HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 1072122,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1072122/?format=api",
"text_counter": 370,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Homa Bay CWR, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Gladys Wanga",
"speaker": {
"id": 590,
"legal_name": "Gladys Atieno Nyasuna",
"slug": "gladys-atieno-nyasuna"
},
"content": "month period within which, after signing the contract, you must begin the project and not create any further room for negotiation and renegotiation. Members might have had a chance to look at the Bill, right from Clause 37 through to Clause 60-something. It is all about procurement processes for PPPs. One of the issues that the Committee was concerned about is why PPPs cannot follow the Public Procurement and Assets Disposal Act or why these modalities of procurement cannot be included within that Act. This was, however, explained to us and it is important to note that PPPs being special arrangements where you more often deal with private firms, you cannot subject them to the Public Procurement and Assets Disposal Act. They are unique compared to the Budget-based projects. The Leader of the Majority Party is whispering that they are apples and oranges. If I am coming in with my money, you do not want to subject me to a public procurement process. I want to come in with a proposal and say that I would like to do A, B, C, D, and bring in my money, which I can recover, from my own studies, within a given period of time. That is why it is important to note that Section 4 (2) (e) of the Public Procurement and Assets Disposal Act, 2015 lists PPPs as one of the procurements to which the Act does not apply. Consequently, PPPs are excluded from the scope of application of the Public Procurement and Assets Disposal Act. There was concern on the issue of representation in the PPP Committee. In the process of reducing the number of representatives, especially the PSs, the PS for Industrialization was retained. The Committee felt that we can have the PS for the National Treasury, the PS for Planning and the PS for Infrastructure and have the rest of the PSs co-opted occasionally on the basis of which project is being discussed at any given time. Otherwise, we would have all the PSs of all the State Departments. So, when dealing with a water project, you will need the PS responsible for water. When dealing with a hospital project, you will need the PS for Health or their representatives at any given time. So, that is one of the thoughts that the Committee had. The Committee felt that the scope for qualification for the position of Director-General should be looked at. Currently it is a bit narrow. The Bill is also silent on the process of recruitment of the Director-General. This being a position in public service, the Committee felt that the Bill should expressly provide for this recruitment in order to ensure that filling up of the position is done competitively and in a transparent manner. In that case, the Committee proposed that recruitment be vested in the Public Service Commission (PSC). There is a whole conversation and discussion around how the staff of the directorate are recruited. There is secondment of staff which was seen as a good proposal. The other key issue that we thought about is the role of Parliament in the PPPs. The role of Parliament in approval of PPPs should be clearly outlined because this Parliament approves budgets for every project that is conducted in this country. As the BPS comes, it does so with the status of our debt. So, we as a Committee felt that the issue of PPPs must have a mechanism at a global level, not on a day-to-day basis. However, at a global level, Parliament is apprised of which PPPs the country is getting into. There is also the aspect of contingent liability which the Government has to sign. So, it is important that the role of Parliament is included as we negotiate the PPPs. As I conclude, in order to safeguard the interest of the public, the Committee was of the view that PPP contracts should not exceed a concession period of more than 30 years. The Committee’s conversation was that a generation lasts 30 years, or a generation is 30 years; such that if we enter into a PPP, we should not enter into one that binds the next generation as well. There are many models and some are much less in time. For example, if you rehabilitate, operate 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"
}