ict practitioners bill is back

For the record KICTANet was opposed to the ICT practitioners bill. Please
see the submission to parliament www.kictanet.or.ke/?page_id=28886

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Ahmed Mohamed Maawy via kictanet <
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

> Listers,
> Allow me to add a comment or two. I believe we will start deviating from
> the main issue.
> Firstly, I think we need to very much understand where the buck stops on
> each matter. As much as yes, Bwana Mucheru, you require the industry to
> take lead in defining frameworks, there also needs to be guidance from the
> top. KICTANET is (as on the website) a
> catalyst for reforms. Bwana Mucheru these reforms need to be worked on by
> the both of us. We need you to become a part of the process together with
> all of us. The whole point of having the MoICT and bodies like Kictanet
> (which are catalysts) is the fact that we need to work together. Silos
> don\’t solve a problem.
> Bwana Mucheru, also I may not recollect this list necessarily being
> hostile in the past. And as any of us, you have a right to make your
> comments heard, and also I believe we need to also have a feedback loop
> between all of us. I think through the KICTANET website it is evident
> KICTANET has been doing its job well. If there are ways KICTANET can
> improve, Bwana Mucheru, feel free to raise the suggestions. This country
> belongs to all of us Sir.
> Lastly, Bwana Mucheru, this list has too many members who are strategic to
> the development of our country. And all of us need to be engaged with you.
> I think it will not do all of us much justice if we see you refrain from
> commenting on it. Lets all work collectively.
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Fiona Asonga via kictanet <
> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>> Dear Ali
>> You were with us at KEPSA Offices when we asked that KICATNET nominate
>> representatives to work with us on the ICT Practitioners Bill. Because we
>> want to achieve more as an industry we ave continues to work with your
>> representatives even on the Vision 2030 MTP III plan and other engagements
>> we have had with the ministry of ICT. It is not about KICTANET being a
>> member but being a partner and working with TESPOK, DRAKE, KITOS, BAKE,
>> ICTAK and any other ICT association.
>> The document we circulated through KEPSA to the Ministry and parliament
>> included KICATNET as part of KEPSA. You may need to reconsider your
>> statement to CS Mucheru. Secondly, the KEPSA partnership with KICTANET is
>> not compulsory. However, it is in the interest of achieving similar set
>> goals for the ICT sector as a whole. KICATNET is free to pull out of it at
>> any time just advise KEPSA secretariat on the same.
>> Together we can achieve more
>> Kind regards