Access Session

01 November 2006 - A Main Session on Athens,Greece

Schedule

 Internet Governance Forum 1 November 2006 Access Panel

 Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the
 The Inaugural Meeting of the IGF, in Athens. Although it is largely accurate,
 in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or
 transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings
 at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.

 >>CHAIRMAN MAGLARIS:  Okay, ladies and gentlemen, please be seated. I know the
 weather, for a change, was very nice today. But still, we have some work to do.
 So let's start this session on access. This is obviously a very important
 issue. And as you -- was several times mentioned at this conference, there are
 at this point about one billion worldwide users of the Internet out of six
 billion worldwide population. That makes it one out of six citizens and people
 in the world being connected to the Internet. I come from a country, Greece,
 that has an Internet penetration which is close to this average, a bit higher
 than this average, which could be very comforting. However, I don't want to get
 into the trap of a statistician that says that my head is in an oven, me feet
 are on ice, therefore, on the average, I'm okay. [ Laughter ]

 >>CHAIRMAN MAGLARIS:  My name is Vassilios Maglaris. I'm a professor at the
 national technical university of Athens. I welcome you here today. And let's
 please start on this very interesting session. Our moderator will try to
 orchestrate this panel on very, very tough and difficult questions.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Hello, everybody, ladies and
 gentlemen. My name is Ulysse Gosset. I'm from France. And I belong to the team
 of television station called France 24, which is not on the air yet, but it's a
 new international channel from Paris which is going to be an alternative to
 CNN, BBC, and Al Jazeera. Glad to be here to discuss the important issue of
 access. The bad news is we have five and a half billion people who can't reach
 the Internet. The good news is that the digital divide is reducing. I'm going
 to speak French today. It's important that we should protect linguistic
 diversity. So good afternoon to all of you. The good news is that the digital
 divide is being somewhat reduced now. But the bad news is, it's still pretty
 wide. And that when you look into the details, you see that when we're talking
 about broadband, in particular, the divide is enormous, it's an abyss. 60% of
 Americans and Europeans can have access to broadband. Only 40% of people in
 Asia. And 0.1% of Africans have access. So there is genuine lack of equality in
 access. Nevertheless, from 1994 to 2004, in one decade, the digital divide has
 been reduced by seven. It's dropped from 27 to 7, the divide between the
 developed and developing countries. So things are moving. And they're moving
 thanks to new technology, the development of networks, thanks also to the
 political will to act. So what we're here to discuss today is what
 possibilities exist, what are the issues, the major questions we have to ask
 today, so that we can envisage a future where there will be easier access for
 more people around the globe. We've got a very high-level panel of
 international representatives with us today. And so that the panelists and you,
 the audience, both those here in the room and those on the Internet, can
 communicate together and draw out this list of important questions, I would
 suggest that we start with a presentation, an introduction, from our panelists.
 I will start with our first panelist, Gabriel Adonaylo. He's going to introduce
 himself, he'll tell us who he is. And as all panelists, he will tell us if
 there is one single question, what is the priority point for him on this
 question of access today.

 >>GABRIEL ADONAYLO:  Good afternoon. Well, the moderator has just said, my name
 is Gabriel Adonaylo. I'm from Argentina. And I'm product manager for I.P.
 products in Comsat International. And I'm also chairperson of Internet exchange
 for the Camara Argentina de Internet. I -- I'm wondering today about how
 improving connectivity in Argentina, and abroad as well, to solve problems of
 access.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. If I can move now to our second panelist, Vincent
 Waiswa Bagiire.

 >>VINCENT WAISWA BAGIIRE:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator. My name is Vincent Waiswa
 Bagiire, from Uganda in east Africa. And I work for an institution called the
 Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa, charged
 with increasing the effective participation of African policy-makers in
 international processes such as this one. And my interest here is, how do we
 get independent and transparent regulation that can unbundle monopolies and
 duopolies to create competition and to achieve access in Africa on open access
 basis. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Jim Dempsey now, please.

 >>JIM DEMPSEY:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.
 My name is Jim Dempsey. I'm policy director for the NGO Center for Democracy
 and Technology in Washington, D.C. And I'm also policy director for our Global
 Internet Policy Initiative, GIPI, which is a joint project with the NGO
 internews. And for us, working in developing countries, the major issue is the
 reform of national, legal, and regulatory frameworks to remove barriers to
 Internet development by reducing licensing requirements, by reforming
 telecommunications law mandating interconnection, and otherwise addressing
 barriers to expansion of the networks and access at the national level.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. We now have a panelist from Senegal, Mouhamet
 Diop. Thank you.

 >>MOUHAMET DIOP:  Well, let me respect tradition as well. We've got
 interpreters with us, so I'm going to speak French. I'm called Mouhamet Diop,
 and I'm from Senegal. And I am the Director-General of a group called Next, but
 I'm also Secretary-General of ISOC Senegal in civil society, and at
 governmental action level, I'm head of GRAPP, which is head of new technology
 under an accelerated growth strategy. What I am particularly interested in
 today is the question of interconnectivity, but from the point of view of
 differentiating between the historic model we've seen thus far, where all
 countries in Africa, everyone is seen as clients, whereas in other countries,
 we've got these peering approaches, where it's a different approach completely.
 Africa is committed to this diversification between the bodies, which means
 that in each country, a fee is paid for access to Internet, whereas if there
 was concerted access, it would trigger an economic system. So we should be seen
 as a continent as such, not as millions of different users. So we have one
 institution now which is on an equal setting with all of us around the world. 
 And we think it's high time things started to move. I'm also interested in the
 question of adaptability of interfaces. When you talk about access, we forget
 the fact that most people are -- a lot of people in Africa are illiterate. And
 we tend to lose sight of the fact that the tools we have now are going to have
 to be adapted if our people are going to be in a position to use this
 technology.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. The next panelist is George Greve.

 >>GEORGE GREVE:  Thank you very much, I thank all of you for being here. My
 name is George Greve. I am president of the Free Software Foundation Europe. We
 are a pan-European NGO, a nongovernmental organization, dedicated to all
 aspects of free software. And our central issue, really, is, and the central
 question that brought me here is how access to the digital age is determined by
 software freedom, ultimately. And I hope that we will be able to discuss that.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Hugo Lueders, please.

