[kictanet] kictanet Digest, Vol 74, Issue 92
Edwin Onchari
eonchari at lynxbits.com
Tue Jul 23 23:57:21 EAT 2013
I have this nascent feeling that this forum has been for a while now been
used as a "incubation center" for ideas for the "strategically placed" to
further their agenda. Why is it that constructive ideas/contributions herein
seem to simply go to waste by being ignored & sidelined by past and current
GOK well placed? I read contributions on this topic and reminisce on
my/others remarks on this forum in regard to BPO and sigh- here we go
again!!
Edwin
-----Original Message-----
From: kictanet
[mailto:kictanet-bounces+eonchari=lynxbits.com at lists.kictanet.or.ke] On
Behalf Of kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 8:43 PM
To: Edwin
Subject: kictanet Digest, Vol 74, Issue 92
Send kictanet mailing list submissions to
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke
You can reach the person managing the list at
kictanet-owner at lists.kictanet.or.ke
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of kictanet digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Thoughts on Kenya's National Broadband Strategy
(Brian Munyao Longwe)
2. Re: [ISOC_KE] Thoughts on Kenya's National Broadband Strategy
(Ali Hussein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:04:01 +0300
From: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com>
To: "Judy M. Muli" <judym.muli at gmail.com>
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>,
"isoc at orion.my.co.ke" <isoc at orion.my.co.ke>
Subject: Re: [kictanet] Thoughts on Kenya's National Broadband
Strategy
Message-ID:
<CAHSdPfbXKRwtbFXaV8xDwMe2MCzE46XmwNEpc860Q101g=khJw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dear Judy,
If you truly knew my track record in national ICT development as well as the
amount of effort I have freely given towards this cause over the past
19 years since my first responsibilities in the now defunct East African
Internet Association (EAIA), then you might not really be asking me for
patience.
The problem we have, very simply put, is a human factor problem, some
thoughts on this from me in e 140 Friday blog http://140friday.com/?p=485
Walubengo, it is not matoke that causes me to speak out, it is sadness at
the depths to which we have fallen. I think it is only a matter of time
before the public (ourselves and others) start crying out for the blood of
the officers who will have led us as a country into a hole out of which we
cannot climb.
Sadly,
Mblayo
On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, Judy M. Muli wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Hi Brian and the other key stakeholders and experts in the ICT industry:
> there is need to engage more with ICT officers and managers already
> working in the public sector...there is lots of written material,
> research papers, implementation papers, and write ups- truly rich
> content in the government of Kenya so as to get and gain first hand
> information and experience on what's on the ground in the public
organizations..
>
> Where we are as a country and ICT experts is not about Point of view,
> planning etc Kenyans are the best planners, and the plans exist. our
> need at the moment as a country and in major ICT projects is on
implementation.
> being involved and providing tangible and specific solutions on
> implementation.
>
> Warm regards,
> I am happy to have joined the right forum,- currently I am hopeful
> that technology will not be blamed by organizations like IEBC and
> others on our watch.
> Lets get the plans already in place, empower and improve them as we
> quickly provide implementation, monitoring and evaluation tangible,
> specific, clear guidelines.
>
> Judy Muli
> Head ICT
> COB
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe
> <blongwe at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'blongwe at gmail.com');>
> > wrote:
>
>> How about the attached. My input to the so called "National Public
>> Key Infrastructure Stakeholder Consultation"
>>
>> Despite personal phone calls which I received from both Dr. Ndemo and
>> Paul Kukubo that I would receive a response, it seems that somewhere
>> along the way - I was dismissed as a "noise-maker" - I tried to keep
>> it quiet, now let me make some noise.
>>
>> I was also very disappointed to hear through the grapevine that some
>> senior people said "Brian is only making noise because he doesn't
>> have a job" along with the implication that I was seeking an
>> appointment/assignment into the PKI project....disgusting....
>>
>> Anyway, here are the attachments. Zero response to date - and I can
>> promise you, zero change in the plans/design...
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:24 PM, James Mbugua <jgmbugua at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> They are here. Let them respond.
