My name's Jennifer Cook, I'm Director of the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C., and I want to say a big welcome to all of you for making it through on this very rainy day to this event. I think it's a real testament to our panel and the topics that we're going to be discussing today. I also want to say a major thanks to the One Campaign for partnering with us in this effort, enduring the ups and downs of a government shutdown and busy schedules, but it's definitely been worthwhile since we really have a fabulous panel this morning. I want to say a special thanks to Miriamu Aminu at One for helping out with this, and particularly to Riva Levinson at KRL for all her energy and really helping make this happen, and to our CSIS team as well. As you all know, and as I say as the audience attests, there's lots of energy around this town and I think around the world on the big new opportunities in Africa that over a decade of strong growth rates have opened up. High commodity prices have driven this in large part, but in many cases there's much more than that at play. Greater macroeconomic management by African governments, new sectors, telecommunications, banking, construction that are really, we're seeing a beginning of diversification there. We have a growing consumer class in Africa that's driving internal markets and you've got a virtuous cycle of growth and demand that's building. The opportunities are there, but there are big questions I think in many cases on whether African governments, the private sector, and their partners are really going to take advantage of this momentous opportunity to drive growth into the future, sustained growth and economic transformation down the line. A few key elements of that, at the heart of that are infrastructure and we're here to talk about that today, power generation, a huge obstacle to investment and to growth. I would also say education and training a workforce, an African workforce that's going to be ready and prepared for the opportunities ahead and then obviously the question of governance. The U.S. is waking up to these opportunities. The President's trip was a powerful signal that things are changing. The mindset is changing here in Washington. There's a lot of congressional action on Electrify Africa, the President's Initiative on Power Africa. These things are getting the kind of attention I think that's maybe a little belated, but it's happening. Let me just say, though, that growth over time, it's not guaranteed, Africa is a hugely diverse place. Some of the countries are not blessed with the demographics or the natural resources of others or the strong governments. One of the big questions is how do we ensure that the big opportunities and the growth stories pull those countries, pull the most vulnerable countries, the most vulnerable communities and the most vulnerable people along with them. We have a panel here today that's really been at the cutting edge of those big questions, how to drive the growth, but also ensure that we pull the most vulnerable along. We're featured and we're so pleased today to have Tony Elumelo here today, who is one of the people who, as I say, has been at the forefront of these questions. He's an entrepreneur, done very well in that, but also a philanthropist. He's a former CEO of one of Africa's leading pan-African banks. He is now chairman of Heirs Holding, which is an investment company that builds sustainable African businesses. Heirs Holding is a major partner in the Power Africa initiative and has been one of the early proponents and drivers of that. When you talk about kind of this handful of new kind of entrepreneur in Africa that's really thinking big, thinking ahead, doing things above board, doing things differently, Tony Elumelo is in that handful. And he's front of the line and often mentioned first in that. We're also going to welcome very shortly Donald Kerberuka, president of the African Development Bank. Again, someone who's been at the cutting edge of this change, transforming the African Development Bank into something much more efficient, much more forward-looking, big emphasis on infrastructure, on the private sector, on regional integration. And at the same time, pulling those fragile states along and how do you bridge the growth opportunities, and here he is, with those multi-fundable. Michael Elliott, president and CEO of the One Campaign, a very nimble, growing, powerful advocacy organization with millions of people and network worldwide that's focusing, began focusing really on debt and aids and the trade agenda. But is really moving into the power and infrastructure debate in a very important way and doing important work here in Washington, but also expanding that network across the world. And finally, Darius Manns, head of president and CEO of Africaer, which is a really vulnerable U.S. institution that has been doing a lot of work in Africa for many years before everyone was so focused on Africa, working again with communities and with governments to reach the most vulnerable. Africaer too, and we're going to hear a little bit about this, how they're playing in this new kind of narrative on the Africa rising, on the opportunities, on infrastructure and power. Each of our speakers is going to speak briefly from the podium. We're then going to have a little bit of a conversation and we'll turn to the audience, and I'm sure there's lots of questions and comments, and we'll try to end promptly at 11 o'clock. Dr. Cabarruca is going to need to leave us a little early, but we look forward to his comments and to the discussion that ensues. Thanks again, and Tony, welcome and thank you so much for joining us here today. So good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thanks to the organizers of this event. Thanks to CSIS for the opportunity of sharing my thoughts with you on something that we in Africa see as being very, very significant, catalytic and transformative for the development of Africa. The development of Africa in a sustainable fashion, and that is power. Power is the same everywhere, same thing. And so I'm not going to bore you with the benefits of power. I'm not going to educate you on why there should be electricity, or what electricity means to our lives, because electricity in America has the same benefits and impact as electricity in Africa. The only thing that is different is a fact that why electricity is a constant in a place like America and other developing parts of the world. In Africa, it's a very scarce commodity. It's very difficult to have access to electricity. We have just about 20% of Africans that have access to electricity. The National Energy Agency tells us that we need to do a lot in terms of investment to create access to electricity in Africa in 2030. This is 2017. We're told we need $300 billion of investment. So the question is, and what we should be discussing as friends of Africa, as Africans, how can we make this possible? How do we create access to electricity in Africa? Realizing the benefits of electricity to mankind everywhere. And so I thought I should share with you from my own background and experience what I believe can help to make this possible. I speak as a private sector person in Africa. I speak also as an investor in power in Africa. And I speak as the chairman of a group that has invested, or that has committed to investing $2.5 billion under the Power Africa initiative. I know why we are investing in power and I know why we want to continue to invest in power. And I believe that others know this to help us to begin to address the power deficiency we have in Africa. I know that the investment opportunities in Africa as it relates to power is changing. The operating environment is fast improving from what it used to be before. I know that there's market in Africa and that the market will keep growing because we need to do a lot more to move the consumption from 20% to even 80%. And so for us as a group investing in Africa, we are investing in Africa because we know that market is not an issue. We are investing in power in Africa because we know that the sector has been significantly de-risked by most Afghan countries. Because we know that development organizations like the World Bank and the ADV have taken a role to de-risk power sector risks in Africa. We are investing in Africa, power in Africa because we know that the returns are quite high. We know that if you invest in power in Africa you can make up to 67% return on investment. That is why we are investing in power in Africa. And we know also that beyond why we are investing in power in Africa, there are other reasons, other things that have happened in Africa and the power sector that can help significantly for new investment to come into that space. We believe that power in Africa should be seen as an investment. We believe that development partners have a role to play as the African private sector investors. We would like to see more African private investors and billionaires, successful business people, come into the power space to invest in. We believe that there are certain initiatives that are external to Africa that can help to improve access to electricity in Africa. The Power Africa initiative of the current administration is one and that is why we support it. The Electrify Africa Act is another one and we believe that it should be supported because it can help to significantly unlock access to long-term investment in power in Africa. We know there could be different challenges but we should keep in view the ultimate objective of access to electricity in Africa. And we should also remember where Africa is at this point in time. Africa needs electricity. Africans have the role to play making this happen. Friends of Africa also have to play a key role in making this happen. We know about the opportunities in power in Africa because we have access to information. Because we know what is actually happening on ground in Africa because we know the truth. So we cannot begin to address the power issue in Africa if we do not make sure that the right information is put out there. About one, the investment opportunities in Africa in the power space. Two, the fact that Africa of today is not about 20, 30 years ago. And the fact that the population of Africa is growing and so is the income per capita also growing. The fact that you can't invest in Africa and no one or policy will affect your investment in Africa. The fact that you can invest in Africa and the macroeconomic policies are stable and you can easily remit or repatriate your funds or your returns out of Africa. We believe that people need to know the truth about what is happening in Africa, today's Africa. We believe that people know what is happening in Africa to attract investment. Remember we have to invest $300 billion in Africa between now and 2030 if we most significantly improve access to electricity in Africa. This cannot happen if we don't change the way we do things. So I'd like to see this opportunity to call on first the African government and political leadership to continue what has started. This is a call to sustainability, sustain what has started by worth consistent government policies that encourage investment in the power sector. We need to also get the African private sector leaders to demonstrate confidence in Africa by investing in this sector that is very important for the true transformation of the continent. I'd like to call on the development partners to help to further the risk key sectors that can help change or transform the African society. And equally important we'd like to call on those who have the heart of Africa, those who like to give to begin to rethink how we give in Africa. To begin to change how we give in Africa. To see giving as a way of helping to eradicate poverty in a sustainable fashion. To see giving as a way of discouraging and ending dependency. To see giving as a way of encouraging self-sufficiency. And how can this happen? I believe that if you look at the amount of aid that goes into Africa every year, it's huge billions of dollars. If we were to secretize this influence into Africa. Two years or three years influence Africa. And further leverage these ten times. And use it to provide risk guarantee for people who want to invest in key sectors like power. These will have a lot of positive implications for the continent. Remember as an investor in the power sector in Africa, one of the reasons I gave for investing power is because the sector was largely the risk. And so if we have interventions or initiatives that can help to the risk both power and other catalytic sectors of the African economy. Then we will be truly transforming Africa in a manner that is sustainable and lasting. This is what I call African capitalism. And this is in my viewpoint a new way to engage with Africa. This is a new philosophy, socio-economic philosophy that we should adopt as a growth approach in Africa. So that collectively we can not just address the issue of access to electricity. But beyond electricity, deal with other issues that we consider extremely important for the true and sustainable transformation of Africa. I'll pause here and I'll take comments because of our discussion. