The Institution of Engineers Malaysia (IEM) is opposed to the idea of regulating IT professionals as mooted in the proposed Computing Professionals Bill 2011.
IEM labelled the Bill as a "counter-productive" move that would stifle the creativity and innovation that are inherent to the information technology (IT) industry.
"If such a regulation is put in place in the early development of the industry, there most certainly will not be the proliferation of innovative solutions to make the industry what it is today," says the statement issued by the professional body today.
IEM noted that the talent pool in the IT industry came from very diverse backgrounds, experience and qualifications, with some of them even without formal qualifications.
"Regulating IT professionals can lead to a reduction in competitiveness, which will be detrimental to the achievement of developed country status as envisaged in the National Key Result Areas."
"It (the Bill) is a protectionist scheme that adds unnecessary hindrance and costs, such as staff to man the proposed Board of Computing Professionals, to set and conduct exams, training courses, fees, paperwork and the like, which will also increase bureaucracy."
IEM stressed that the regulation of professions should only be done in industries where public safety and interests were at stake.
While acknowledging that individual organisations should have the flexibility to set up their own registers of eligible IT professionals for their specific needs, IEM believes that the "one-size-fits-all" solution as proposed in the Bill will not solve the current industry concerns.
‘Government not competent'
Meanwhile, the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas) questioned the government's competency to regulate and accredit the IT industry.
"The government really does not have the competency to accredit IT practitioners because the industry evolves continuously through innovation," Ideas senior executive Medecci Lineil said in a statement.
"I firmly believe that this law is not needed because it denies the efficiency of the market and it should therefore be withdrawn."
Concurring with IEM, Lineil said the government's attempt to interfere in the supervision of the IT industry was a pedantic "step backwards" and understandably, dynamic technopreneurs and others in the industry opposed the Bill.
Instead, Ideas proposed consumer satisfaction as the ultimate "supervisor"or regulator for the IT industry, and for self-regulation through a code of ethics promulgated by the industry itself, without government interference.
IEM labelled the Bill as a "counter-productive" move that would stifle the creativity and innovation that are inherent to the information technology (IT) industry.
"If such a regulation is put in place in the early development of the industry, there most certainly will not be the proliferation of innovative solutions to make the industry what it is today," says the statement issued by the professional body today.
IEM noted that the talent pool in the IT industry came from very diverse backgrounds, experience and qualifications, with some of them even without formal qualifications.
"Regulating IT professionals can lead to a reduction in competitiveness, which will be detrimental to the achievement of developed country status as envisaged in the National Key Result Areas."
"It (the Bill) is a protectionist scheme that adds unnecessary hindrance and costs, such as staff to man the proposed Board of Computing Professionals, to set and conduct exams, training courses, fees, paperwork and the like, which will also increase bureaucracy."
IEM stressed that the regulation of professions should only be done in industries where public safety and interests were at stake.
While acknowledging that individual organisations should have the flexibility to set up their own registers of eligible IT professionals for their specific needs, IEM believes that the "one-size-fits-all" solution as proposed in the Bill will not solve the current industry concerns.
‘Government not competent'
Meanwhile, the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas) questioned the government's competency to regulate and accredit the IT industry.
"The government really does not have the competency to accredit IT practitioners because the industry evolves continuously through innovation," Ideas senior executive Medecci Lineil said in a statement.
"I firmly believe that this law is not needed because it denies the efficiency of the market and it should therefore be withdrawn."
Concurring with IEM, Lineil said the government's attempt to interfere in the supervision of the IT industry was a pedantic "step backwards" and understandably, dynamic technopreneurs and others in the industry opposed the Bill.
Instead, Ideas proposed consumer satisfaction as the ultimate "supervisor"or regulator for the IT industry, and for self-regulation through a code of ethics promulgated by the industry itself, without government interference.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.