 >>HUGO LUEDERS:  Ladies and gentlemen, it's great to see here all of you,
 despite the sunshine outside. My name is Hugo Lueders, and I'm the
 Secretary-General of the European e-Skills Certification Consortium for eSkills
 improvability and competence development. I will discuss by priority the
 eSkills gap. And as everybody knows, the world doesn't stop at technology, but
 beyond access to technologies, there's access to content, access to knowledge,
 access to training, access to certification. And at the end of the whole access
 value chain, there is placement to employment. And I will hopefully have some
 time to address all these different issues. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Professor Milton Mueller, please.

 >>MILTON MUELLER:  I'm Milton Mueller, I'm a professor at the Syracuse
 University School of Information Studies and a partner in the Internet
 Governance Project. I believe very strongly that the key to closing the
 infrastructure gap is the mobilization of local capital and the organization of
 capital investment in the national policy framework. And I hope we have an
 opportunity to talk about that.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Michuki Mwangi, please.

 >>MICHUKI MWANGI:  Thank you. My name's Michuki Mwangi. I come from Kenya. I
 run the Kenyan ccTLD, K NIC.  And also president of AFTLD. In my opinion, the
 solution to the access issue lies at a national level, whether developed or
 developing countries. And I believe that we need to have -- come up with
 creative, innovative, and inexpensive ways at the national level to improve on
 access.  And this lies within stable infrastructure and also distributing cost
 services for there to be improved access to these services. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Mr. Park from Korea.

 >>KISHIK PARK:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator. I am from Korea, and I am in charge
 of IPv6 forum, Korea, and currently I am serving as the chairman of ITU-T study
 group 3. And my question is, how can we make or how can you harmonize and
 standardize a various way of using, providing, sometimes charging Internet
 usage to make this very important tool of Internet as globally available a
 means. That is my key question. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Sam Paltridge.

 >>SAM PALTRIDGE:  I'm Sam Paltridge from the OECD. I work in the area of the
 OECD that deals with policy and regulation, particularly as it concerns
 infrastructure and infrastructure development. I guess my key question is how
 we can further develop a very successful model that already works with the
 Internet and expand that and take down to the -- the barriers to that
 expansion. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Craig Silliman, please.

 >>CRAIG SILLIMAN:  Thank you very much. Good afternoon. It's nice to be here
 with you today. My name is Craig Silliman. I'm the deputy general counsel at
 Verizon business, which is one of the largest global carriers. In that
 capacity, I have responsibility for all legal and regulatory issues outside of
 the United States, which includes not just dealing with regulatory issues, but
 negotiation of all of our interconnection agreements, peering, and otherwise,
 internationally, and network expansion agreements. The number one factor in
 improving quality and price of access to networks is competition. So the top
 issue here for us today, I believe, is, why is there not more competition for
 access in many countries around the world? How do we identify the barriers to
 competition and how do we resolve those barriers? Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Parminder Jeet Singh.

 >>PARMINDER JEET SINGH:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator, and thank you all for being
 here. I'm Parminder Jeet Singh. I'm from a nongovernmental organization based
 in Bangalore. We do work on projects and policy engagements in areas of ICT for
 development and information society issues. And one issue which I would like to
 see addressed centrally here today is that when we talk about Internet access,
 we cannot look at only telecom access in isolation. And I think it comes back
 along with issues of software, hardware, content, services, applications. And
 this superstructure and infrastructure growth has to go together as a chicken
 and egg story. And it's -- and we often try to, you know, just extrapolate the
 telephone model, where the issue is probably just weighing a telephone line or
 making wireless available and it's very simple and low-cost treatment at the
 end of the wire which can be used. And the voice services, everybody knows how
 to use it. And we tried to extend that model into Internet access. But Internet
 access is about services development, about health services, education
 services, banking. And under those -- until those services develop, we cannot
 lead the development of Internet telecom access. And when we look at Internet
 access in this way, there is a very strong implication, a policy implication,
 of it, where the public expenditure becomes a much bigger part than when you
 are looking at it only as a telecom access issue. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. A lady now from Europe, Maria Simon.

 >>MARIA SIMON:  I'm the chairperson of ANTEL, which is a state
 telecommunications company, one of the few in the world, I would imagine. And
 deals with questions of competence. This question of access needs to be
 approached from various angles:  Technology, the physical access on one hand,
 including national and international and also fees and how they swing in with
 the level of income in the country. Also terminal access. You've also got the
 question of education, training people to use access. And, finally, national
 content creation. I hope we can discuss these issues.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Bill Woodcock, please. Excuse me, Jonne Soininen.

 >>JONNE SOININEN:  Good afternoon, everyone. I'm not Bill Woodcock, who is
 sitting next to me. I'm from Nokia, from Finland. Nokia is a manufacturer of
 network infrastructure, wireless network infrastructure, and also a
 manufacturer of mobile phones and terminals that are used to access even the
 Internet over the wireless links or mobile wireless networks. My interest here
 is to see what -- how we can use mobile wireless infrastructure and mobile
 wireless technologies and discuss about that to get access to the people who
 are not currently connected. And this includes technologies new and old. And
 I'm also interested to see that the -- discuss about the issues of regulation
 to see that there's a good environment where a sustainable model can be built
 to provide access to everybody. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. And now the last panelist, Bill Woodcock.

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  Thank you, and good afternoon. To those of you who don't know
 me, you may have gathered by now, I'm Bill Woodcock, the research director for
 Packet Clearinghouse. We're an NGO that supports critical Internet
 infrastructure around the world. I believe that the most important issue
 confronting access to the Internet at this point is monopolization of the local
 loop. I think we have a decreasing number of companies that are sitting on
 antiquated copper at this point. And I would really like to see the local loop,
 the right of way, opened up to access by those who would put in new fiber
 networks. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Well, thank you to everyone. We've got 15 panelists, and it
 covers a very broad range, very high-level panel, to get the discussions going
 and look into this question of access. As you know, this is an interactive
 forum.  There are four people in the team helping me to collect questions from
 the room.  Matthew Shears, who is here.  George Sadowsky, Raul Echeberria, and
 Peter Hellmonds. We also have the possibility of interacting with the outside
 world with people who are following the forum on the Internet.  And Jeremy
 Markham, our blogger, will be taking the questions from the Internet. It's all
 ready, we are all set, we have two and a half hours ahead of us to focus on
 what the genuine issues are. But we saw some pretty dramatic figures beforehand
 about this divide.  One million people connected, five billion not.  And I
 wanted to ask one of the members of the panel how many years you feel it will
 take to reduce this Digital Divide in a clear way and get 2 billion connected,
 for example, so that access can be easier.  How long will it take to get to
 that figure of 2 billion connected? Hugo, have you got any idea about this? 
 What do you think?

