Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1009632,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1009632/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 18,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Speaker",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "sponsored by the then nominated Member, Hon. Johnson Sakaja, the Banking (Amendment) Bill sponsored by the Member for Kiambu Constituency, Hon. Jude Njomo and the Engineering Technologists and Technicians Bill sponsored by the then Member for Bomet County, Hon. Cecilia Ng’etich, countermanded the recommendations made by the respective departmental committees. All of these proposals were subsequently passed by the House and assented into law. Hon. Members, the practice world over is that whenever Speakers are faced with a situation where they have to decide between a policy and a proposed legislation, they tend to rule in favour of legislation since it asserts the authority of the House. The above two scenarios exemplified by the actions of the House Business Committee and of the Speaker conform to a long held parliamentary tradition that, whenever the Speaker is confronted by a choice between the House, a Committee or an individual Member of the House, he always chooses the House for resolution. Hon. Members, I hasten to caution that the discretion that the House has lent the Speaker ought not to be construed by Members as a convenient avenue of circumventing the carefully woven fabric of the committee system under the Standing Orders. Majority of the work of the House is conducted in committees which have at their disposal relevant sectorial experience and expertise in their respective mandates and the assistance of competent technical officers both from within and outside Parliament. Accordingly, a decision to countermand the recommendation from a Committee of the House should be viewed as an exception and not the rule. Consequently, in the exceptional circumstance where a Member is genuinely aggrieved by the recommendation of a committee or the manner in which his or her legislative output is being processed by a committee, two secondary avenues for seeking direction or redress exist. First, and with regard to inordinate delays in the consideration or processing of a legislative proposal, the Member may move the House Business Committee to seek a resolution of the House for the advancement of its legislative mandate. Secondly, where a committee has made an adverse recommendation with regard to a legislative proposal, the Member may provide the Speaker with relevant information to inform his consideration of the Report and recommendation of the Departmental Committee. From the foregoing, you will note that the discretion granted to the Speaker by Standing Order No.114 is only with regard to the recommendation made by the departmental committees. Hon. Members, as you are aware, the pre-publication scrutiny in our current legislative process has two steps namely: money-Bill certification and consideration by the relevant committee. If a legislative proposal is determined to have money-Bill aspects contemplated under Article No.114 of the Constitution, it is forwarded to the Budget and Appropriations Committee for consideration and recommendation in consultation with the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury. On the other hand, if the proposal is determined not to have any money-Bill aspects, the Standing Orders require the Speaker to forward it to the relevant committee for initial consideration. In considering a legislative proposal, the relevant committee checks on such issues as constitutionality, existing provisions in law or conflict with other existing law without proposed amendment or repeal. As to whether that process adds value, I wish to state as follows: Firstly, Article 114 of the Constitution is a constitutional requirement. It is not a procedure or step that the House has a decision over as the House may proceed “only in accordance with the recommendation of the Budget and Appropriations Committee after taking into account the views of the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury”. Therefore, there is no question as to whether the process is necessary or not. Indeed, Article 114 of the Constitution expressly requires the House to only proceed with the consideration of a money bill in line with the recommendation of a committee mandated with that task and after 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."
}