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. President Kebabaga, wonderful. You know being asked to speak after Tony Elumel is like being asked to sing after Pavarotti. Not long ago in Johannesburg I was moderating a session. So that was Tony Elumel of course. That was Mo Ibrahim. That was Patrick Motepe. That was John Rupert's four of Africa's billionaires. I don't have to tell you that I feel very poor. And now thank you very much for inviting me. I think Power Africa is a turning point. It is not a turning point because of 20 million people it will connect or the 7,000 megawatts it will provide. It's a turning point in how the world should relate to Africa. It's a turning point to say together we can achieve things not necessarily by the traditional instrument of ODA of aid. We can achieve things if Afghan governments reform the power sector. Do the right things in terms of regulation. And if business people look at this as an opportunity. I don't have to tell you the story of the Batashu Company in the late, I think about 1894. So Batashu Company was sent two people to West Africa to sell shoes of course. And then the first person landed in what is now Sierra Leone. And sent back a couple to say no, no, no. These poor don't wear shoes. There's no market here. Send the ticket on the boats. I'm coming back. Another one landed in what is now Nigeria. And he sent a cable saying bring the shoes. There is a market here. I think for a long time people have looked at Africa as a place where you go to do good. Not a place where you have an opportunity. And to tell you right now in Ethiopia because Ethiopian power is very competitive, 3 cents per kilowatt hour. Many international companies are relocating from China to Addis Ababa. They are looking at the opportunity provided by Ampo Power in Ethiopia. Competive labor conditions. And the nearby Port of Djibouti. And they are relocating in footwear. The latest is the world's second largest textile manufacturer, the Swedish company. They are setting up shop in Ethiopia. And of course this will have multipliers for all concern. When we met yesterday at Brookings for those who are there, I didn't mention something which I want to repeat here. We're all celebrating this average growth in Africa of 5%. But actually if Africa is to transform, it is not 5% we need. It is 7% at the minimum. Now lack of power is a shaving of 2% every year. So if we could close the gap of infrastructure, not completely but at least enough, that means we go from 5% to 7% and that is the beginning of real transformation. So whether it is a small garage owner in Kaduna who found that he opened the garage in the morning and after him there's no power. Or a kidney cotton doing his or her exams and has to sit in the streets in the evening to study. Or a doctor trying to keep the vaccines or to operating the patients and suddenly there's no power. Whether it is education, it is health, it is business. As Tony was saying, power is absolutely vital. Now the example I'd like to give you is in Liberia, which is a country well known in the United States. I was there just a month ago, who are trying to do things in Liberia with many people here. Liberia has totally installed a capacity of 58 MW of electricity.  By the way, of that 58 MW, only 25 MW are available on a continuous basis. And Liberians pay the highest price in the world. 54 cents per kilowatt hour. There's not much you can do. Liberia has a lot of iron ore, plenty of other minerals, so companies who are coming are setting up their own ways of producing electricity. But I'm sure once you have connected Liberia and the power Africa with the West African power pool, it will make a huge difference for families and business people. Now, I want to say that it is actually possible because we are the biggest investor in power in Africa. We do at least every year close to $2 billion of power investments on the continent, whether it is clean or fossil fuels. Everything's there. Hydro, geothermal, solar, wind. You want it, it's there. Interconnections, connecting different parts of Africa. Now, the 20 million people will be connected and the 7,000 MW provided. Actually, it's very important, but it's still a drop in the ocean. Because here in the US, people take for granted that each one of us sitting in this room consumes, what, 15,000 kilowatt hours of power per year. Every Nigerian on average is about 120. So I've got a long way to go. So we need the power Africa and more. Now, I said yesterday at the meeting at the MF with American officials and African governments from the five countries where power Africa is taking place, I was amazed at the reforms taking place to make power investment possible. From the courageous decision in Nigeria to cut subsidies and focus them on the poor. From the courageous decision in Tanzania to reform the utility company Tanesco and many other reforms in Ghana and in Liberia. And so in very soon to be possible, to go into country, sign power patches agreements, you'll have independent regulators who can set tariffs. You'll have a framework which enables you to feel comfortable. You can have a 30, 40 arrangements with the governments. And then we in the international organizations, we are now able to put in place a little structured products to provide risk guarantees while you feel uncomfortable. Just two and I'll stop here. In Kenya, we have done Africa's largest wind installation in Turkana. Not in Kenya. It provides about 500 megawatt electricity. Now, for the sponsors, they are concerned that the governments will not build the transmission line on time. But the government too was concerned that the sponsor will not finish the products on time. So what you have done is to stand between the two and provide a partial risk guarantee to the government in case the sponsor defaults and to the sponsor in case the government defaults. And that has made this project possible. We'll be providing in Nigeria, I think next month, about 372 million dollars to help provide these guarantees to this bulk company to enable the privatization to continue animated. So it is possible, it is doable, and I think together we can do it. And I think Power Africa is a very, very good start. And like 20, I'm happy to answer your questions if you have any. Thank you. We will turn to Michael Elliott of the One Campaign. Thank you very much. And I'd like to offer our thanks from the One Campaign to all our friends at CSIS for putting this event together. It's pretty extraordinary that we have in this room during an extraordinarily busy week in Washington with all the World Bank and IMF meetings that are going on and all the kind of opportunities that you have. We've got a standing room only crowd in one of the biggest rooms in the Willard Hotel for a topic that two and a half years ago when a few of us started talking about it would have got five or ten people at a seminar. So I mean we've come an extraordinarily long way in talking about a topic that I believe and that we believe in the One Campaign is of the first importance.  If Tony is the Pavarotti then I suppose Donald is the Placido Domingo and Darius, I'll give you Jose Carreras, how's that? And I'm sort of somewhere down in the chorus with a kind of, a not very convincing tenor. So as the president of a global advocacy organization focusing on extreme poverty and preventable disease, I feel as if I kind of have to comment right at the kind of start of my remarks that were 20 or 30 minutes into this event and no one has yet talked about hunger or AIDS or disease or despair. An indication that this event and this topic is producing an opportunity for us to talk about a new paradigm when we think about Africa, to talk about Africa as an opportunity to talk about Africa as a rising economic powerhouse, to talk about Africa as a place that we're going to hear more about in many, many, many positive ways throughout the rest of the century. But also to recognize that the opportunity that Africa presents to all of us will be lost if we don't address a critical issue and that is energy poverty. In sub-Saharan Africa, as you've heard from Tony and Donald, lack of infrastructure is not an inconvenience. It's a daily hardship that stunts economic growth and hinders efforts of poverty reduction. I truly believe, as many of us do, that we can work to see the end of extreme poverty in our lifetimes but we can only do that if we work with African leaders, businesses and civil society to increase access to electricity. Power, as we constantly hear when we make trips to Africa, talk to our African friends and African leaders, is essential to issues of health. You've heard already about the importance of keeping vaccines cold, about kind of providing safe and clean clinics where women can give birth in a secure environment. It's crucial to education, not simply so that schools are well-equipped but so that kids can do what we take as a birthright, that is to say, do their homework after 6.30. It's crucial and we need to make this point because it sometimes gets lost when we concentrate on social services. It's crucial to job creation and as you look at the exercises that we and the One Campaign, but more particularly the UNDP, the UN Development Program have done as they've gone out to talk to people in the last year about what people want from a new development agenda. What you hear over and over and over and over again is economic security that comes from jobs and it is so essential to kind of have the degree of power and electricity without which we will not get that economic growth and millions and millions of jobs that are needed in a young and growing continent. You've had some of the figures from Tony. His figure was 300 billion needed by 2030, the figure that we often use and this is just for basic access without kind of thinking about economic growth. 