 >>HUGO LUEDERS:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator.  We are very careful with precise
 figures but I can share some data with you. Industry has heard the Tunis call
 for capacity building as the most important, single most important
 cross-cutting issue which was addressed at the Tunis event. And we have stepped
 in, have moved forward.  We cannot wait anymore that E.U. member state
 governments finally bring their acts together on a European level.  So we have
 moved forward to have a substantial inroad on the 20 million unemployed people
 we have in Europe. We are building E.U. chapter members, working together with
 a multitude of nongovernmental organizations, nonprofit organization, public
 agencies, community colleges of all kind.  And we are quite sure that over this
 period, we have defined for five years in Europe, that we will have a
 substantial inroad, and we will reduce the skills gap in Europe. We have
 presented -- Just one more sentence to that.  We have presented this project to
 other parts of the world.  Myself, I have spoken about this issue in Jakarta. 
 They were most interested in this.  They have simply asked, "When are you
 coming here and doing the same thing here?"  Because they have exactly the same
 need. So we will try to roll this out, a real global program.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET: Jim Dempsey, what do  you think about this?  How long do you
 think it will take to reduce the divide -- we saw this has been divided by
 seven over a decade -- to get from one billion connected now to the two
 billion, how many years is it going to take from the NGOs point of view?

 >>JIM DEMPSEY:  Well, I think that the next 500 million will be easy because
 they will all come from China, which has certainly a dedicated effort to
 develop the Internet. I think that the other 500 million of the second billion
 will be spread around the world.  I'm afraid to say that I worry particularly
 about Africa being left behind here. I do think that the wireless technologies,
 including wireless broadband offer perhaps the greatest promise in that regard,
 both in terms of the last mile. So I think the second billion, we are certainly
 going to see a sharp curve, and then probably a long tail to get closer to the
 third billion. But I think that the -- the hard problem, in my view, is Africa.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Well, the floor is always open for the audience, as you know.
  So I'm turning to you now.  You can ask questions of the panel at any moment.
 So are there any questions? Yes? If you could stand up, please, and introduce
 yourself.  Give us your name and tell us who you are asking the question to. If
 you could stand up, please. So this is the first question from the floor.

 >>MALCOLM HARBOUR:  I am Malcolm Harbour, member of the European Parliament.  I
 just wanted to add to a question, and Jim Dempsey spoke as I was writing this
 because he was the first person to mention wireless.  So the first question I
 would like to ask the panelists, in terms of the next -- I accept his view
 about 500 million for China but let's say another billion beyond that.  What
 proportion of those are going to be enabled by wireless connections of
 different wireless devices?  Will that spread of wireless devices require
 different approaches or similar approaches in terms of access rules and
 regulations? And finally, I think in response to your neighbor, who is sitting
 next to you, Mr. Diop, who said about the problems of access for people who
 don't have literacy or people skills, again, do wireless devices or next
 generation wireless devices free users from some of those constraints, so they
 really will be one of the keys to delivering the connectivity that we want to
 see in enabling those citizens in the future?

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you.  Professor Mueller, please, on this question. 
 Back to the panel.

 >>MILTON MUELLER:  Yes, I don't want to get into a game of predicting when
 something is going to happen.  I think what is more important is the point
 raised by the last question which is how does the nature of the technology
 affect the possibilities for expansion. So the point I made in my opening was
 that it's all about the mobilization of local capital and open entry into
 markets so that people can respond to these needs without having to get
 approval from governments in a top-down fashion.  And in that respect wireless
 dramatically changes the nature of the complexion.  And if certain things
 happen right at the standardization level and the spectrum allocation level, we
 can see very dramatic progress because wireless allows the much smaller
 investments to be made, while retaining certain kinds of connectivity,
 intercompatibility be. For example, unlicensed spectrum allows people to enter
 the market with new kinds of equipment without having to get licenses.  That's
 very important. It allows people to create local kinds of connectivity. One
 point I want to -- a question I raised to the other panelists is I heard a lot
 of talk about regulating the local loop or requiring interconnection.  Clearly,
 you can't regulate a loop if there is no loop.  And for many parts of the
 world, the question is not how do we regulate the local loop.  It's how do we
 build a local loop. And frequently you can build obstacles to the creation of
 infrastructure if you focus on exporting western models which presume a
 monopoly, universally covered infrastructure and you are trying to regulate
 access to it to allow competitors to enter, you have a completely different
 problem when there is no local loop and you have to build one.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you, and on this issue of the local loops, maybe I
 could turn to our friend in Senegal, Mouhamet Diop.  What do you think about
 this?

 >>MOUHAMET DIOP:  Thank you.  What we've seen over recent years in terms of
 Internet development is that there has been a whole change in paradigm, people
 who worked in developing Internet in Africa were the ISPs, Internet service
 providers.  That is now changing and the new players we have seen pushing for
 Internet development are telephony operators who have a lot of cash, who have a
 lot of money.  And this brings me back to what Vincent was saying.  He was
 saying that we needed investment capital. But mobile phones have proven that
 viability of telecom investment is at stake.  And they are now mobilizing funds
 to push for Internet development through the mobile, from the mobile side. But
 we have it take an overall view of this.  We're not only talking about an issue
 within a given country. Look at Africa as a continent, a whole continent. 
 Access for operators doesn't apply only to one single country. Let me give you
 an example to illustrate what I am saying. Somitel is a subsidiary of France
 Telecom, and it now provides internet access to more than four other countries
 using sat 3.  But all these countries pay for the telecom connection -- the
 land transit in other words, to access the loop -- but they also pay for access
 to Internet through local transit in France. So all this is going out of Africa
 for a service which remains in Africa.  And that's something which should give
 us food for thought. We are in a worse situation as introductors for all the
 other continents.  We shouldn't have to pay any more to connect to the global
 network, because, you know, it's a question, a line of logic of peering.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  On this point specifically, we are talking about cell
 telephony and two and a half billion cell telephones very quickly, very soon. 
 And to be able to connect to Internet with mobile telephony.  So I now turn on
 this to somebody who specializes in this field.  Jonne, Jonne Soininen, can you
 come in on this and talk about some of the role played by this particular type
 of link up.  Thank you.

