| Bwana PS, true that these drafts were debated and i recall attending the forum at KSPS. Problem is this was a while back (2006-7) but the problem has always been that you never get to know what part of non-government stakeholders contributions were taken on board (went to the cabinet) and which parts were ignored. Eventually ofcourse one will get to know the details when the Bill gets to the floor of Parliament. And then the real challenge starts in that if other stakeholders think that what is before parliament is not "inclusive" enough, they will try to influence MPs to change it accordingly. At that level ONLY the big "influential" stakeholders (read: donors/private sector) can get the attention of the MPs; let alone their "buy-in" to make changes (read: forget our famous wanjiku's input at this level) Finally, even if the big stakeholders do get their changes in, if at all the Executive feels that those changes significantly alter their original policy objectives, they can always play the red card (veto) and take the whole process back to square1. So in short, my submission is that it is always cheaper to build and probably more importantly confirm consensus at the beginning of the policy process rather than towards the end. walu. --- On Sat, 7/24/10, bitange@jambo.co.ke <bitange@jambo.co.ke> wrote:
|