19 billion in finance needed each year. And I think we all recognize that we can't possibly get that from the public sector. Private sector sources are necessary to bridge a gap and to ensure sustainability of projects in the long term. No country has dramatically increased energy access without significant public and private finance and without significant public policy support to address risk and make projects economically viable. And if you want proof, the United States, this great country, is the proof. One of the reasons that this kind of issue resonates when I kind of go around the country and kind of give speeches on energy poverty is that people can remember things like the the Tennessee Valley Authority. People can remember Lyndon Johnson kind of bringing electricity to the Hill Country of Texas. And it didn't happen by accident. It happened by a kind of sustained exercise of public policy to bring power to the powerless. The same has been true in other countries that have increased energy access substantially in the last 20 or 30 years such as Thailand. And it will remain true in Africa today. And while there are plenty of companies, as we know, who are increasing considering investing in Africa's energy sector, so far actual investment is nowhere near the scale needed to address demand. Currently one of the reasons is high perceived political and emerging new market risk. In addition to high capital costs, which means the traditional funding sources often remain inadequate to scale up the energy sector. But things are changing as we know. We're looking at a set of solutions about the national and international level that are both realistic and transformable. The UN Security Energy for All initiative, the Power Africa initiative that as you've heard, President Obama unveiled in Tanzania earlier this year and the Electrify Africa Act now up on Capitol Hill. And increasingly you're seeing African governments buy into these initiatives. I think 26 have now signed up to Sustainable Energy for All working with Donald and the African Development Bank and other international lending authorities to really scale this up. And here we've got legislation kind of moving on the hill. The Electrify Africa Act which had no cost to taxpayers due to its leveraging of the private sector aims to provide access to 50 million people in both rural and urban settings. And one of the kind of key issues over the next few months will be to kind of move forward on that. The Bill and the President's initiative called for OPIC, the Obviously Private Investment Corporation, to mobilise private capital to help solve the critical challenge of energy poverty on an international basis. The African Development Bank and others will be involved too. It seems to be important that when one looks forward to international and to legislative proposals, we do so in a holistic way. We stress both the importance of access for the poorest so that they can have the very, very, very basic human needs satisfied that power helps and also to create inclusive economic growth. The Electrify Africa Act tries to do that by having three important objectives including access to 50 million people, promoting institutional platforms that provide service to both rural and underserved areas so that access isn't just a question of providing access to cities and seeking to increase installed power capacity by 20,000 megawatts. I've been giving speeches on energy poverty for the last two and a half years since I took over at the one campaign because it was a topic that interested me before I got into this business. I always say at this point in my presentation, it is vital to understand that if we're going to do something like power up Africa, the continent that in so many ways is going to shape our century, we do it in a different way from the way that we powered up North America and Western Europe. That we do it in a way that is more sustainable, which is why sustainability is a theme that we keep hearing, that is cleaner and that satisfies two claims of justice, two claims of justice that are honest at all times and both of which I believe can be satisfied. The first claim of justice is to people right now, is to 1.3 billion people in the world right now who do not have access to the sort of life enhancing services that we regard as just normal, as normal as walking into our house and flipping on a light switch. There is a severe and pressing claim of justice that those of us who are more fortunate to have on us to help those 1.3 billion people get the sort of facilities that we have. And note, I said and not but, there is a claim of justice to those generations who are going to come after us. I'm a dad. No one has to kind of tell me about intergenerational justice. I've got kind of children in my 20s. I'm just about old enough to, young enough perhaps, to imagine that I'll have grandchildren one day so I kind of understand that we have to provide power in the continent of the century in a sustainable way that is going to provide justice to generations yet to come. But I kind of absolutely firmly believe that we can do that if we unlock the floodgates of innovation and creativity and technological wizardry so that we bring to the market all sorts of innovations and dreams that scale up power in a sustainable way. While recognizing, while never forgetting, as Jim Kim said in his remarks at the World Bank just this week, while never forgetting that we have claims to people right now. There are claims of justice to people right now that we have to satisfy. There are 1.3 billion people in the world who do not have what we regard as a birthright every time we kind of get up in the morning and kind of switch on electric light and we have to satisfy claims to justice to people right now as well as to those who are coming after us. Thankfully, those of us at Advocacy Organizations, like Juan, are privileged to work with incredible leaders in Africa who have brilliant ideas, who have kind of real determination, who are putting together their own energy plans. Our job in Washington in organizations like ours is not to say, you know, here's what we think we should do, it's to kind of listen to people on the ground to hear the plans that they think are most tailored to their own circumstances. They are the experts, not us. And to try and, where we can, put a bit of wind at their back. So we're kind of thrilled to work with people like President Johnson-Serle, who I saw and spoke to about this just not long ago, to people like Donald, President Cabruca, to private sector leaders like Tony. This is an inspiring and a hopeful moment in which I firmly believe that loads of us from many, many different interests from the environmental groups, from the anti-poverty groups, from the private sector, from the technology groups, from the international organizations and national legislators can all get behind a set of solutions that truly should address one of the great injustices of our time and also one of the great opportunities of our century. Thank you very much. Michael, thank you so much. Arius, yes. Good morning, everybody. What I'd like to talk about is how do you bring power to people? I represent an organization called Africaer. We've been working now for more than four decades in empowering communities, providing opportunities. And so I think these initiatives that are under way that you've heard this morning are a tremendous opportunity. But I think we really stand on as a verge of an energy revolution in Africa, much as we are seeing it here in the United States. I mean, think about it. We're finding oil and gas everywhere in Africa. Tanzania, Mozambique, I mean, it virtually stands on its second independence. Domestic energy security, financial security, the ability to develop energy intensive industries and generate jobs and opportunities. You've heard this morning about the many initiatives that are underway, the extraordinary work the African Development Bank is doing, power Africa, what the private sector is doing, and the reforms that are gathering steam across Africa. This moment where we have this wonderful convergence of countries prioritizing energy, donors lining up behind it and the private sector stepping up. So a very big push to bring power to people, to build national grids and create regional energy solutions. It's finally here. But I think at the same time we have to recognize that this is going to take billions of dollars and decades for national and regional grids to be built out. It's very important that this gets done, that it gets done well, especially with regard to environmental safeguards and doing resettlement well, the business that Africa is in. We've resettled more than 17,000 people in Tanzania for its power transmission and distribution build-out. But I believe strongly that you cannot walk on just one leg waiting for these big grid investments to bring power to people. And the poor should not have to wait decades when new technologies provide many opportunities for leapfrogging in rural Africa to dramatically improve access to clean energy, much as mobile technology did in communications. Today there are great off-grid, mini-grid solutions, which I believe are going to be a very important part of the energy future in this country, in our creaking electricity grid that's highly centralized. You heard Mr. Kabaruka talk about some of the extraordinary things that are happening on the renewables front. I can tell you just from our own experience as a small nonprofit, bioenergy, tremendous opportunities, agriculture for energy, which we are doing in Mozambique using Brazilian technology. Small-scale biomass energy from biofuel cook stoves from to animal dung, the extraordinary things that can be done, zero emissions technologies that provide power. Solar voltaic, think about the dramatic decline in the cost of solar. Prices have fallen now to be very competitive with oil and diesel. Tremendous option, which we are utilizing for institutional purposes in rural Africa, for schools, for health clinics. Solar thermal, the work that we and many others are doing on solar water heaters and cookers, in addition to wind. And as I discussed with a couple of the panelists earlier today, one of the things that we are very excited about is compressed natural gas in gas-rich countries like Nigeria, which are an enormous opportunity. The challenge is how do you get these technologies out into the field? And I think there are some very creative ways that we certainly have been doing to do it. So my main focus today is really, I think, here in the United States, as several speakers have said, tremendous opportunity for the private sector to engage. I think it's in our direct interest, U.S. companies, to think about what can be done to strengthen energy security in Africa. I think it's a big opportunity, frankly, for the U.S. to learn how to knit all of these new technologies together to overhaul our own system here in the U.S. So in conclusion, again, I think it's very important we walk on both legs, the big investments in building out the national power grid. This big push is finally here to strengthen national and regional power systems in energy trade in Africa. But it's also very important that we make a big push on renewables in Africa. Thank you. Thank you so much, Darius. And thank you to the panel for such a powerful set of presentations that I think were very complementary in many ways and kind of really emphasize kind of the turning point in both the opportunity but the mindset that needs to happen here in the United States. And Power Africa is kind of the front edge of that, as you said, and finding new ways of transforming assistance down the line and what that means. And I think that's something we're going to be grappling with for the next few years. I know that Dr. Kerberuca is going to need to leave shortly, so I'm going to ask a question of him and of Tony. We talked at the outset that the rise is not going to be uniform and some countries are likely going to be left behind or either not getting it right, don't have the big resources, natural gas and so forth. And I wonder if you mentioned power pooling and kind of the regional aspect of it. That can be particularly challenging, kind of building big regional infrastructures on power and agreements. I wonder if you might say a little bit about the opportunities and the challenges of that and what you're seeing in terms of regional resource sharing and so forth. And then on the big new producers, as Darius said, big new opportunities in natural gas and Mozambique and Tanzania. Maybe a tough question, but are they going to get it right? And what can we do to ensure that kind of the resource curse doesn't go along with those resources? And then I wanted to ask if Tony, you talked about kind of the de-risking that you've seen by African governments. And I wonder first, every Nigerian government that has come to power has said that resolving the power issue is going to be their number one priority. Now they're beginning to make progress. And I wonder if you might say, what are the priority steps in de-risking the sector? And perhaps to our panel generally, what is accounting for this change and how do