 >>JONNE SOININEN:  Yes, thank you very much.  And I would like to address this.
 So like you said, we have now about 2.5 billion users, mobile phone users, and
 we are coming close to 3 billion soon in just a couple of years. This means
 that half of the people have access to telephony already.  But this doesn't do
 much for Internet yet. However, I think that this can be used as a basis of
 providing, also, Internet access.  The same technology that is used to provide
 the mobile access can be also used to provide Internet access. However, this is
 not at broadband speed.  But I would think that it is better to start with
 lower band if broadband is not available in that area yet just to get access to
 the Internet. In addition, there is, in the future, and also already what is
 available in developed countries as technologies on mobile wireless networks,
 broadband technologies that can give same kind of data rates as the DSL
 networks.  And those can be also used to provide, then, better access in
 developing countries.  And I think they will also play a major role to connect
 the people to the Internet.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much. I turn to the room.  Willie Currie has a
 question.  Are you there?

 >>WILLIE CURRIE:  My name is Willie Currie from the Association for Progressive
 Communications.  I wonder, just to pick up on one point, whether it is a
 problem of the local loop.  Rather that it may well be that it's a backbone
 infrastructure that is missing, and that if the backbone were there, then
 creative solutions could be found through wireless broadband put in the local
 loop.  And then the issue that I raise is, well, infrastructure is one thing. 
 Then there's also the matter of the costs of international Internet
 connectivity.  And we have heard that there might be solutions possible by
 completing the communication policy reform in developing countries, that there
 should be Internet exchange points. But what I would like to ask is, is there a
 probability for an international agreement on reducing the cost of Internet --
 international Internet connectivity through a body such as the WTO?

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Well, I think that Bill Woodcock might attempt an
 initial approach on this.

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  There were several points there, and I think the two main
 ones were about the local loop and whether it's really the local loop that's
 the problem or the international backbone.  And number two, whether there's a
 role for, say, intergovernmental or international agreements with regard to
 connectivity to the international backbone. So the important thing to realize
 here is that there is no international backbone.  The Internet is made up of
 many, many, many Internet service providers in different parts of the world. 
 Some of those happen to be located in the United States, or Europe.  Some of
 them happen to be located in Africa.  They all connect to each other on a
 peer-to-peer basis. And those connections tend to be very large.  There are
 many, many, many terabits of connectivity at that level. The real problem, I
 think, is in the local loop. We have, in some of the most developed countries
 in the world, we have local loop connectivity that is less than a megabit.  You
 know, in the United States, for instance, we're falling, every year, further
 and further behind other countries. This is because the local loop is typically
 controlled by an individual company.  And they have -- as long as that's true,
 they have very little incentive to upgrade it. I think that the question of
 whether there's room for intergovernmental action in mandating how Internet
 service providers connect with each other internationally, I think you have to
 ask yourself what form will that take?  Are you going to tell one private
 company that it needs to bear the cost of international transport on behalf of
 another private company simply because of the country of incorporation?  These
 are not intergovernmental matters if these are not governmentally owned
 incumbent phone companies. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Craig Silliman, do you think that you could speak to this
 issue on regulation?  Do you have a view on this?  Might there be international
 agreements and how would that be formed?  Is it realistic?  What's your view?

 >>CRAIG SILLIMAN:  Absolutely. First, I agree strongly with almost everything
 that Bill just said.  I take exception with one thing.  As someone who
 currently lives in the UK but used to live in the U.S. where I had a 15 megabit
 Internet connection into my house, I actually think that there's been a great
 model in the U.S. for competition and upgrading the local loop, largely because
 of competition between the cable industry and the telecom industry. I only wish
 I had that sort of connectivity currently in the UK, and I think most of us
 would anywhere in the world. I think on the international cost issue, I think a
 couple things to keep in mind.  First, we should not lose sight of the fact
 that the Internet, as Bill rightly pointed out, is a network of networks.  And
 in many ways, I would argue that it is far and away the most successful
 interconnection model in the history of any networked industry. In a little
 over ten years, purely through private commercial negotiations, you have over
 20,000 autonomous systems, individual networks around the world, that are
 directly and indirectly connected to one another.  Which means that I can start
 an ISP in any country in the world, connect it up to a network and be able to
 reach any site, any e-mail address anywhere in the world. When you think about
 it, that is an extraordinary accomplishment, something that probably could not
 have been architected or engineered by any single group or body, no matter how
 well meaning or foresighted. The cost of the international interconnection
 links I think bring a couple things to bear. First of all, I think we need to
 look at the model there, and again I echo Bill's comment that the Internet is a
 network of networks, which means when you are buying interconnectivity on a
 global basis, you have a choice of literally dozens of providers in a market
 that is intensely competitive.  We have seen prices drop in this market by over
 90% over the last couple of years which is almost unheard of in any industry
 for any service or product.  So I would argue this is a market that is
 characterized by intense competition and prices that are moving very close to
 cost. The comments that you hear, for instance my colleague commented on
 traffic from one African country to another that transits through Paris, I do
 agree that when you look at that it seems illogical and you identify a problem.
  But I would suggest to you that the problem is not the cost of the
 international bandwidth, but, rather, the cost of the domestic access. What you
 are seeing there is an economic incentive to route traffic internationally
 because the international links are actually cheaper than domestic. If you go
 back five or six years in Europe, traffic use -- the majority of Internet
 traffic between Paris and London used to transit through New York.  And that
 was because the circuits between London and New York and Paris and New York
 were cheaper than those between London and Paris. When Europe liberalized in
 1998, lease line prices immediately dropped, the traffic flows immediately
 shifted removing those international transit costs from the European network
 providers.  Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much. In the room there is a very specific
 question from Africa, from Alex Corenthin.  Are you there, Alex?  Could you
 speak to the microphone and give us the African view.

