Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1028809,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1028809/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 89,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Prof.) Kamar",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 33,
        "legal_name": "Margaret Jepkoech Kamar",
        "slug": "margaret-kamar"
    },
    "content": "I also congratulate the team that led to this very successful judgement. I thank Sen. Orengo, who was the leader of the team, Sen. Omogeni, Sen. Mutula Kilonzo Jnr., and all those who contributed in one way or the other, because this is a landmark ruling. This is not just for the Senate; it is for the country. It is putting things right so that there is order in the nation. When Article 110 (3) was articulated, it was not meant to undermine anybody, or to create competition between one Speaker and the other. It was supposed to put order in the way we do things. We should not have had any negative competition between the two Houses because both Houses are literally working for the same people. It was wrong for the other House to imagine that they can seek signatures, approvals and endorsements from the President when they have not articulated. I like the way the judgement was made at the point of noting how costly this is going to be. The judges said that they should have thought about the costs before they offended the law. I, therefore, think that this will bring us back to an orderly way of doing things between the two Houses, and I think that we should take it from here. It is very clear that we have heard statements that do not really befit negative competition, including saying that even the Senate was supposed to be closed. How do you close the Senate when you want devolution? We know very well that the role of the Senate is basically to look after the interests of the counties and the county governments. If the Senate is not there, there is no way that we can deal with the interests of our counties. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) is here, and 35 per cent is going to be given to the counties. If that money is going to be put in, it is more important now more than ever that the Senate is strengthened, so that it can do its representative and oversight role, particularly the role of oversight. We have been talking for funding for oversight that has never really come through. There is no way that 35 per cent of the resources of this country can go into hands that cannot be scrutinized. We must see transparency and accountability in expenditure, and must be able to make everyone accountable, so that we are not just coming here to read the reports of the Auditor-General and looking at postmortem reports five years after the governor has retired. We really need to be up to date. It is very important that the Senate is not put in its own position. I think that this is one thing that we must deal with when we are dealing with BBI, to make sure that the Senate is in the rightful position to do the oversight of the funding, which is going to be quite substantive. With that, I support that communication that you have given this afternoon."
}