>>
>> As for the Cabinet Secretary, we will judge him by performance not by
>> statements. He should state at least three flagship goals he intends
>> to achieve.
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Barrack Otieno
>> <otieno.barrack at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> You raise a very important issue. I attended the broadband meeting
>> and whereas it was elaborately organized there is a lot of discomfort
>> that i will raise on this platform.
>>
>> Clearly it appears the multi stakeholder model is under serious
>> attack and if we are not careful the gains we have made in the last
>> 10 years in building an enviable ICT community Internationaly will go
>> down the drain. I interacted with several technocrats and to my
>> dismay majority of those in Civil Society Organisations that are
>> meant to check the government are branded as trouble makers.
>> Difference in opinion is treated as personal affront , worse still it
>> was clear that our input no longer matters to put it bluntly from the
>> few engagements i had this morning, we are resource persons. You may
>> have noticed that COFEK raised a similar issue in a press release and
>> i have just seen an email from a lister in which he was quoting the
>> CS that some people are making noise in a corner which i found to be
undiplomatic if at all it is true.
>> You have spoken for many who are murmuring and i hope the Cabinet
>> Secretary who is on this list takes note of this concerns, once
>> goodwill is lost it might take time to recover it and this will
>> result in stalled or worse still failed projects. We need meaningful
>> engagement based on national aspirations not personal preferences and
>> cronyism, i agree meaningless stakeholder consultations should be put
>> to an end, we need a clear process of soliciting for public input,
>> the same should show when the public views have been dropped and why?
>> ever wondered why open data is still a myth to name but a few?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe
<blongwe at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have just gone through the recently launched National Broadband
>> Strategy.
>>
>> Sadly, none of my submitted input (included below) was accomodated
>> (even after confirmation from CCK that they had been received). I
>> guess this is a sign of the times, because it seems that over recent
>> years "public consultations" by CCK and Govt on ICT issues have been
>> merely stage-managed exercises aimed at giving an appearance of
>> inclusion, but in reality are merely rubber-stamping exercises which
>> allow largely third party driven agendas (vendors, foreign govts) to
>> take center stage and prioritization in our strategies, policies, laws
etc...
>>
>> I guess I will just have to stop making the effort to "contribute" to
>> these processes as it
>>
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/judym.muli%40gm
>> ail.com
>>
>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder
>> platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT
>> policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for
>> reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled
growth and development.
>>
>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable
>> behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times
>> and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize,
>> respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20130723/e4d3c4
94/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:36:45 +0300
From: Ali Hussein <ali at hussein.me.ke>
To: Walubengo J <jwalu at yahoo.com>
Cc: "isoc at orion.my.co.ke" <isoc at orion.my.co.ke>,
"kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ISOC_KE] Thoughts on Kenya's National
Broadband Strategy
Message-ID: <BC5CC162-2906-41DE-98BF-A10EAEC6FCE0 at hussein.me.ke>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Reminds me of the disaster that was WCIT12...
Ali Hussein
CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd
Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd
+254 713 601113/ 0770 906375
"The future belongs to him who knows how to wait." - Russian Proverb
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2013, at 6:16 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> @Mblayo,
>
> It appears the matoke u r consuming is really firing you up :-)
>
> But I totally agree. Stakeholder consultations without a formal feedback
mechanism for the public to know if their comments were considered, and how
they were then not taken onboard can be frustrating. Govt must better define
how it processes stakeholder input.
>
> @Barrack asked a similar qtn at Karen meeting 2weeks ago and we were
informed that Govt has final say - which is fine and acceptable. However,
Govt has on the other hand an obligation to report back to public in terms
of how many comments were recieved, how many were taken on board, how many
were amended before adoption, and how many were rejected and reasons why.
>
> Otherwise public can get fatigued and begin to suspect perhaps
> correctly that no one even reads their input and public is invited to
> have free lunch and rubber stamp what is already predetermined by some
> high ranking men and women in dark suits :-)
>
> walu.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 3:41 PM AST (Arabian) Brian Munyao Longwe wrote:
>
>> How about the attached. My input to the so called "National Public
>> Key Infrastructure Stakeholder Consultation"
>>
>> Despite personal phone calls which I received from both Dr. Ndemo and
>> Paul Kukubo that I would receive a response, it seems that somewhere
>> along the way - I was dismissed as a "noise-maker" - I tried to keep
>> it quiet, now let me make some noise.