you get maybe some of the more laggard countries to come along with that change? If you don't mind, I'll start with Donald and then turn to Tony and the panel on the region. Thank you so much. Thank you for allowing me to leave early. And accepting that I can blitz. I did apologies. It's very difficult to give time in this place at this time. First of all, we are 54 countries. Some are more endowed than others. And so we consider, what I've just said, extremely important. Liberia has ILO and many other minerals, but does not have gas. So we're building a connection in West Africa so that Liberia can purchase power from Nigeria, Ghana, and others. In East Africa, as you know, Ethiopia is almost the center of hardware electricity. So we have just concluded a power connection with Kenya so they can import power from Ethiopia. So those kind of connections for us are critical. Energy security for every country on its own, on the basis of its own resources, is not possible. But energy markets is what we're trying to develop. And I'm happy to tell you that governments are very, very keen on this. Where we're having a challenge, I have to be honest with you, is that for independent power producers, the absence of regional power purchase agreements is the big elephant in the room. And that is the one we're trying to resolve. That is why, for example, this big dam in the Congo has not been done because putting turbines in the water genetically free-stays in vanilla. But you have to figure out regional arrangements for buying and selling that power. But we are on it. We spend about 20% of all our energy investments on this kind of connections. Now, on a second question, will the new oil-rich, gas-rich countries get it right? My own feeling is the people demand that they get it right. Because the people have seen the difference. They have seen countries with nothing like a bird becoming middle-income countries. And next door, there's a country which has oil, exports maybe what, a million barrels of oil per day, and 60% of the people are living below the poverty line. Now they know the difference. They know why it is happening. So I think people will demand that governments get it right. Management models are well-known. It's not rocket science. We don't all have to copy the Norwegian model. There are so many models to copy. So we have set up in the bank an Africa Natural Resource Center. And what we intend to do is help countries, first of all, get their contracts right. Because some countries have got into very unfair and balanced deals. It's not morally right and it's economically unsustainable. So first thing, know what you have, get contracts right, get a fair deal from your resources. Second thing, spend wisely. Know white elephants. Invest in infrastructure, invest in people. Because oil and gas are finite resources. They inherit them from God, from Allah. And then one day they'll be over. So you have to translate them quickly into human capital and into infrastructure. Now beyond spending wisely, think of the future generations as well. So we'll be helping governments along the value chain, along the contracts to ensure they get it right. There would be a few accidents of those who get it wrong because of many reasons. But I think the people will not accept it. Thank you very much. Why do I, are you, can you stay a bit more or are you on your way? I'm told I have to go. Next time, next time. Okay, well thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Kerbruka. Please join me. And let me just say thank you. Let me just say we're joined today by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson. And I wonder if she's in the audience, is she here? I wonder if she might, she's a little late. Tony, we talked about de-risking. What have you seen as kind of the priority, priority steps that governments have taken, given you a chance to take a new look and say, look, there are actually opportunities here versus maybe in decades of the past when the power sector was probably not a safe commercial bet? I'd like to say that, can I hear me? Yeah. I'd like to say that the risk in the power sector or EDC sector is not the job of government alone. And I'd like to, so it's a concerted global effort actually that we need to de-risk the power sector. And I will explain why. My explanation will come from my experience because they say experience is the best teacher. So when we decided to, we have a power plant in Nigeria which has capacity for 1,000 megawatt of electricity and would pay $300 million to acquire the plant. And so why did we make that investment? Because we are rational investors. We made the investment because we, as I said, some questions I call the investment huddle of race. First, policies. If we make this investment today, power sector is a long-term sector in terms of investment. And you need five, seven to ten years to begin to see significant outcomes. So if we make this investment today, we want the investment, we want to make sure that there's no policy reversals. And so that was the concern. The second concern was have a technical capacity. We are an investment management company. We don't invest, we're not electrical engineers or mechanical engineers. So how easily can we find or have access to technical capability and competency? So that was key for us. The third point was, so if we generate electricity, who is going to buy it? And how we show that the pricing mechanism and tariff and gym structure is good and consistent so that we can plan long-term? So these were the risks as investors that we saw. How did we, one man made us make the decision after looking at these risks? So let's start with policy. We realize that the countries, a couple of countries in Africa have embarked on very significant power sector reform program. Nigeria is one of those countries. And even legislating policies in place to make sure no reversals. And so it gives you confidence that this is here to stay. So based on that, we said, okay, we have to invest in this space. In terms of technical competency, we were able to easily find technical partners. We need technical partners like in, we have two from America, the Symbion and Georgia Electric. Then in terms of the purchase agreement, which is the key one, they threw the World Bank and the ADB. ADB is coming in now, as you said, but World Bank came first. There was partial risk guarantee. And so that helped us. Now, why was World Bank forthcoming providing that because Nigerian government gave a sovereign guarantee to the World Bank upon which World Bank gave this guarantee to us? But not every country in Africa that has the kind of resources that others have to provide this kind of sovereign guarantee. So we need, in dealing with the issue of power in Africa, have to find how to deal with the issue of this kind of guarantee that helps to de-risk investments in the power sector. And that is one of the reasons I am thinking that we should begin to think new ways of making this happen. New ways that can, like this, your secretization of aid in flowing to Africa will take you to leveraging it many times over so that you can use it to provide the kind of awesome guarantee so that across the continent, there will be a guarantee to make $300 billion investment in power between 2030. We need to do things in manners that we have not tested before. So that's one more point to begin here. And that's why I say it's not just about Nigerian government because there are things, or African government, there are things that they don't control. If you look at BAL2 and BAL3, capital adequacy competition for banks, you see a situation where geography rather than asset classes become eligibility criteria for deciding the kind of risk waiting if you are tied to a portfolio. Then banks are very rational economic agents so they respond appropriately. If you do that and say investment in Africa is this amount of risk and it takes this kind of charge on your capital, automatically, you don't need a rocket science to tell you that you're not making investment in that space. So we also need people who set global rules and policies to look at this and see how, if the intent is to help create access to electricity in Africa, every hand must be on deck to make sure that it is achieved and we can talk about this and apply it to other sectors where you have certain feelings. Yes, Michael. Jennifer, you had an interesting colloquy with President Kavaruga before he left on the resources curse and I can't resist saying something quite important on that, fighting the resources curse in Africa and all over the world, in other words, making sure that... Is this still on? In other words, making sure the natural resources, the wealth that can be derived from natural resources goes to those who live above the ground under which they are found. We all know it's going to be a highly complex issue. We all know there are lots of actors. We all know that there is great complexity in fighting the resource curse. But the stuff that we can do here, the stuff that we can do in the global north, the stuff that we can do in Washington, that really makes sure that the resource curse is minimized. And the key thing we can do, and Donald was... President Kavaruga was talking about this when he got on the contract, is make sure that there is absolutely transparency in terms of what people are paying for the natural resources that they are extracting from poorer countries in the world. The United States was a true leader on this, was a true leader on this by putting legislation as part of Dodd-Frank, the famous Cardinal Luga amendment which required extractive companies to publish what they pay. I think everyone in this room knows that the SEC did an excellent rule putting Cardinal Luga into effect, that there was unfortunately a lawsuit brought by the American Petroleum Institute, and that right now Cardinal Luga and the SEC rule is back in the hands of the SEC. We can really do something here in the rich world, in the rich world, in the global north to reduce the resource curse. And the key thing that we can do is to make sure that the transparency of who pays what to who is an absolute bedrock principle. So we have many, many other organisations are really calling on the SEC to come up with another strong rule implementing Cardinal Luga as fast as we possibly can. People always talk about the resource curse as if it's something that happens in the global south. Not so, not so. As Paul Collier at Oxford University always says, it takes free to tango when it comes to corruption. It takes the guy who's paying the bribe, it takes the guy who's accepting it, and it takes the facilitators, the lawyers and the accountants in London and New York who are setting up phantom firms so that money can be diverted out of Africa. We can do something about it and we absolutely should. Thank you very much for that. And Kofi Annan's report, equity and extract is... It will turn your stomach to read the deals that are made, the shady front company to speak, the tax havens and so on. I just want to come back to a very important point that Donald made which is within Africa the power that I think people pressure from citizens has. You look at a country like Mozambique which has going to get 20, 30 billion dollars of investment in the next 10 years in gas driven by liquefied natural gas to go to Asia. But it's an enormous opportunity in this country where electricity access is so low to bring, to build a domestic gas system to have a trans-Mozambican pipeline. And many of the elements are there and I think politically for them the pressure will be let us use these resources for Mozambique's own development not just simply for exports of liquefied natural gas. So I think this pressure from citizens I think is an important part of it. And then second, the capacity piece I think that's central in all of this. And I think for many governments this is the challenge to really deliver on transparency, much better management of natural resources and turning this natural resource boom into a development boom that works for people. And there