publicly proclaimed that they were not "independent" but just a part of government (at the World Bank breakfast meeting three weeks ago). As far as I know, this contravenes a recent court ruling to the effect that CCK decisions are not tied to government policy. Thus far, CCK is a not a "regulator", perhaps a vested interests, sound proof glass house where consumer cries cannot reach?
But welcome to Kenya, and see how our laws are flouted and court played, but when it comes to LICENSES... it is like "god" speaking to sinners. And all the talk about fresh new laws...?
When I learnt the poem "who killed Cock Robin" as a child, I had no idea it would make any sense in my grown life. But with the so many official barriers to affordable communication this robin poem <http://www.garden-birds.co.uk/birds/robin.htm> now makes a lot of sense.
Have a laughly day.
Alex Lucy Kimani <lkimani@comnews.co.ke> wrote: Alex,
Just to add to what you say below, my take just by observing the various players in the telecom industry these couple of months, as well as the policy makers and those suppossed to be regulating/implementing these policies is that there is too much "conflict of interest" and no wonder the consumer gets a raw deal!
- A regulator that is more concerned with keeping the operators happy rather than looking out for the tax payer paying their salaries not to mention the fact that "independent" regulator is just but a theory, and government foot prints are all over the place... - Operators eager to keep the status quo, but in the meantime trying to out do each other to steal, and or maintain the customer base, fighting dirty comes to mind, or is it capitalism at its best? - A government looking to grow the GDP and hopefully looking to lower the bandwidth price in the process, but being pulled in different directions by the various forces and one can only hope they dont wind up carrying the donkey on their backs!!!
LK oops!
... but seriously there quite a number of underlying issues. But in short:-
1. Regulator - Should begin by establishing a relationship framework with consumers and multi-located businesses and facilitate them with their own fibre rollouts- Remember it is cheap and can pass overhead on electric poles, riverbeds, hills etc especially where big telcos do not find the business case to do it. Help change "LICENSE" a facilitative piece of paper not an intimidating obstacle to consumer - affordable telecommunication.
2. Operators - they assist in the operations/management of consumer-customer owned last mile fibre and/or mash (2.4 and 5.8 GHz) networks
3 Government - Ministry of Information should ensure the wonderful consumer protection clauses in the ICT policy (and upcoming Information laws) do not end as relics. The implementation strategy has to be theirs. So don't ask me :-)
4. Everyone - to be honest.
Briefest I could get.
/Alex
John Walubengo wrote: Alex,
Plse, to avoid information overload, plse give a preamble (executive summary) of what your links do elaborate in what I believe would be much detail.
It will be much, much more helpful in that you would assist us in internalising the whole idea/model...so back to Mucheru's qtn. How can/should the Consumers as one of the Key stakeholders engage with the others namely, Regulator, Operator, Govt, in the future dispensation (when OFC has been provisioned?).
walu. NB: we shall start on the Closing phase on Monday. I remembered Kenyans (and other African users?) are not active internet users on weekends..
--- Alex Gakuru wrote:
Glad to:
Loss of internet users affects everyone and economic retardation, knowledge society, will be washed away, just like we lost fibre cable in 1995 see Vohra Speech < http://www.isoc.or.ke/speeches/launch_vohra.pdf>
Thus, read my frustrations in the light of the many proposals made officially but nothing has ever been done.
Synopsis:
3 things for now maybe more later (if needed.)
1. Boost IT confidence for otherwise, there will not be any market left for business, no e-government, information society....
You can find them on http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2156/a/22411
The two reports are:
- Policy for the IT society - Recommendations from the members of the IT Policy Strategy Group
An overall document with recommendations on what the government should do. It includes information from the 2nd report...
- Broadband for growth, innovation and competitiveness
In April 2004 the Government´s IT Policy Strategy Group set up a working group on IT infrastructure and broadband. The primary task of the working group has been to support the Strategy Group by working, within the framework of a free market, for futureproof, accessible, competitionneutral, technologyneutral and coherent electronic communications networks, which are capable of meeting the challenges of the future. This report summarises the discussions and proposals.