 >>ALEX CORENTHIN:  Alex Corenthin is my name, and I am from ISOC Senegal.
 Referring to access, the issue of access and what happens in the rural world,
 don't forget that a high proportion of the population in Africa is actually
 rural population without any sort of network linkup.  They only have a minimum
 service which they have. And that comes under the national regulation of each
 country. But we do have this target population which is not being served and
 doesn't have access to technology because of the economy aspects which have to
 be taken into account in terms of providing this technology to that population.
 So my question is, how can we ultimately arrive at a situation where you solve
 the issue, thinking, perhaps, a little of the model which was taken for mobile
 telephony.  There are certain limits there, because an African cannot, in fact,
 pay for a mobile telephone.  And we now have this technology growing. We need
 to give technology a chance as well.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much.  Perhaps I can turn to Gabriel on this. 
 Perhaps you can come in on that.

 >>GABRIEL ADONAYLO:  Well, basically, taking up this question, perhaps I can
 give you a specific example of what has happened in Latin America. Because we
 do have zones and areas of Latin America which are rural areas, where there's
 no real network infrastructure.  So what is happening in the area where you
 have, between Brazil and Colombia, a network which has been financed by the
 state, so you have a universal service, it is called.  And that is a way of
 establishing some sort of infrastructure in areas which are not financially
 viable. So it's an infrastructure which would be made up of users who don't
 really have the resources, and they are areas which are really economically
 disadvantaged. SHSAC {sp?} one of them in Brazil and this is a service to the
 citizen with thousand of access points where citizens can actually have access
 to educational material and other sorts of technical information.  e-learning
 possibilities and other implications. Brazil we also have another program,
 Compartele is its name, and it does have also several thousand access points
 where you can have access to the service.  And a lot has been said about
 wireless technology, but we do have broadband access possibilities here where
 you have this infrastructure in place.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much.  Perhaps we could move to our Korean
 friend on this, on the same question, please.

 >>KISHIK PARK:  Thank you very much, Mr. Moderator. Let me explain a very short
 story of Korea.  In Korea, already more than 71% of Korean people, they are
 using the Internet daily, and also more than 70% of household, they are
 connected to the broadband Internet. But some of the panelists already
 indicated competition is the best way to solve that kind of access problem. 
 But I don't think in that way, because I believe this Internet tool should be
 treated as food or housing.  Because Internet there is not just a means to
 communicate our ideas or something like that.  This is kind of daily
 infrastructure for every citizen.  And it will be in many countries in the
 future years. So we think about some collaboration before competition.  If we
 emphasize competition only, in that case, some of African colleague indicated,
 many world citizens, they cannot pay for this very, very convenient and useful
 tool. So it does mean, actually, inaccessibility. So we should think about the
 practical affordability or accessibility for Internet usage.  That is very
 important point. We cannot discuss any kind of new technologies to give us some
 very convenient access without thinking of price or cost.  That's my very short
 remark. Thank you [ Applause ]

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much.  On this same subject, Maria Simon, head
 of the Uruguayan telephone service.

 >>MARIA SIMON:  Thank you.  I would like to refer specifically to several
 points here. First of all, technology, whereby you can have access as a user. 
 And then when it's talked about the various loops here and the local loops. 
 But in Uruguay for example, the majority of broadband technology is through
 loops.  And given that this infrastructure is on the basis of very good
 technology, you can, in fact, have good access to this broadband possibility.
 Now, in those few areas where you cannot have access, you have Wi-Fi technology
 available, and also linked up to cellular possibilities. And that's all well
 and good, but we must bear in mind here the concept of how mobile telephony can
 really actually reach each and every citizen at whatever level.  That's
 important, because we really need to get to people who are economically
 speaking in a backward situation as well. The user really does not care whether
 it's Wi-Fi, local loops or wi-max.  So what the user is interested in is the
 actual cost, the cost to access this technology.  So in this sense, we do have
 very clearly different cases between the different countries, and the
 interconnectivity is important for those who pay.  And perhaps we ought to say
 here that telephony does that a convention where, in fact, each country pays
 for half the access but, otherwise, in smaller countries where you don't really
 have that access possibility, it does have implications for them.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much. I turn to the room, because Pierre
 Dandjinou has a question. I think he's with us. I think -- yes, if he's here,
 please do come forward. The role of the private sector, you were asking, in
 terms of access possibilities. Can you perhaps submit your question to us and
 please introduce yourself. Thank you very much.

 >>PIERRE DANDJINOU:  Pierre Dandjinou is my name. I'm from Africa as well. I'd
 like to thank you very much. But my question is to the panelist as to the role
 that some of the local private enterprises might undertake. One does see that
 the private sector is referred to often on the international level. But we also
 have local private enterprises. How can we perhaps move ahead in order not to
 reduce them simply to becoming sellers of equipment and perhaps you can give us
 some sort of example of success stories here in terms of distribution of such
 facilities at a local level.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Sam Paltridge, perhaps I can hand over to you, OECD.

 >>SAM PALTRIDGE:  Thank you, Mr. Moderator. It's a very good question. I'm glad
 you raised the role of the private sector. I think I very much agree with those
 panelists that have emphasized competition and the role it can play in building
 access. And the question asked for a positive example in that area. And I think
 you might remember who won the Nobel Peace Prize this year, the founder of the
 Grameen Bank, which provided a microcredit scheme in rural areas in Bangladesh.
 Now those of you who know Bangladesh know that it has one of the lowest GDP per
 capitas in the world. And where they went to serve were the areas where the
 incumbent telecommunication carrier did not want to serve, said was uneconomic
 to serve. And Grameen Bank went in there, Grameen Telephone went in there and
 provided telephone service and provided a local entrepreneurial model where
 village telephone ladies provided service, where the incumbent monopolist would
 not provide. And they did that in a country that has, I would say, one of the
 worst interconnection regimes in the world, because there was no settlement
 payments that went to that telephone company, Grameen, to provide that service.
 So the point I would make is, if you would open up the market, if you give
 people a chance, you will find new ideas, new ways to provide service, ways to
 take advantage of the type of innovation that some of the panelists, like Nokia
 and so forth, would provide the tools. And the first thing you need to do is
 get a commercial core network built out, with competitive principles, and then
 the government can, in an economical way, provide connectivity to schools and
 libraries and health centers and so forth. But if you try and put the horse --
 the cart before the horse, if you try and do a universal service type buildout
 from day one without that commercial support already being there, it will be
 too expensive.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Very quickly, please. Craig Silliman.

