RVR future at stake as Kenya plans asset sale

[Olekoima]

• Tweet

In Summary

    In the SGR contract, Kenya Railways expects to raise $41 million from the sale of wagons, railway tracks and sleepers belonging to the existing railway.
    Minister says once the construction of the standard gauge railway is complete, there will be two operators: Rift Valley Railways, which will operate the old line and Kenya Railways, who will be running the new standard gauge line through a concession.
    Sources within the government, however, believe that the existing concession with RVR will become untenable once the new Chinese-built railway line is in use, mainly because of the profitability issues within RVR.
http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/RVR-future-at-stake-as-Kenya-plans-asset-sale/-/2560/2475060/-/1152f7h/-/index.html

[Omollo]

I big cynical "pole" to the thieves. They swindled Kenyans and hoped to lay their hands on prime properties of Kenya Railways. Sadly for them, somehow KR remained alive and well and they could not get the bride.

They also failed to notice the love the Command and Control Economy Father in Kenya - Mwai Kibaki - and his love for reviving and expanding government ownership. KMC revival did not arouse their suspicions at all.

Before I say good riddance, the old railway can play a major role in the economy. There are minor problems which a serious operator and good investments can solve. I have seen railways worse than that making money elsewhere.

[RV Pundit]

why have two lines in the first place.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Two might come in handy if the pace of growth permits it.  A big if.

[Omollo]

why have two lines in the first place.

I don't know of any decent country with a decent Railway that runs a single track. In fact what some do is run 6 or more trains on the two tracks using special exchange stations. The more tracks the better.

[MOON Ki]

It is odd to do things that cost a great deal of money just on the basis that (a) other countries are doing it, and (b) more is better.   Unless the main objective is to have lines that are not fully used, empty wagons shuttling back and forth, etc. 

The real issues should be whether (a) the capacity is needed and (b) can be afforded.

Instead of arguing from "gut feeling", perhaps the numbers should be considered.    The EA Railways Master Plan, part of the work done by consultants hired by EAC, is worth a careful read.   It can be found here:  http://www.infrastructure.eac.int/

The reports looks at the current railway lines,  their capacity, projections in demand and essentially concludes that the current lines would be sufficient if spruced up and operated properly.   The cost figures  show that the SGR will not be worth the money.   

There is also at the same website a report and slides of a presentation by a Japanese expert on their experiences.   His conclusions were basically that (a)  the current lines are adequate if certain changes can be made,  (b) the obsession with standard gauge is misplaced, and (c) people should pay serious attention to maintenance, maintenance, and maintenance.

To my mind, what is required is that lessons be learned from the failures of the old railway line. 

[Omollo]

MoonKi

I doubt that you understood the gist of my argument and the reasons behind my suggestion.

1. The New railway is a reality having been constructed against all the best reasons advanced. I opposed it as much as I could feebly do.

2. There is the "old" line which is now run by RVR and which will most likely revert to KR. What to do with this line is the question at hand (unless I too misunderstood).

3. It would be of no Value Addition to the country for it to be dismantled and sold off (as it were in Sierra Leone) or left to decay.

4. My argument and that of many other people has been that the existing "old" railway was good enough with repairs and modernization of the line and the running stock. I cannot suddenly depart from that thinking and advocate for the mass thievery that the crooks are planning to work.

5 Allowing the old railway to run side by side with Uhuru's new railway is the chance we all need to gauge and test the wisdom of constructing the new one.

6. If there is a demand for it, why not? Not to mention killing it to remove competition is inherently uncompetitive and goes against known anti trust values. Uhuru has a mandate to build a new Railway (wherever) but the last time I checked his manifesto did not include dismantling the old one.

Over to you.

[MOON Ki]

Omollo:

Yes, I did

[MOON Ki]

Omollo:

I have absolutely no difficulty with what you have written just now; I agree with it.

On the other hand, I still don't know what to make of this:

"I don't know of any decent country with a decent Railway that runs a single track. In fact what some do is run 6 or more trains on the two tracks using special exchange stations. The more tracks the better."

[Omollo]

MoonKi

It would have been all order to follow through with decades old expectation to improve the existing railway line by adding another track and making improvements such as stronger bridges, straighter corners and reduced gradients - all to improve the speed and capacity of the trains - especially the freight trains. Looking at the history of the railway, it has had its unfair share of serious accidents with resultant loss of lives and cargo.

All these would have cost a fraction of the current investment in the new railway and saved my kids and yours from having to pay for our corruption, greed and wrong priorities. There was really no serious discrepancy, failure or shortcoming that led to the failure of Kenya Railways other than greed and corruption that saw a combined onslaught against it by vested interests. Moi wanted to grant his transport companies the advantage of transporting freight from Mombasa. KR was an impediment that had to be taken out of the picture. Then again KR had vast resources especially land, warehouses and moving stock. At one time KR had the largest fleet of buses and trucks. The telegraph and workshops were coveted additions.

Now that the new railway is a foregone conclusion, I see no reason why the old one cannot be left to pick up from where it left. Some of the grabbed land could be reclaimed by the National Land Commission - something that would be harder if it is killed as I fear it might.

Sorry for the insha

[MOON Ki]

Omollo:

There is no reason why there should not be business for the old line.    Beyond Nairobi, there is not the slightest hint that the SGR will exist as more than a line on some map:   where will money for the post-Nairobi extension come from?   when might construction start?  who knows.  (I can already see Uhuru running a neat, little con about how re-electing him would get the railway extended.)

I also note that Tanzania has finally seen sense: no new & fancy SGR.   Instead, it proposes to rehabilitate its old lines.   For that it has already got $300 billion from the world bank and is looking to get up to $1 billion in a *private*-public partnership.   If those lines get properly fixed, Uganda, Rwanda, etc. would find Tanzania as the better rail linkage; and that it turn would affect port business.    That could leave Kenya in a very awkward place.

[Omollo]

At best Uhuru thinks he is doing something good to mark him out as an achiever. At worst, he has simply been manipulated by money minting cartels who care nothing about the Railway. The old railway has a chance to grow. With the increased EAC cooperation, trains would freely move from Kisumu to Dar and from Mombasa to Dar / Kampala.

All this will only come if they do not sabotage it to help their new line. Their "Standard" Gauge Railway will find completely different standards from the borders and basically go nowhere. How can something be "standard" when it is the odd one out?