are simple things that we in this country can do. You think about these power utility companies that desperately need in Africa that need to upgrade their capacity. We have a whole generation of retired engineers working that have worked in utilities ready to go. You have people get on the ground who can I think get to know Africa better provide technical assistance. And I think that too helps to bring investment as people get more comfortable and understand the opportunities. Thank you. Just to follow on that I think as we focus on kind of building the capacities of governments and so forth the question of building strong and informed constituencies for reform is critical and we tend to forget that. We think private sector needs to be talking to government but there's another segment and maybe it's me coming from a think tank that you need a strong, constructive, informed, educated civil society that can also play into those debates. It actually expands the capacity of government thinking and strategy and it can be something of a bridge between private sector and government as well. And I think all of the speakers mentioned that. Jennifer, that's exactly why transparency is so important. That's exactly why transparency is so important in African country after African country. One of the most exciting things that's happening is this rapid growth of really fantastic civil society organizations armed with cell phones, armed with new technology and kind of really doing the Lord's work. Give them the data. Give them the data. Give them the information and they will get the job done. We are nearing time. We want to take a round of questions at least and so if you can raise your hand and we'll call on you. Please identify yourself. If you want to direct it to a specific person please say so otherwise we'll turn to the panel generally. We'll start with the gentleman here. And Mike, and please wait for the mic. Thank you. Weon. Don Lauren, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense. Thank you all for a wonderful presentation and thank you all for what you have done. You are all the example of these opportunities that lie ahead in Africa for all of us. One of the things that seems to be absent from your discussion this morning has been the S-word, security. With the exception of tangential comments from Michael here in his previous intervention the fact of the matter is we really haven't talked about that and I don't mean the stereotypic militaristic armed force type security but I do mean the proper combination of diplomacy, development and defense that is critical to provide the economic stability the environment for investment people are going to be hesitant to spend 300 billion dollars in Africa if it is not a stable environment. So I'd be interested in your thoughts on how there can be a structure or an approach to whether it be individual African nation regional of Africa approaches or continental approach in Africa to provide the stable environment that approaches the challenges of drug trafficking, terrorism, warlordism, human trafficking poaching and all the thing and civil war of course and so I'd be interested in your thoughts on that. Great, thank you. Yes, the lady there I'm sorry I don't have my glasses on so it's a little tricky for me. Hello, I'm Courtney Vaughn and thank you for your presentation. The next thing is for Tony. Tony as an investment banker investing in the power infrastructure in Nigeria. What is your concern for Nigeria as you look at more of the longer term risk given that Nigeria is a federation of states just like the United States which is a little unique relative to other African economies and in the United States power seem to be in terms of the development is more of a state driven initiative meaning the policies that are in place and the rules to support some of probably what we would call our de-risking thinking as we investors, long term investors and in comparing that to Nigeria everything seems to be driven at the federal level and you're making infrastructure investment that is crossing states do you see that as a potential downside as you know that could actually discourage job investors if it's not taken into consideration now and I know that the partial risk guarantee does not cover that sort of thing for example and just to put it on the table I'm the person who developed a five year strategic business plan to institute the West Africa electricity power pool that's a 2006 through 11 so I have lots of knowledge in West Africa in particular. Thank you. Let's take two more. Yes, there. Good morning Adrian Kacinski with Structuring Strategic Capital a question that really I guess can go across the panel but I'd like to hear an elaboration on the needs of rural versus urban power from both financing perspective what are some of the challenges and then from an operational design and implementation perspective and then from the needs of the population some of the challenges of getting them engaged in particular from the perspective of promoting consumer demand. And let's take... Okay, would you take one more, one last one and then we're going to wrap up, yes. Good morning my name is Eric Michel Soussouglou from Cedar Street Capital an investment bank based out in New York that specializes in raising capital in emerging markets I'm almost tempted to say and maybe Tony as an investment banker can confirm that the risk in Africa can be the risk by associating all contracts with derivative that are available on the financial markets. The second the real question that I have is what do you find much more efficient in terms of providing large investment in the energy sector public-private partnership purely private ventures or government led or parasitol type of companies for the energy sector thank you. Great, let's turn to Tony for the first then we'll go to Michael and Gary. So I think sorry, can you hear me? Yes. But sorry, some of us are mono. Can I have a microphone please? Okay, so for me all four comments are kind of related. So I would like to just speak generally and I hope that addresses all the issues. Today we preach a new kind of investment approach in Africa. We preach and believe and practice Africa capitalism which is private sector commitment or call on private sector to lead the development of Africa by making one long-term investments two in key and strategic sectors and economy three investments that create economic prosperity for social wealth. So if you put all of this together security is a derivative of a symptom of certain things that we experience in Africa today. Poverty is a threat to mankind and threat to mankind anywhere is a threat to mankind so if we therefore follow that logic and if we go further to what Michael said and what we all know about the significance of power in alleviating poverty and so if we have poverty we continue to bridge security challenges in the world nothing is going to stop it and if we need to deal with poverty in Africa and that poverty or threat anywhere is a threat to mankind everywhere then we need to fix I call it forcing first let's fix the basic things so it's embedded the security challenge it's embedded in all this conversation we've been having here today in fact it's equal to security to this conversation and that first everyone everywhere the second point about also the issue of nation states and especially the fragility of some federation like Nigeria in particular if we create economic prosperity through private sectors active engagement and in the process we give hope to people people will not go to the level of extremism that we're all scared of and it is therefore it builds everyone of us in the sector foreign friends, partners etc to make sure that the development we see and preach in Africa is one that actually touches the generality of the masses in Africa so that poverty can be addressed and the poverty is addressed to a large extent people won't want to kill themselves or talk about cessation where there's prosperity people don't care much about what's happening in the center is where there's poverty they begin to ascribe all kinds of reasons to why people are poor or certain geographies in a certain entity see more poverty so prosperity and social wealth can help to address this level of concern the issue of the right approach to power sector investment for instance in Africa private sector public private sector government led in this concept of African capitalism it is believed that the private sector should lead government should focus on regulation, key policies and let private sector do what they know how to do let government just be involved in concern themselves with creating the enabling environment that will prosper the private sector realizing that private sector prosper then the economy and society would be better through again the social wealth and poverty they generate I think that's it there was the question of rural urban and reaching let me, can I just start by endorsing absolutely everything that Tony's just said in relation to the question from our friend the Department of Defense formally from the Department of Defense I mean when Tony said poverty is a threat to mankind and a threat to mankind anywhere is a threat to mankind everywhere that is so right one of the things that we find in the work that we do in advocating about extreme poverty and preventable disease so you won't be surprised to hear this is that often the people who get it fastest and best are people who have security experience because they understand as Tony's just said that there is a real link between extreme poverty and instability there's a real link between assuming that you have a completely emissarated future without hope and picking up a gun and so these matters are intimately linked and you're right to raise them I was absolutely fascinated on the question about urban and rural I don't claim to be an expert about how you how you bring power to fields rather than cities and I was nodding with agreement that Darius's comments about the the hope that one can find leapfriking technologies to bring mini-grids to rural areas and so on and so forth I'd only say this there are very good reasons why when we think about access to poverty we think about the rural poor when we think about poor people particularly in Washington we often think about poor people in rural areas Africa is urbanizing at an incredible rate and it is increasingly important that when we think about access to health and education and jobs and power we think about it in terms of the mega cities that are cropping up all over the continent as well as well as, I'm not saying instead of, I'm saying as well as underserved rural areas there was a terrific article last week in Time Magazine a publication that I once had something to do with on energy poverty in Karachi, Pakistan demonstrating the lack of sustainable and reliable sources of energy in that city of what 15, 18 million, something like that is just as damaging to the human spirit and incidentally to kind of bring things full circle, you can see I used to be a journalist and incidentally just as dangerous in terms of creating conditions in which insecurity and extremism is bred as it would be in rural areas maybe I'll just two, two quick things about it I think there are two issues one is technology the other is the challenge of implementation, which I think is I heard in her question and there are two things I can just share with you from my own experience rural urban but a big focus what Africa does is we go historically our mantra has been we go where the tarmac ends in the 21st century we go where the network ends that's not just rural Africa but it's peri-urban Africa hugely important and hugely neglected without access to network services and so working with some technology partners Coca-Cola company and some engineering firms the ability to put essentially public utilities in a 20 foot container to generate power using crop waste using garbage using diesel fuel any source to generate power which can in turn drive a water purification system and provide a communications link essentially public utilities in a box as you could put in a peri-urban area or in a more dense rural area second is in rural areas where the population density isn't there one of the things that we have been working on is how do you take advantage of existing distribution networks community health workers agriculture extension services as a delivery mechanism the challenge is finding a financing mechanism that can make this affordable for the poor a solvable problem but at the core of it is something as close to our hearts is the challenge of helping people adopt these technologies behavior change is that something that Africa has more than 40 years of experience in knowing how to do it sorry, no we can talk perhaps after yeah we're just at time and I want to say a big thank you to our panelists for a really rich and thoughtful and inspiring presentations I want to turn to Tony to say just a couple of wrap up words Tony do you want to say just a couple of closing words what I'd like to thank on behalf of my fellow panelists the CSIS for this opportunity and to say that Africa appreciates this level of interest for this interest should not end or die here we should spread it beyond this all we should let people know that there's a new crop of a new way of doing things in Africa there are opportunities in Africa Africa should be seen as an investment destination not as an aid destination and indeed that we as Africans are receptive to foreign investment and we as Africans are also investing in Africa demonstrating confidence in the African continent and that we want to fix power in Africa together we want to create access to electricity in Africa together so there will be security and peace to everyone thank you