 >>CRAIG SILLIMAN:  Very quickly, just to add to Sam's perspective, from the
 private sector perspective, there are business people, entrepreneurs in every
 country in the world that are constantly looking for every day constantly
 looking for business opportunities. What we hear from this panel and the
 audience is that there are opportunities and needs that are not being met.
 Those are business opportunities. If those business opportunities are not being
 filled, we have to ask ourselves, what are the barriers that are getting in the
 way, how do we remove those barriers.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Maria Simon, very quickly.

 >>MARIA SIMON:  Well, I just wanted to give you a few examples as concerns what
 has been done in terms of public association in Paraguay.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  We'll come back to the examples later on in the second
 section, if we may.

 >>MARIA SIMON:  Yes. I do agree with that local industry certainly can help on
 this. Thank you.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  I think it's important that we ought to perhaps have from our
 Indian panelist here some information as to what happens with local loops and
 local capital. Can you perhaps, from your point of view from Bangladesh, could
 you tell us what happens in terms of local access by local communities which
 don't necessarily have the I.P. technologies available.

 >>PARMINDER JEET SINGH:  I will have to pull together a couple of points which
 all go together and impact this issue. I made a point earlier that we tried to
 take the telephone model and extrapolate it to the Internet. I like to hear
 examples. And would just like to say that I think the local entrepreneurship
 model is very important. We know Grameen Bank example.  Telephone is different
 from Internet. This is the point I have been trying to make. Telephone has been
 around in Europe for decades now. You didn't call it "information society"
 then. You called it "information society" when Internet came in, when
 Internet-based services came in. It's a completely different ball game. We
 tried to extend the telecom paradigm, and tried to say that all the
 Internet-based services, the way we access services, the way we do banking, the
 way we collaborate, social networking, everything will change. And the same
 when the telephone was brought to everyone by a private-sector paradigm. And I
 have a problem with it. I will give you an example from my own village. I often
 go to a villages have from a relatively well off or average well off part of
 the country. And one day, I accidentally found out that there was Internet in
 the dialup access. There was dialup access to the Internet. I never knew about
 it because nobody talked about it. I took my laptop and tried it. And it was
 very good. I could do video conferencing over it. But no one in the village
 knew about it. When I tried to tell people about it, they heard, and they found
 it's novel, and then that's where it stopped. People don't use Internet. I
 would like to hear an example where people have actually used Internet in that
 manner. And I think in this aspect, we need a lot of public investment. And I
 support my Korean friend's point that we have to take it as the same kind of
 infrastructure the way we invested into education. All the developed countries
 invested into public education many decades ago because they knew it was
 central for economic and social growth. I say this is also key to growth. It
 can lead the village. But wherever there is a gap, we can't keep waiting for
 the markets to go in and public investment should go in. That's the point.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Fine. That's very interesting. Before we give the floor back
 to the panelists, let us have something from Jeremy Malcolm from the floor.
 What are the questions that we have from the Internet, Jeremy.

 >> JEREMY MALCOLM:  We have six people in a chat room talking -- listening into
 this discussion by the webcast. One of them is Michael Nelson. And he has a
 question for the panel. I'll just read it out. Craig Silliman is exactly right.
 The genius of the Internet is that it is a network of networks, built using
 open standards. Universities, government agencies, companies, and NGOs can all
 build a network and plug it into the global Internet. Unfortunately, new
 government regulations for data retention and filtering, for instance, could
 make this much more difficult and expensive. Furthermore, some proposals for
 next-generation network standards would also hinder this end-to-end nature of
 the Net. In five years, do you think it will be as easy as it is today to plug
 private networks into the global Internet?

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Quickly, answer.

 >>CRAIG SILLIMAN:  I think Mike identified it perfectly right. I think he's
 identified the dangers. I will take the optimistic stance and say in five
 years, it will not be harder, but I'm counting on the fact that the problems
 he's identified will be resolved and the governments will do the right thing
 and not hindering the Internet with unneeded regulation.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you. Hugo.

 >>HUGO LUEDERS:  Just quick point. If you speak about access improvement on a
 local level, I think you have to be more precise. What you're talking about
 here is about technology access improvement on local level. And, hopefully,
 we're coming back later on to the real issues beyond technology access. There
 are the real challenges for the Internet, society we are facing. There will be
 tremendous changes in the whole domain of education, training, work force
 development, et cetera. And hopefully I'm coming back to that later on.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Mouhamet Diop.

 >>MOUHAMET DIOP:  Thank you, very much, moderator. The question in terms of the
 private sector, if I may just go back to that, it's a very, very short answer
 to that. But I do differ on one point with the person who spoke to this issue,
 saying that the (inaudible) can only come from the private sector, which is
 going to regulate the rural problem in terms of regionalization in Africa. We
 have to understand that in African, this is a very special case, and we have
 been able to observe that the private sector cannot take on board directly the
 needs for establishing regional needs. Same thing for the rural level. Because
 these are not financially viable ventures. So the governments would have to be
 involved in some way. And as concerns regional infrastructure, no
 telecommunications operator will be interested, basically, in what's happening
 in terms of interconnectivity within the country. This is important, because
 there's very high potential there, and you yourselves said that you have, in
 fact, a very high percentage of the population involved. So there is this
 tremendous potential there. So why should you go into a very remote area,
 whereas you could act within the smaller areas? So the companies have called
 for, say out only at the city level, where they can have a maximum cost-benefit
 result. So the government would have to take on board implementing and
 establishing the infrastructure, and also have perhaps PPRs established there,
 too.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much. Jim, perhaps on the same subject, very
 quickly.

 >>JIM DEMPSEY:  Yes. I think I would propose what I think is a very simple test
 for the questions that we're considering now. That is, what is the role of
 regulation? And what is the role of government? And I think the simple test
 that I would propose is, does the regulation or the intervention of government
 expand access and innovation? Or does it constrain access and innovation? And
 in some respects, the removal of regulation, the removal of licensing
 requirements can open up, expand access by permitting more innovation at the
 edges of the network. We're seeing globally, in both developing and developed
 countries, somewhat of a recent trend towards government intervention or
 regulation that is actually intended to limit innovation and to limit the
 expansion of access.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you very much. A question from Juan Fernandez from Cuba
 in the room. Are you there, Juan, in the room? I can see you. Yes, there you
 are. Thank you very much on this issue. Introduce yourself, please.