>>
>> I was also very disappointed to hear through the grapevine that some
>> senior people said "Brian is only making noise because he doesn't have a
job"
>> along with the implication that I was seeking an
>> appointment/assignment into the PKI project....disgusting....
>>
>> Anyway, here are the attachments. Zero response to date - and I can
>> promise you, zero change in the plans/design...
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:24 PM, James Mbugua <jgmbugua at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> They are here. Let them respond.
>>>
>>> As for the Cabinet Secretary, we will judge him by performance not
>>> by statements. He should state at least three flagship goals he
>>> intends to achieve.
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Barrack Otieno
<otieno.barrack at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> You raise a very important issue. I attended the broadband meeting
>>> and whereas it was elaborately organized there is a lot of
>>> discomfort that i will raise on this platform.
>>>
>>> Clearly it appears the multi stakeholder model is under serious
>>> attack and if we are not careful the gains we have made in the last
>>> 10 years in building an enviable ICT community Internationaly will
>>> go down the drain. I interacted with several technocrats and to my
>>> dismay majority of those in Civil Society Organisations that are
>>> meant to check the government are branded as trouble makers.
>>> Difference in opinion is treated as personal affront , worse still
>>> it was clear that our input no longer matters to put it bluntly from
>>> the few engagements i had this morning, we are resource persons. You
>>> may have noticed that COFEK raised a similar issue in a press
>>> release and i have just seen an email from a lister in which he was
>>> quoting the CS that some people are making noise in a corner which i
found to be undiplomatic if at all it is true.
>>> You have spoken for many who are murmuring and i hope the Cabinet
>>> Secretary who is on this list takes note of this concerns, once
>>> goodwill is lost it might take time to recover it and this will
>>> result in stalled or worse still failed projects. We need meaningful
>>> engagement based on national aspirations not personal preferences
>>> and cronyism, i agree meaningless stakeholder consultations should
>>> be put to an end, we need a clear process of soliciting for public
>>> input, the same should show when the public views have been dropped
>>> and why? ever wondered why open data is still a myth to name but a few?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe
<blongwe at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I have just gone through the recently launched National Broadband
>>>> Strategy.
>>>>
>>>> Sadly, none of my submitted input (included below) was accomodated
>>>> (even after confirmation from CCK that they had been received). I
>>>> guess this is a sign of the times, because it seems that over
>>>> recent years "public consultations" by CCK and Govt on ICT issues
>>>> have been merely stage-managed exercises aimed at giving an
>>>> appearance of inclusion, but in reality are merely rubber-stamping
>>>> exercises which allow largely third party driven agendas (vendors,
>>>> foreign govts) to take center stage and prioritization in our
strategies, policies, laws etc...
>>>>
>>>> I guess I will just have to stop making the effort to "contribute"
>>>> to these processes as it seems to be pointless and an exercise in
futility.
>>>> Hopefully others will have better luck?
>>>>
>>>> Have a good day,
>>>>
>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Brian Munyao Longwe
>>>> <blongwe at gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had shared these thoughts in ISOC-KE and someone asked if I would
>>>> mind sharing them with KICTANET. Well, here goes:
>>>>
>>>> ------------
>>>>
>>>> Is it right to explicitly name a particular technology within the
>>>> context of such a high level strategy?
>>>> Pg 6
>>>> ?? the immediate plan to further deploy broadband through a
>>>> nationwide LTE system
>>>>
>>>> The language in principle 2 (pg 8) and principle 7 (pg 9) seem to
>>>> be contradictory. While principle 2 emphasizes technology
>>>> neutrality (a good thing), principle 7 in elaborating competitive
>>>> use of technologies explicitly names fiber optic and wireless
>>>> broadband. It is proposed that the language here be changed to
>>>> distinguish between fixed and non-fixed media as alternatives for
>>>> infrastructure
>>>>
>>>> Pg 21 - the relationship between a pacemaker (for heart conditions)
>>>> and content & applications is not immediately obvious - could this
>>>> be the wrong kind of example to use in this section?