Hello everybody, my name is David Dash and I am the moderator of this press conference I'm the spokesperson for the Third Extraordinary Congress and this Congress has one subject, one subject only, which is remuneration rates We have two speakers with us. I have to my immediate left the director general of the Universal Postal Union Mr. Bishar A. Hussain and on my far left I have Mr. Kenan Bosgayik. Mr. Kenan Bosgayik is the chair of our Council of Administrations He is the chairman of this extraordinary Congress and he's also the director general of Turkish Post Now what I would like to do is we will have a brief statement from the director general of the Universal Postal Union And then we will go into a statement from Mr. Bosgayik A brief statement and then into Q&A from yourselves Please could I ask you when you put your hand up for a question to give your name but also your media organization as well So let's start as quickly as possible. Mr. Hussain, the floor is yours Well, thank you very much Mr. David Daj, the Excellency Mr. Bosgayik who is our Congress chair here and members of the media, good afternoon to you My name is Ambassador Hussain. I'm the director general of the Universal Postal Union and I'm sure now by now you are quite familiar with what UP is all about. We have become very famous Of course we have always been famous but I think the industry affirms that this union is really relevant and important to him Today we have gathered here, we have invited 192 countries, probably we may have well over 100 and 30 countries, 140 countries may be present already The only objective for our meeting here today and tomorrow is just like David has just said is only to deal with one important topic and that is the compensation systems we have in UPU for remuneration on exchange of our postal items This has been a subject of so many congresses since 1969 and every congress we revisit it, we review it and of course a new set of tariffs are set up and then of course from 1969 you can imagine how the world has evolved So what's happening is just like what I said in the morning is that the change, the pace of change in our business, in our structures, in our environment and the industry and technology are so fast that probably our cycle of decision making which is every four years was probably not good enough to catch up with the needs of the market So in light of this background I would like to say that we already had some work going on, even from the last congress which was terminated as tariffs but even at that congress we had set up our task force to look into this further and we came to Addis Sababa last year in September and this was again looked at but by that time I think a big country in the United States of America had already sent their official communication to me as director general informing us that if the system is not reformed and they are going to quit the UPU So that's really set the dynamics in a very fast pace We set up in October last year the council, the governing body rather let me say, met and gave us the secretariat instruction to be able to facilitate several meetings a lot of consultation from other countries to fast track the work so that at least by April this year during the council session we were going to come with some compromise solution and also with intention to keep United States within the family of UPU Colleagues I must say that you will appreciate that the dynamics have changed so fast, so many different interests and so we are not able to reach really a consensus so that's why we have got different scenarios The countries that support an option, which they call option A, which is more or less the current system with a little bit of increased tariff rates of a transition period of five years and then there are those who have taken that extreme position called option B, which is United States of America supported by Canada, Brazil and a few other countries who really want immediate self declared rates and of course when we realise the two extremes, a number of other countries, Japan, France and Germany and a few other European countries supported by other countries from other regions came up with what is called an option C, which is more or less a midway between the two extremes So this proposal gained a lot of momentum, got a lot of support from other countries and in no time I think we had a proposal which we thought even the International Secretary to be fairly balanced but here we are again, the options were not satisfactory to other countries in April The decision was made again now to call for an extra ordinary congress We sent out a communication to all the member countries to decide whether they want to come for an extra ordinary congress or they could even vote from the business, but again member countries opted to have a physical meeting here in Geneva today and tomorrow So what we are going to hear today and tomorrow is really a discussion by the plenary potentials and members of the heads of delegations of these countries to decide which of the options would be preferable to come from an equitable system for the union going forward So that's where we stand, option A, as I told you supported by the United States and others Option A is by China and France and many other countries Britain, I think I'll say a number of countries have expressed their support for this On the other side we have got option B which is United States, Brazil, Canada and some other countries I don't know who else is with them or not And then option C is somewhere in between, many many countries are really in view of this support So this is where we stand and we do hope that these sovereign governments who are gathered here today will be able to make a decision that will hold the union together and also to allow United States consent to be addressed Of course the US has asked for a number of things which you will hear, but I can answer that if there is a Q&A I give the floor to the chairman to review this conversation Go ahead Mr. Volkayevich Thank you very much David Thank you David First of all First of all we are gathered here for a historical day in Switzerland And I congratulate Switzerland again for hosting this historical day historical day and sharing the historical responsibility. Switzerland, which has hosted many important events for the 145 years of the Union, again is hosting another important event which is the Third Externational Congress. The exchange general director made a very good summary on the contents of the Third Externational Congress. Yes, indeed the world is changing. Of course it is natural that as the world is changing, we might also feel the need to change certain things in our sector and in our industry. And this is why we gathered here actually. But we are trying to find a compromise way in order to shed a light to the future of our Union while also carrying out this and by realizing this change at the same time. Countries might have different preferences in terms of their own national interests. But, however, the postal territory which comes from all the world has to come up with a good solution. I wish that we will be able to come up with a solution which is going to be the fairest and which is going to be within the framework and within the spirit of compromise for the good future, for the better future of our Union. In order to achieve the success of the general director Pascale Kliwaz, who is the general director of Pascale Kliwaz, especially our general director Bishar Hussein and deputy general director Pascale Kliwaz and all the staff of the IB are making tremendous efforts to come up with a successful conclusion of this very congress. And we are also very honored to be appointed as the chair of the congress. Therefore, we would like to thank the general director of UPU and also to Switzerland. And we would like to also thank you as well for inviting us to this press conference. It's a real pleasure. Look, we can move into the Q&A session now, but I'd just like to ask, is there any interference in terms of the interpretation with regard to the life, to the filming? No, is everything okay? Good. Good. If I could just try and invite the interpreter perhaps, just to try and whisper just a little bit to Mr Posgain. Anyway, let's move into the Q&A session. Gentleman with the black suit jacket over there to the right. Can you see me? Yeah, this is not possible for the Swiss news agency. First, the US said this morning that only solutions B and C might be acceptable for them. So if there is no compromise on one of these two solutions and they decide to withdraw, what would that mean for UPU? Would that mean in the end of the negotiating function for UPU or even worse? And then we have any broad idea of the total value of the supply chain of international mail and international letters and small packages? Well, I think you've given me, I wish I knew the answer because that's why I call all 192 countries to find a solution to that problem. Certainly UPU has always been a forum for intergovernmental organization and a treaty-making organization. So we are used to countries having different positions and different, I mean, really expectations. However, we have always been able to overcome all those differences. We have a robust system in which we develop consensus. And I can tell you most of the things. We hardly go to vote. It's done by consensus. But on an extreme case like this, we have a voting system to go with. So option A and B is the preferred option for the United States. They say that very well, which means then they get what they want. But in a multilateral system like this, they do recognize that there is also the other parties who are also a member of the network. So we have to find something that's also comfortable for them. So in my view, option C was developed really to bridge the different extremes. And if you ask me really, this is probably where the solution of this union may lie. But again, it depends on how the countries feel. These are sovereign governments. They will take their responsibilities. But I believe that it will be useful to have a system that is going to be not make everybody happy, but not everybody sad as well. So everybody has to gain something, has to do something. So I am trying to appeal to member countries to have a position that is going to be really negotiated and acceptable to a certain