 >>JUAN FERNANDEZ:  Thank you very much, moderator. Juan Fernandez is my name.
 And I am, in fact -- I work in the informatics and communication industry in
 Cuba. And I was a member of the working group on Internet governance of the
 United Nations. And I am a member of the Study Group 3 of ITU as to the
 connection costs issue and member of the Strategic Council of Global Alliance
 for Development in the United Nations. Now, before I actually submit my
 question, I'd like to remind you here that the main obstacles to access to
 Internet is hunger, lack of education, discrimination, and exclusion. So those
 who are ill, those who are hungry, those who are illiterate, and those who are
 excluded from everything also would be excluded from new technologies and from
 the Internet. Also, poverty and underdevelopment, to which a large part of
 humanity is, in fact, condemned, has an effect on the basic infrastructures in
 place, such as drinkable water, utilities, such as electricity, and also the
 social conditions within which people live. So I do think that the necessary
 first step in order to improve and democratize Internet is to try to eliminate
 those obstacles I mentioned. But once the underdeveloped countries have
 undertaken this tremendous effort and sacrifice to create the minimum
 conditions for them to be able to connect up to the Internet, then they find
 themselves confronted with a situation whereby they have to pay for the
 connection up to the Internet at the same level as the developed countries,
 even though this might also be a channel used by users in the developed
 countries, which means that, as has already been mentioned before, you can have
 technical means whereby you can do away with this paradox. And these poor
 countries seem to be financing Internet by this system. So my question is to
 this specifically, what can we do to change the situation in favor of those who
 are less advantaged so far? Because it must be said that to one of the replies
 here that was given in terms of reducing cost, because costs are, in fact,
 dropping, but we have to see how we can in fact try to not only reduce costs,
 but to make sure that we can share the costs. And I don't know whether the WTO
 can be called in on this as somebody said or whether we could call on the ITU
 or what we could do.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Well, before we go any further, the question on Cuba -- for
 Cuba. What is the number of people who are connected the on Internet in Cuba
 today?

 >>JUAN FERNANDEZ:  What?

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Today, how many people in Cuba, what percentage of the
 citizens are connected to the Internet in terms of the overall population it
 might be interesting to get some figures.

 >>JUAN FERNANDEZ:  Well, I really didn't want to talk about Cuba, because I
 didn't want to politicize this forum too much. But you asked me, so I'll tell
 you. As an awful a lot of you will be aware, Cuba is a small country. Fifty
 years ago, it underwent an economic war waged on the by the most economically
 powerful country in the world. Now, look at Google, for example,. If we try and
 get onto Google, we're told that we can't have access, we can't buy software
 from Microsoft. We don't have access to fiberoptics. All of our Internet over
 the last few years has had to go through satellite channels. And they're very
 expensive. And what we are doing about this, because the cost of connection is
 very high, we have social appropriation of the Internet.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  I was asking about the percentage of Cubans who were
 connected.

 >>JUAN FERNANDEZ:  We don't count this in terms of individuals who, depending
 on the money in their pocket, cannot have access. People have connection to
 Internet, wherever they are, in the mountains, in the schools. More than a
 thousand schools have only maybe one pupil, because when we say 100% in Cuba,
 we talk about 100%. So a lot of these schools have to put up solar panels so
 they can have connection. 100% of our universities have Internet. All of our
 research centers and companies that need it can have Internet access. We don't
 prioritize individual use of Internet, not because we don't want that; it's
 because we can't, because we don't have the access, the network, because of the
 embargo imposed on us by the United States. But thank you for the question. I
 hope I've answered it. If you need further explanations, I'm sure I can give
 you them.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Well, we've gone beyond the first hour of our discussions. I
 think this has been very interesting.  And it's always interesting to have
 specific examples about Internet access. So in daily reality, what's going on.
 Before I give the floor to a couple of members of the panel, let me put the
 question first. In their countries, in their daily activities, what examples
 can they give of what they've been able to do to encourage Internet access, or
 examples of what they're trying to do but didn't work, what were they not able
 to do. Bill Woodcock asked for the floor. And then we're going to deal -- hear
 from the panelists and see what they have to say.

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  Actually, I was hoping to respond to the question about Cuba.
 Shall I do that?

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Please go ahead. But I just wanted to let you know that I
 wanted to ask this question. And I would like -- in fact, if each panelist
 could say in his own country what is the access today to Internet. I could tell
 you, in France, for example, in Paris, you have 125% access in Paris. But if
 you go down to the countryside, you go down to 50% access. Even in the
 developed countries, we have our own difficulties. So it's very interesting to
 have a view. Please, your answer to Cuba.

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  Let me preface this with, first of all, an apology for my
 government's longstanding policies. I'm from Berkeley, California, and as many
 of you who are familiar with the politics in the United States know, this means
 that I am pretty much 100% for Cuba with regards to the embargo and so forth.
 Now, with that preface, let me answer the question about what percentage of
 Cubans are connected to the Internet. Remember that the Internet is an
 end-to-end model. Zero percent of Cubans are connected to the Internet. The
 Cuban government operates an incumbent phone company which maintains a Web
 cache. Cubans who wish to use the Internet browse the government Web cache.
 They do not have unrestricted access to the Internet. And the question about
 whether there is an inequality in Cuban access to the global Internet, ask
 yourself whether a Cuban Internet service provider would face any challenges in
 connecting to a network in the United States or in Europe. And the answer is
 that, no, these are unregulated markets. They would face exactly the same costs
 as anyone anywhere else in the world. Whereas an American or British or French
 Internet service provider wishing to sell Internet access in Cuba would find
 themselves precluded from doing so by government regulation. So at that level,
 there's a basic incompatibility between heavy government regulation and the
 free market model upon which the Internet is built. And I understand that this
 is a choice of each country, and I don't make a value judgment about that,
 simply stating that the Internet has come into being in one environment, and it
 doesn't necessarily make itself --

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  What is the percentage of connection connecting people in
 California?

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  I'm not positive now. I would guess somewhere between 80 and
 90%.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay. Let's go to Korea. Mr. Park, what is the connection
 percentage in Korea, South Korea, today?

 >>KISHIK PARK:  Mr. Moderator, let me use a few seconds just I will be very
 short.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay.