2. Because Regulator apparently never catchup, then establish consumer complaints portal (something like http://spokane.bbb.org/) - ICT policy provides for consumers to frequently their concern areas ( a pity all our labored official documents were pulled down and replace with a template at www.information.go.ke documents. - Consumers register complaints against businesses at this portal. When the company addresses the issue, the complaint is struck off. governments not allowed to transact with business above certain complaints ratio - Promotes business ethics. - Register members=>Consumer make responsible complaints not malicious to their competitors
3. Regulation.
What is self regulation? - A corporate basement corner "self-regulation" desk or acceptance to complaints, criticism and accepting the impact of one's action to others - Regulator will have a "regulatory" job in this environment - Currently consumer complaints collected by CCK just accumulate dust in their archives and this would be a good way to measure their performance contracts. (Business disputes area addressed in a flash) record. So in a way consumers, will "regulate" the Regulator.
This is just a synopsis let me know if it suffices
Alex
Joseph Mucheru wrote: Alex,
I may have missed you post, but have you proposed an appropriate Consumer/Business/Regulatory structure that you believe will work? It would help to have an idea of what you are proposing as a structure.
Thank you
-- Joseph Mucheru Executive Director mucheru@wananchi.com
From: Alex Gakuru Reply-To: Kenya ICT Action Network - KICTANet Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:36:43 -0800 (PST) To: Cc: Subject: Re: [kictanet] [Kictanet] Existing/Appropriate Regulatory Models for OFC (2days)
Kenya has been profusely bleeding internet users.
In 2005, we had 1.5 million internet users but in Sept 2006, ITU revised the number to 1 million. CCK then urged some of us who raised this concern that they disputed the figure and urgently launched an Internet users study-census on 01 Nov 2006 at Mbagathi. We were all promised to be called back before end December 2006 for study findings. That never happened and January just end.
Two week ago at the World Bank RCIP meeting at the Jacaranda Hotel, the PS in his presentation stated the number of internet users to be 1.25 million.
Question, Going by the PS data, what could be causing internet loss in Kenya?
Eight years after CCK was formed and section 23 and 47 of the communications act introduced, The Regulator is yet to show 1 practical initiative they have ever implemented to protect consumers. Consumer protection, it would appear, is petulant and the law is broken without a blink while the Regulator embarks on situation containment-management, and life goes on.
Is it time for Civil society to divorce itself from over engagement on commercial arrangement discussions between government and business and re-dedicate itself to serving the voiceless?
Will all this fibre talk translate to real consumer cost savings or are they just the usual public marketing of the wonderful world to come, but as usual just in the future to keep hope high?
In the meantime we continue talk on fibre while a third of our internet users are lost.
Alex Gakuru
Rebecca Wanjiku wrote: the question of regulation is tricky but as Kihanya points out, it is going to take a lot of consultations and concessions between government and other stakeholders if the OFC is to work and serve the intended purposes,
True, other countries have deregulated but what do you do in a country like say, Kenya where the anti monopolies commissioner is not in the fore front of addressing issues, am sure many people on the streets may not know the existence of that office.
In the article by Roland Alden that Walu has recommended, he argues that many African govts have been resistant to change and adds that what is needed is regulation liberalization. Maybe thatâs what is needed.
But how do we start talking of deregulation when we canât agree about the Act that will govern some of these issues.
I may not be well versed with the law but am sure with the technological development, there will arise disputes that were not envisaged in our current laws, how do we deal with that within the judicial system, we need an ACT Roland further contends that in some cases, regulators may have ordered a party to fulfill its part of the bargain, but when it failed, the judicial system "rarely provided any meaningful" compensation to the aggrieved party.
Regulation, deregulation, appropriate law, and am sure === message truncated ===>
kictanet mailing list kictanet@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
_____________________________________________________________________________ _______ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited._______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/lkimani%40comnews.co.ke
----------------------------------------- This email was sent using Communicatons Solutions LTD WebMail. " " http://www.accesskenya.com/
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alex.gakuru%40yahoo.com
--------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Please unsubscribe or change your options at http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mucheru%40wananchi.com
participants (8)
-
Alex Gakuru -
alice＠apc.org -
Bill Kagai -
John Walubengo -
joseph kihanya -
Joseph Mucheru -
Lucy Kimani -
Rebecca Wanjiku