>>>>
>>>> Pg 22 (Table 4) on the problem of an unstructured innovation chain;
>>>> wouldn't it be better to aim at developing a National Innovation
>>>> System - rather than simply seeking to "institutionalize the
>>>> innovation value chain"? The current recommendations fall far short
>>>> of *really* tackling the underlying issues and proposing sufficient
>>>> interventions to address the problem in the medium to long term.
>>>>
>>>> Pg 23 the figures related to mobile penetration should be updated
>>>> with latest market estimates and not figures from 2011. Current
>>>> estimates are at 100% mobile penetration. Also the percentage of
>>>> *youth* is questionable as it is based on a 2005 study. Should
>>>> statistics that are 8 years old be used in such an important document?
>>>>
>>>> pg 26-32 Section 3.4 Policy, Legal & Regulatory Environment
>>>>
>>>> While CCK has over the past 13 years of it's existence facilitated
>>>> massive transformation with the information and communication
>>>> technology sector in the country and the region as a whole. It
>>>> could be argued that the Commission's mandate has become bloated
>>>> over the years, leading to a "too many eggs in one basket" problem.
>>>>
>>>> It could be recommended that specialized agencies be established to
>>>> deal with essential issue that do not strictly fall under the
>>>> regulatory mandate of CCK and may, in some cases create opportunity
>>>> for conflict of interest. These include but are not limited to:
>>>> Operation and Administration of the Universal Service Fund,
>>>> Operation and Administration of cyber-security related units, consumer
protection etc...
>>>>
>>>> While it is evident and obvious that CCK has served and may
>>>> continue to serve as an ideal "incubator" for these types of
>>>> services/agencies. It is true that they encompass a potentially
>>>> vast amount of work, especially within a national context and could
>>>> be better served by specialized agencies that can focus time and
>>>> resources and deal with issues in a focused and timely manner.
>>>>
>>>> pg 33 Section 3.5.2
>>>>
>>>> by specifically referring to a particular technology (in this case
>>>> LTE) as a means to accomplishing the objectives of this strategy -
>>>> it might appear that the strategy is biased towards particular
>>>> vendors or operators and may not necessarily be taking the best
>>>> interests of the marketplace and the greatest stakeholder - the
>>>> citizen - into consideration. It is recommended that the language
>>>> in this section be reworked to eliminate the mention of specific
technologies.
>>>>
>>>> The section on Financing and Investment should include
>>>> recommendations on various incentives to promote activity in the
>>>> area. Tax breaks, concessions, PPP proposals, allocations from
>>>> various existing (and new) funds etc...
>>>>
>>>> Section 4 Implementation
>>>>
>>>> once again, specific reference to LTE may not be in the best
>>>> interests of leaving the strategy open enought to allow for
>>>> competing and maybe more affordable technologies that can achieve
stated objectives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> isoc mailing list
>>>> isoc at orion.my.co.ke
>>>> http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Barrack O. Otieno
>>> +254721325277
>>> +254-20-2498789
>>> Skype: barrack.otieno
>>> http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kictanet mailing list
>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jgmbugua%40gma
>>> il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder
>>> platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT
>>> policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for
>>> reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled
growth and development.
>>>
>>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable
>>> behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's
>>> times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or
>>> personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or
qualifications.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kictanet mailing list
>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>>>
>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmai
>>> l.com
>>>
>>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder
>>> platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT
>>> policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for
>>> reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled
growth and development.
>>>
>>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable
>>> behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's
>>> times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or
>>> personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or
qualifications.
>
> _______________________________________________
> isoc mailing list
> isoc at orion.my.co.ke
> http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20130723/d94c24
45/attachment.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
------------------------------
End of kictanet Digest, Vol 74, Issue 92
****************************************
More information about the KICTANet
mailing list