Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1010438,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1010438/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 400,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Funyula, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) Wilberforce Oundo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13331,
        "legal_name": "Wilberforce Ojiambo Oundo",
        "slug": "wilberforce-ojiambo-oundo-2"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Speaker for giving me this opportunity to contribute to this Report. Let me first start by stating that I belong to the Departmental Committee on Trade, Industry and Co-operatives that generally oversees this particular Government agency. Yes, we are aware that there have been issues concerning KEBS, but I have various concerns on the issues that are being raised in this Report. Hon. Speaker, if you look at page 13 of the Report, the crux of the matter is that KEBS allowed a company that presented fraudulent and misleading information. Those are two companies. We need to pause and ask a question: How does that become a problem of KEBS? Issues of fraudulent or fake documents fall on the realm of criminal law and are punishable under the Penal Code. Such issues cannot be dealt with by Parliament. Hon. Speaker, concerning the recommendations, and I must say this with a lot of respect to the Committee... The Committee has done tremendous work. We appreciate that the PIC is an oversight committee and, at any given time, we should never try to challenge its reports. However, honestly speaking, the recommendations are contradictory. One, you want to hold the Managing Director (MD) personally responsible. What that means, I have not understood. What does it mean to say, 'personally responsible'? Looking at the issues at hand, there is no financial loss. There could have been impropriety probably in the processes, but KEBS stands to make no loss at all because it is involved in expenditure of public funds. Those who are importing are the ones who pay. Third, there is a recommendation to debar the two companies, a recommendation which had not been actualised. There is the law of natural justice. How then would you expect KEBS to decline to receive bids from those companies and yet, the process of debarment had not happened at all? Finally, when you look at recommendation number four, I would say, again with due respect to the Committee, it is just preposterous. These are fishing expeditions. You are anticipating something that will happen or will not happen. How do you know there are going to be legal issues? You are as well usurping the powers of the court and the criminal investigation system to determine there is going to be an offence that is likely to happen. It is just like, you are walking in the streets and the police officer looks at the way you are walking and determines you are likely to commit a fraud or an offence. Hon. Speaker, we are a House that should be respected. 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."
}