extent to everyone. Yes, please. Sorry, just to go back. And the value of the markets measured in billions, would you say? Well, I really don't have that statistics. It's really a more technical area for me. But I can tell you, we probably, I don't know, Mr. Daj may be able to answer that. But we can provide that information a little later. I'll come back to you. In the front row, gentlemen with the white shirt behind the camera. Hi, I'm Jamie from Associated Press. I just wanted to know if you could tell us what will happen to the international coastal system if the United States does pull out. What will the impact be? And just a second question, if I could, about the impact on consumers generally if terminal rates do go up for these types of packages. What exactly is going to happen? Absolutely. The two questions are very valid. I can tell you, the departure of any country, first of all, is not desirable for us because no country has ever left the Union since 1874, 75, 22, created. This is the first time we have this situation. However, if you ask the question, what does it mean if the U.S. departs from the Union? The U.S. is a very major player of the Union. The economy is very big and many countries have a huge traffic parcel and packets of traffic with the United States. So a departure of the United States from the Union would mean then it's a total destruction of the service of the country. Because the moment a country leaves the treaty, what happens is that that country does not exist for us in our global postal territory. So what that means is that nothing really, we cannot exchange any mail or packets or parcels with U.S.P.S., which is United States Postal Services, officially in the form and the shape we know it today. So that means their stamps will not be valid for us. They will not be able to exchange anything. They are not going to use our IMPC codes and all other many, many other services which they can get directly. One thing I want you to recognize is that this is a treaty-based organization. And the advantage is that with one signature when you access the Union, you are a member, you have access to 192 countries automatically. And what this means is that the U.S. have to leave the Union. It means it has to go and negotiate 192 different bilateral agreements with 192 countries and you have to have 192 custom authorities. You have to do many other issues that really have to be done by lettering. This international security customs, AIRTAS and ACAOS, we have treaties with all these organizations which really affect the impact on the logistics global supply chain system. So departing from these means all the systems and procedures and the standards we have developed will not be accessible to United States of America. It's really a nightmare scenario for that. On the other side, the flip side is that all the other countries will not be able to exchange mail with United States. And therefore they will have challenges on how to send the mail to the country. It cannot be called mail anymore. If any bilateral arrangement arises then we consider that only as a commercial couple and that of course there are other ways private companies will do that. So probably that's the route they will go. And as for the impact on consumers? The impact on the consumers again in both ways, it means money. For example, the big net exporters like China and many other countries, the moment you hike the prices because you see, let me come back to this. In 2016 we developed a treaty based rates in Istanbul which was supposed to run up to 2020. So what those countries told us is that they go back to their customers and negotiate discounts and prices and everything with that in mind, with that rates in mind. Now if you come in the middle of the second and say you have hiked it on the other side, so they have big challenge and they have a problem with their customers. And that would mean then that they're saying that they may not be able to use the postal system again. So my worry is that they may use other channels to deliver the mail to what we call United States or those countries that are asking for high hikes. So if you ask me directly to the consumer it means big money for them. For example, if someone in United States was ordering something from China for example and he was getting it at $2 and the next day the whole thing is now going to $7 to $10 to deliver it. Of course the consumers and the customers will be able to deal with that like every other person. So impact-wise it has a global impact. Now the Philippe side and the agreement on the other side is they say look, these are commercial goods, these are not social mail anymore, these are not letters that are coming. It is therefore their right to be able to demand for compensation for them to be able to pay to cover their costs. And they cannot subsidise foreign mail which is coming to this country. So the whole idea about this meeting here today is how do we strike a balance that we don't throw the baby with a basket from the exporting countries. And at the same time we don't run laws organisations, I mean subsidise other countries, mail in those countries that are net importers. So that is really where the crux of the matter is and this is what we are trying to solve here. Thank you very much sir. Could you just briefly explain what you meant by IMPC, just to ensure that everybody knows. International mail, it's called IMPC, is a code system. It's just like a country code. When you want to dial telecoms let's say plus one, it takes you to United States, plus two, five, four is Kenya, I mean plus four one is Switzerland. So the code is a routine system which we use to mail, to route our mail to a country. So that's a code which by which a country is carbonised, that's what's called the IMPC codes and standards. Thank you very much. Lady in the front to me, followed by the gentleman with the black jacket afterwards, thank you. Hello, it's Christiana with the German Press Agency, another consumer question. In the event that the US leaves, are we going to see piles and piles of small packages building up in countries or in sorting centres? What exactly is going to happen on the 20th of October? Well, if United States leaves you will get those piles you are talking about here for sure. Because somehow every country has to figure out how to send mail to the United States. Because we will never, I mean the traditional system will completely shut down according to our current rules unless that is changed. So it means then that all the customers that are selling and those who are expecting to receive will be disappointed globally. It's a disruption, major disruption is in the way, if we don't solve the problem today. Please go ahead. Hi, I'm Ben Simon from AFP. Sir, you're a public servant from a developing country and I assume you interact with a lot of other public servants from developing countries. Do you think it's appropriate that China still retains that title as a developing nation given the size and capacity of its economy? Well, I think that is outside my pub view. I don't determine where, what is the level of development of any country. I think there are other borders like United Nations which classify that probably they cannot say better than I can do that. So we do respect that. Thank you. Any further questions in the front row, gentlemen of the White Jackets? Yes, good afternoon. John Zarekostas from Penske Media Corporation in the US. I was wondering, sir, you elaborated the differential between exporters and net importers. Can you give us an example for our lay readers, what it means in a big country exporter like China exporting to the US? What for a two kilogram package would be the subsidy equivalent given by the US personal service in a transaction like that? Just hypothetical. Well, what we mean by net exporter is a country that exports a lot of small packets out of the territory, outbound mail is called net exporter. And net importer is those countries that receive those mails. Which means that the outbound is less than the inbound.  But if you, so I hope you understand that. So the question is, please, remind me of your second question you said. What is the differential, what is the amount for a two kilogram package, for instance, that the net importing country would be subsidizing the exporting country? Right, this is again the contentious issue here. What happens here is that the United States is saying that they want to determine their self-declared rates. And here, this is something which, when you say self-declared rates is based on what? They say our country costs. Who determines those costs? And who compolises that? There are 192 countries. Each one has a different level of economic development. Each one has different priorities and everything. So how we can figure out what is average and what is a bit difficult here? And who will certify that? So this is a debate, that's the crux of the matter of what we are trying to deal with. But in the amount of volumes, of course there are specific prices we have set for the small-limit pocket parcels. And I think that depends on the volume, I mean the traffic between two countries. I remember those figures. I'm sorry to push this issue, but for our readers, what is on the two kilogram package, what is the subsidy equivalent today? Is it 50 cents a package, 20 cents, 10 cents? Just to give a perspective to our readers, otherwise we are lost here. Okay, probably sir, with due respect I can refer that to my technical team who deal with the finance issues. And we can give you that information a little later. Thank you. Please Paul. Paul Eden from CB Research. We report on global postal industry plus 15 years. I'll just cover the detailed questions really. Can you just clarify how many countries are actually present here now, and therefore how many have voting rights, and therefore what would be the necessary majority for any of the options? Question one, question two, is if option C is accepted in voting form, what is the timings for the implementation of option C? And the third question, which I've just forgotten. Okay, let me deal with the first two. According to when we checked the column this morning, we have seen nearly 140 countries, I think maybe here in this book, how many have the credentials, because again there's another level, the right vote that we have to establish, because the post people are still coming this morning. So I feel that we have to deal with that. So that's not quite clear to me as I speak right now, but because these are the numbers that are moving. But I think we have a substantial column that can be able to take valid decisions on that. The second question again. The second question is if option C is accepted. So again the other question I have is can you just also tell us what is the timing for the votes? On the different options. Okay, that I'll tell you. Sorry, and then the final question then is if C is accepted, what would be the timing for the implementation of C? Alright, first of all the voting begins this afternoon on option B. There's a procedural issue here. What we do here is that when we have so many options like this, the principle which applies to the UPU here is that we always take the option that is farthest away from the status quo is the one that's going to be addressed first. So in this case B is the farthest away from the status quo, therefore the option which is sponsored by the United States and a few other countries would be the first one to go into a discussion this afternoon. And if countries now will have to vote on that, now the results could be either things. Either it passes, which means it is voted positively, and then everything else falls. C and B and A and C minus, whatever we're talking about, everything is gone. But if B does not get sufficient support, then we can go now to C, and C has developed 12 different proposals around C. So the feeling I got here from other countries is that C had a lot of interest of compromise maybe around C, I don't know. This will depend on the member countries, but if A does not pass, then certainly