 >>KISHIK PARK:  Firstly, I fully agree with the interventions made by Cuban
 delegation. And I don't think we can discuss about this kind of accessibility
 without thinking of some charity. Because if anybody can provide some amount of
 money to Korea, with current technologies, we don't have any problem to provide
 all the facilities for every Koreans and any other countries for them to access
 the Internet very easily. That's financial and some affordability. So we should
 be very clear. And in Korea, the penetration rate is 71.9% as of 2005 July. And
 households, 70.8% of households are connected to the broadband Internet. And my
 government is doing some special considerations for some aid to people or some
 young infants, and also including some education to use Internet. So I don't
 object to use some kind of competition to establish some infrastructure or
 something like that. But also, we should think about some kind of collaborative
 spirit to share with some disadvantaged or disabled or weak people. That is
 very important to increase the Internet accessibility, I believe.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Mwangi from Kenya, could I
 have your reaction, please.

 >>MICHUKI MWANGI:  I'll start off by saying that Kenya has an Internet
 penetration of 3.1. And this has gone to.1% over the last five years -- 3.1%
 over the last five years. This is because of liberalization. I would like to
 look at it as a marketplace. If I go to market, I buy the cheapest product. If
 your market is produced, you have no subsidies to produce your market, that
 means it's expensive for you to bring your products to the market, then your
 products will definitely cost more, so no one will buy from you, you will
 always buy from the one who is able to produce products cheaply.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Professor Mueller.

 >>MILTON MUELLER:  We may be getting lost in the detail and overlooking a
 bigger issue. We're basically talking about universal service, about the
 classic division between the dynamism of the market and the distributional
 effects of government. And it seems to me the obvious answer to this is that
 you have to rely on the dynamism of the market to get you about 80% of the
 construction of the infrastructure, and that there is always a role for
 governments and subsidies and redistribution and filling out anywhere from the
 final 2% to the final 20%, depending on what kind of a country you're dealing
 with and what kind of an economy you're dealing with. Just to give you an
 example in the United States, which invented the term "universal service," we
 got to about 90% coverage of the country because of competitive market
 conditions in the 19th century and early 1900s, and the Scandinavian countries
 also had competition during that period. Surprisingly, or not surprisingly, to
 this day, it is the United States and the Scandinavian countries that still
 lead in infrastructure penetration. Furthermore, as an academic, I can say that
 you can do statistical correlations.  Many, many statistical correlations,
 about what factors, affect Internet penetration in a given country. And you'll
 find again and again that the degree of telecom liberalization is a
 significantly positively correlated factor. So you have to rely on the
 commercially self-sustaining business to mobilize the massive amounts of
 capital needed to construct an infrastructure, and you have to rely on
 competition to drive the costs down and to develop new service contents. But,
 of course, there's room at the end for redistribution, which extends it to
 high-cost areas, to poor people, and to people who couldn't get it otherwise.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  And if you are speaking about infrastructure, there is a
 question from our blogger, if you can give him the microphone, we are going to
 be -- from -- Alice (saying name).

 >> Yes, Alice has sent in a question by e-mail. She's the national coordinator
 of catalyzing access to ICTs in Africa. And she's also involved with the
 Association for Progressive Communications, and she says, access to the
 Internet requires reliable backbone infrastructure at both national and
 regional level, accompanied by affordable, cheap connections to the
 international network. Could the panel discuss how Africa can develop fast,
 affordable Internet backbone. We have many ISPs that would find creative
 solutions into the loop if they had affordable access to broadband backbone.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  The same field, there is a question from the room. We can mix
 it with this question from Jean-Jacques Subrenat up at the front. He is giving
 us a question.

 >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT:  Thank you. My name is Jean-Jacques Subrenat. I'm a
 former ambassador and now a consultant. Well, two bottlenecks. I've picked out
 two. There are an awful lot more. Mohammed Yunus won the Nobel Peace Prize, as
 we heard. And I would like to know whether there is the use of micro-credit in
 Africa in terms of Internet use. Are there any specific examples of this?  And
 if so, I would like to hear about them. The second bottleneck now is a link
 between the electrical network and access to the Internet. Electrical,
 centralized electrical provision does not always work.  And that's a genuine
 bottleneck. In Africa in particular, have there been specific examples for
 local Internet access to use photovoltaic energy as a solution.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Do we have a panel member who can give a technical answer as
 to the electricity grids? Vincent?

 >>VINCENT WAISWA BAGIIRE:  I thought I was going to answer Alice's question.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Go ahead.

 >>VINCENT WAISWA BAGIIRE:  Alice has asked a very important question, but all I
 can say is there is an initiative and there are several other initiatives
 within the region of improving the infrastructure in the region. And the one
 that is most known is the East African submarine cable system. However, that
 particular initiative I think will need perhaps divine intervention, because as
 it is right now, there are lots of controversies surrounding the project and
 there is a high possibility it may not come to fruition as fast as the industry
 needs it. So that's one of the projects that might assist the region in terms
 of getting cheap and affordable infrastructure.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay.  Who can answer the question about using the electrical
 distribution network to promote Internet access?  On the panel.  Is there
 somebody?  You could, Bill?  Or -- yeah, please.

 >>BILL WOODCOCK:  So there are several ways that that can be done. One way that
 many people are familiar with is sort of in the home, transmitting electrical
 -- transmitting data signals over electrical wiring.  And this sort of works in
 the scope of the home. The high voltage electrical, long-distance transmission
 systems are not very well adapted to that.  However, they already have right of
 way staked out with big towers and high voltage wires. Russia, particularly,
 has been innovative in getting fiber wrapped around those high voltage
 long-haul distribution lines.  That's really the best way to use them, is to
 just use the existing right of way and power cable to wrap fiber.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Thank you.  Jim Dempsey.

 >>JIM DEMPSEY:  I will just say that I think we misunderstood the question. 
 The question was what do you do when there is no power system. So far, I
 haven't heard an answer to that.  I don't have one.  That's a question we are
 thinking about.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Can you answer the question?

 >>JIM DEMPSEY:  No, I can't.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay. Please.

 >>MICHUKI MWANGI:  I think to the best of my knowledge there are projects that
 are actually going to try to develop computers that actually use low voltage
 power.  And one is currently in test at the University of Oregon that is
 through NSRC.  And it is basically something to use low voltage power that can
 be set up in a box and shipped out to these kind of remote places.

 >>ULYSSE GOSSET:  Okay.  Well, we're going to ask the panelists, maybe not all
 of them, but those who have a real good answer to provide to the audience, we
 are inte