Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1025557,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1025557/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 253,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Homa Bay Town, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1565,
        "legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
        "slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
    },
    "content": " Hon. Speaker, I am on Seat No.52. If Hon. Millie would not have been in the House, I would have said where my card remained but, Hon. Millie Odhiambo is my niece, so I keep a bit of these confusions private. This issue of delay in transacting legislative proposals is affecting so many legislative proposals by Private Members. That is why I was seeking to intervene. In the last Parliament, we had a lot and active engagements on Members’ Private Bills. Indeed, a number of Members just come to the House to intervene in terms of legislation in a particular area. We know Judge Njoki Ndungu now in the Supreme Court for the Sexual Offences Act. We still remember Hon. Mungatana. It is very frustrating when you bring up a Bill and it is stuck before a Committee of fellow Members. I was burning to say something because I am a Member who has up to seven legislative proposals pending before various Committees. Most of these are legislative proposals which just lapsed in the last Parliament. What I see before whenever I go before a Committee is a challenge with our Standing Orders. The Standing Orders’ provision which introduced this requirement that we have committees’ scrutiny before publication of a Bill did not time it. I think it is something for the Procedure and House Rules Committee to take up. It can be provided for within the Standing Orders that a Committee will have this amount of time to transact the process of scrutinising a legislative proposal. The other challenge I have seen in the Standing Orders is the criterion to guide a Committee in evaluating a legislative proposal before publication. It is not clearly set out in the Standing Orders. I know that in the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, as long as a Bill or a legislative proposal is not outrightly unconstitutional or in conflict with some law or public policy, you have your day in the plenary as a Member to persuade your colleagues to pass or reject the Bill. But, I have gone before Committees where your legislative proposal is either being torpedoed, rejected or getting stuck because of questions on the merits of the Bill which you should be explaining to the Members here to pass it. As the Procedure and House Rules Committees is considering this provision, it is something we need to do so that it is a clear criterion which even the legal assistants in a Committee can guide on so as to ensure that these things move. Sometimes you get recommendations which you cannot reconcile with the fact of mere legislative scrutiny. When we then invoke your powers to enable a legislative proposal to be transacted and it is taking time, I urge that beyond your intervention… I know you have done some rulings on what the Committee should consider, but it is still a problem. Because of that a number of Bills are going to lapse in this Parliament which ought to have been transacted. I request that beyond such directions as you would give in your Communication to the House, let the Procedure and House Rules Committee under your leadership, also, in considering amendments, make clear the criteria for evaluation or assessment of legislative proposals coming from Members before the Committee. Thank you, Hon. Speaker. 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."
}