Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 694265,
    "url": "http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/694265/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 396,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. George Ng’ang’a",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Thank you. Refer to your witness statement at Page 8 in Volume I of the governor’s documents. There is the paragraph that he quotes Section 131 of the Public Finance Management (PFM) Act. We want to see whether your comment that their decision was illegal has any basis. You have cited the provision of Section 131 and stated that:- “The county assembly shall consider the county government budget estimates with a view to approving them with or without amendments, in time for the relevant appropriation law and any other laws required to implement the budget, to be passed by 30th June in each year.” Therefore, the decision that we have seen complies with that section, to the extent that it was passed on 30th June. Now, let us go to appropriation. You have said that the appropriation could not be passed by 30th June. I will refer the witness to the provision of Section 129 of the PFM Act, which requires the CEC member to submit to the county assembly the budget estimates and any other bills required to implement the budget, except the Finance Bill, by 30th April in that year. My question is: When you were forwarding the draft or proposed estimates did you as the acting CEC Member for Finance submit to the assembly the proposed Bills, in particular, the Appropriation Bill proposed to implement the proposed estimates, in line with Section 129? Was that done by you, as the Acting CEC Member for Finance by 30th April?"
}