we're going back to C, and countries now will have to see what that C will look like. So there's some people who want to push the C towards B, and the other group which wants to have a C minus pushing them towards A, so that's where the divide will be. But we feel that could be the area of compromise and discussion. If that turns to option C. One follow-up and then Nick after that. The only follow-up is just to clarify, if any of the C options are, any of the options C amendments are accepted, basically, when would all this actually be implemented? What would happen next? So the time is caress on distance. There's an implementation phase of about five years, beginning 2021. There will be a baseline for this year which is 2020, then from there 2021, 2023, 2023, 2024, 2025. That's the transition period which is actually embedded in option C. Thank you. Nick, go ahead. Good morning. Nick, how are you? I presume that you have some questions for my team. Well, I'll address this to you first, if I may. If option B was adopted, what is the formula that would be applied to determining self-declared rates for 190 countries? Secondly, I have a delegate suggesting that if the United States was to pull out unilaterally, somebody's describing to me as the beginning of the end of the UPU, would you endorse that? How would you do that? Well, let me answer the question. Really, UPU is a UN organisation with 192 countries. We've had other organisations that, why US was a member and they pulled out and it was not the end of that organisation. So I think, of course, there's a big disruption certainly, but the sun will always rise and member countries will find other alternative means to be able to exchange this global network. I don't think it's going to disappear just like that. What was the first question? The first part, I missed it again. The first question was, if option B were adopted, how do they determine the self-declared rates for 190 countries? Well, it means then that every country will be able to set up their own rates and so the current system will fall. That's what it means. So UPU will not be able to set the rates for any other time of the year system, so it is everybody for themselves and then we'll have to have an agreement. I mean, more or less, there will be agreements to be in place, I think. Okay. Are there any other questions? Okay, I'm very sorry, I didn't see you before. Let's just have a comment from Mr Bosgeik and then go into the final round of questions. We'll take a quick comment on the questions from Mr Bosgeik and then I'll come back to you. Okay? Thank you very much. All the questions were addressed to Albert Duget, so I was relieved. This point is highly important. The real message has to be that the union has to overcome this problem and strengthen the networks that it has. No member country should face the withdrawal of any other country in the future. Therefore, we are really working hard on the compromising rules. But we also need to understand the fact that all the countries are sovereign countries and they can make their own decisions. And I believe that during this three-day working period, we will try to find a common ground to make all the countries happy and we will also provide our union to be kept as a whole. And there is a very intensive competition all around the world which forces every member country to make their own decisions in various manners. And you also asked the question about this issue. This overall general status will increase the cost and it will have a negative impact on the customers. And this is not something that we desire as the sector. Therefore, we need to take immediate actions in order to prevent a high cost. And the solution is not the withdrawal of any country or keeping all the countries all together. We need to focus on maximization of the cost of all countries. And I do believe that if optimization is our approach, then the solution will come faster. And otherwise, the cost will be higher in the future and all the people will escape from our sector. And actually this situation will conclude and only the withdrawal of one member country from the union but it will also have a very negative impact on all union, on all member states in this sector. But I am highly positive about the discussions here and I do believe that we will have a very common solution to this. Thank you very much. The lady with the v-neck, black jumper in the corner to the left. I have a couple of questions. First, if I got this correct, I think the United States does respond to the agreement then you will be obliged to go ahead and have a bilateral agreement with the federal agreement from 190 countries. If it is unable to do this within a year or whatever it is, I would like to know what the revocation of that will be. Will it mean that the countries with whom it doesn't have an agreement will no longer be in any postal service won't be able to put a stamp on a package that countries will have to use delivery of organizations like UBS and DHL and the next and so forth. So again, I would like to know a $4 package. How much would that cost? You know, what would that cost be? And then secondly, there is some question as to whether China is a developing country or not. But there are countries in Africa, elsewhere where there is no question that they are developing countries. What will the impact be upon countries in Africa and developing countries? Well, Madam, just to answer your question, really as I said, the moment a country walks away from a treaty in the Universal Postal Union, all the services and all the standards and the rules that govern the international supply chain system developed for 145 years will no longer be accessible to them. Even with those, they are going to make bilateral arrangements. That is not postal mail. That's the cargo. And the airline's cargo, they can take whatever form or shape. We don't call them mail because that's not a stamp. So there are many other things that are attached to this. There is a national accounting system. How do they compensate each other? How do they deal with issues of return much of the service, for example, the inquiries that follow, I can tell you more than 20, 30 different things that cannot be able to be addressed by one. Here with one signature, you get access to all these services. But when you get out, then you're on your own. So the same problem will be on the reverse side. Because all these other countries, we have to deal with them on similar terms as well. So it's a big disruption that I have seen. The question of how much it will cost a packet. I don't know. Once you declare yourself, you declare it first of all, you have to say what your terms are first. And then the customers on the other side have to know and those post-organizations, whoever you are dealing with on the other side have to load those costs of the new tariffs which they have set up into their costings. Then it will impact on the customer. So there's no question for me in my mind that we are going to have price hikes. The whole thing about this in ratio is some countries want it to hike at the prices. Another thing, no, let's keep it low. Let's keep it low. And the implications for developing nations or less developed nations? Here it affects every country, not the developed or developing countries. Because the same tariff which was raised, if the US decides okay fine, this packet of 2 kilos will cost 10 kilos, I mean 10 dollars in their country and that's going to be uniform for everyone else. So this is the way we see it. So that may have an impact on every country to be honest. I don't know really. I can't give you specific figures of how much to impact on developing countries, but certainly developing countries exchange may with the US and any other country that may wish to go that route. And therefore the consequences are quite there. We have written a full report on this, 70 pages or 80 pages on this on the consequence of the departure of a major country. You can find them on our website. Then it probably will give you a more detailed issue. If you put your hand up I think over here. I think at the back. Do you still wish to ask a question? Okay. Okay. Gentlemen to my left. Anadolu Agency by the Malta Turkish News Agency. He asked a question to Mr. Kenan Bozik. You are very optimistic to find a solution for the options. What if you don't find common ground during this extraordinary assembly? What is the next step for you as you are coming from the sector as you are one of the key members of the European Union? Thank you very much for the question. I can say that we have been conducting very long-term studies and we have been carrying out discussions on this issue. And I believe that leaving the European Union will never be an advantage of any member country. And the countries who voted for option B are also well aware of this fact. And therefore I sincerely believe that the countries will focus on discussing the option C to try to find a common ground. And this big negativity about the option B will also have a big negative impact on the majority of the member countries. And I can see that the EUPU members will not show a positive approach towards the option B. But I think that our members are really optimistic and majority of the members are paying efforts in order to compromise. Therefore at this stage I do believe that finding a common ground on a joint solution will be an advantage of all member countries. And I do also see that a member country realizes the fact that leaving, withdrawing from the union will never be their advantage. Thank you very much. Go ahead sir. Let me just say something here please. So that I am not misread or misquoted. I am very optimistic that we are going to find a solution here. Countries can come in different positions but we have a track record of solidity. We have survived two world wars and the universal postal union has always really reinvented itself. The history will bear us out that every single technology when they arrive on the scene people thought the post office will disappear. When the aviation came and the railways came and the motor vehicles came and we moved from the horses I mean that is the change of technology. When the internet came we came with new services when the telegraph and everything came so everybody every age as we had had our own challenges. This is a new age we have been having serious problems with the substitution electronic substitution and the letter mail has been declined for a couple of years now and understandably people are using new technologies but technology has always been an enabler for us to provide better service and faster services and that is why today we have entered into e-commerce space we are using the latest technologies we are using drones we are using robotic and phishing intelligence and we are really in the cutting edge of things. Today the biggest growth potential for the postal network is the e-commerce and financial services which all use the digital transformation that all countries are going through. So we are there very current we are there with the customers and this problem here is just a small one in our view and we are going to have watch this space tomorrow or the day after tomorrow you will see that you know there is much of any country here or rather a stalemate to happen in this meeting we may have different hard discussions but eventually I am optimistic that we are going to have a potential which will be able to keep the union together no country is going to walk away and will be positive that this union is going to see another hundred or five years coming. Thank you very much for your attention and for your questions Okay thank you very much No we will go back to your room just to say very very quickly obviously we are releasing press releases, other statements as we go forward with the congress please keep in touch this may not be the last press conference okay so thank you very much I will let you know pleasure pleasure very good I have what you said perfectly on message by the way in my notebook I used to work with the way the way