Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1004762,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1004762/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 174,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Rarieda, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Otiende Amollo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13465,
        "legal_name": "Paul Otiende Amollo",
        "slug": "paul-otiende-amollo"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I stand to support this Motion. Sometimes it is important to go on very clear record. If you carefully examined the very reasons you are opposing, you might find they are the very reasons we are supporting. Hon. Speaker, you gave your directions on this matter on 18th of this month. Indeed, in complying with the Standing Orders as cited by the Leader of the Majority Party and the Leader of the Minority Party, and your own directions, it is quite consistent with such a request. We must go on record that we are supporting the Motion not because of anything like newfound unity, but because it is the right thing to do for this House to proceed properly. First of all, under Standing Order 179, it is important to know that although the interpretation has been put by the Clerk to constitute this meeting within seven days, a clear reading suggests that it is the date that should be fixed within seven days, not the meeting itself. There is a distinction in Standing Order 179(1) and (2). Standing Order 179(1) says that there shall be fixed within seven days. That is the original composition. But under Standing Order 179(2), when there is a vacancy or one has been removed, it is the date that must be fixed within seven days, not the meeting. It is important to get those two interpretations right. The Standing Order that fixes the meeting, as you pointed out last week, is Standing Order 172(2), which says that the meeting shall then be convened within 14 days. So, as a matter of fact, the request which is very well placed is a request to allow us time beyond the 14 days. From 14 days to 30 days is not a long time. It is also interesting to note that whereas Standing Order 256, which the Leader of the Majority Party has pointed out, allows us to do this, Standing Order 256A allows us to go even further. Under Standing Order 256A on extension of time, as long as there is a Motion and we have resolved, we can take any period. Standing Order 256, which is the one he has cited, clearly contemplates that paragraph (2), under which this debate falls, is one that can invite an extension. It is important that we put it on record that this extension is quite necessary under the exceptional circumstances that are contemplated. What are these circumstances? The Leader of the Majority The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}