Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1024151,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1024151/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 241,
    "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. I rise to support this Bill. I thank the Parliamentary Pensions Committee and Hon. Mwadime for bringing the Bill to align the current Act to the requirements of the Constitution. The current Act still talks of the National Assembly and ignores the fact that there is the Senate. So, trying to align the Act to the Constitution is a major advancement to make sure that we are talking of Parliament rather than the National Assembly. The second thing is obviously the issue of Members making a deliberate choice. Let me say something at the outset, because I heard Hon. Eseli comparing the parliamentary pension scheme with the university pension scheme. There are two pension scheme models. There is a defined contribution scheme, where it is defined how much you contribute and the money is then invested with fund managers. What you get at the end is based on your contributions plus the growth and the risks. You could get less or more. On the other hand, there is a defined benefits scheme, where your monthly benefits are defined upfront. The contributions are then worked backwards to guarantee that benefit. Parliament opted for defined benefits scheme. So, let us not give the Parliamentary Pensions Committee a lot of work as they try to crack up the figures you get as benefits because we opted for a defined benefits scheme. It does not matter how much they invested. In fact, they do not invest. The money is put in the Consolidated Fund and you are paid a defined benefit on retirement. Given that situation, Members can opt for that defined benefit for life when you retire, subject to serving for two terms and being 45 years old. Or you could decide you want your money upfront because you are a better manager for yourself than what the Consolidated Fund can do for you. But you must make that decision upfront, so that you do not wait until after five years and then you say you would rather have the gratuity rather than the monthly pension. The pension managers need to plan. I think that flexibility is a positive thing. I would like to urge Members to just be careful. The Ksh126,000 may look small, but it comes in handy when you are out there after the two terms. At least it guarantees to pay your power bills and other bills on a monthly basis when you are still figuring out what to do with the rest of your life. If you get everything upfront, especially after campaigns, you are likely to start consoling yourself and invest in some businesses and yet you have never been a businessperson. The next thing you are here asking us to buy you some tea, as we have seen from some of our colleagues who have left in the past. In this Bill, there is now a provision for early exit. If you do not hit the 10-year threshold, either because of sickness or some other reason, the Bill provides that exit opportunity which is not there in the present Act. That is a good thing and we support it. There is also a provision that allows payment to widows or widowers should a Member pass away, because it is your money. It is your defined benefit and it should not stop with your death. Your spouse and children should continue being supported by your pension. That is now provided for in this Bill. I would like the Mover to look at Clause 8(4) of the Bill. When we come to the Committee of the whole House, we should know the interest rate of the gratuity because that has not been 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."
}