Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1013565,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1013565/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 297,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipipiri, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Amos Kimunya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, for this opportunity. Let me start by saying I support the Bill in principle. I congratulate the Member for bringing it, but I have some few reservations that I would like to bring to the attention of the House. I hope we shall tidy up this by the time we get to the Committee of the whole House, so that we achieve the objects of the Bill, but at the same time not end up creating more problems without giving a solution. This is because a solution should not create problems. It should actually solve a problem. I agree in principle that we need certainty in terms of succession planning and that we should not have positions being held in an acting capacity forever. However, when you now look at the Bill, much as it addresses the issue of somebody in an acting capacity, it does not say the circumstances under which someone is appointed to act. So, it presumes that everyone is acting just because of a position falling vacant. We have situations where officers will go on study leave and somebody else will be appointed to act in their position until they come back. That could be for one year. In those kind of situations, you cannot then tell the person who has been taught to act that they will only be paid for six months and after that, they will be forced to continue acting, but they will not be paid. So, there are some issues we will not address to separate the different circumstances in which people act. We also know how long the recruitment process takes in this country. We created this new animal called public participation. We have created so many variables in the recruitment process and it is not unlikely that a position could fall vacant, but the recruitment process then takes longer than six months. So, you are now punishing the person who will be acting by telling them they will only be paid for six months and nothing after that. So, for this to work, we will need to bring in some amendments and provisos so that we know that where a position is already vacant, these are the provisos that we will be providing so that we do not punish the person but we ensure that the position is filled as soon as possible. The other bit that I am looking at is in Clause 3. We are saying by putting the retirement at 60, it will create jobs for youth. I am not sure jobs will be created for the youth because the people who will be replacing those are people in their 50s who are not exactly youth. It does not necessarily mean that the fact that somebody has retired, a job has been created at the entry point. The dynamics are very different. Studies have also shown that people could be productive beyond 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."
}