HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 1083604,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1083604/?format=api",
"text_counter": 309,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Navakholo, JP",
"speaker_title": "Hon. Emmanuel Wangwe",
"speaker": {
"id": 2543,
"legal_name": "Emmanuel Wangwe",
"slug": "emmanuel-wangwe"
},
"content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I rise to second the Bill, ably moved by the indomitable party leader, Hon. Wamunyinyi. I want to give a synopsis of the issue of sugar in the country. The issue dates back to the 19th Century, in 1902, when it was first introduced in Kenya, especially in the western region of Kisumu. That time, we did not have other regions. It was just general. The first organisation that came about was the Kenya Sugar Authority, way back in 1973. That was immediately after the Sessional Paper No.10 of 1965. With that, we have had a dynamic move around between the Kenya Sugar Authority and the Kenya Sugar Board, which came in force in 2001 through the Sugar Act, 2001. The two bodies have seen the sugar industry move to a certain level. But something happened in 2013 when we lost the root of the organisations and, therefore, collapsed the Kenya Sugar Board. That was the genesis of the troubles we are in today. Although the initial plan, through this House, was good, the administration went off the path and we ended up in the situation we are in today as an industry. The Sugar Bill before the House shall not just help the people of western Kenya, but it shall cover Kenya as a whole. We see sugar industries in Kwale, Rift Valley, Nyanza and Western. They will all be governed by this Act. What is good in this Bill, in a nutshell, is to bring back an administrative body which has teeth to bite and which has the focus of the industry moving forward, namely, the Kenya Sugar Board, which is anchored in the Bill. If it comes into force, the other few proposed amendments will come at the Committee of the whole House stage on the composition and administration of the board. But what is important is that the Sugar Board comes back into force to give direction to the industry. For instance, we lost the Sugar Development Levy. Mumias Sugar Company is in limbo today. It is under receivership. The factory could not access however small credit it needs just because if it was to borrow, it would go to the commercial market. If the Sugar Development Levy was alive, definitely the factory would have gone to the Sugar Board to get some money and manage to move on as it struggles. This Bill by Hon. Wamunyinyi seeks to bring back all these benefits to our farmers. This Bill also aligns itself with the Constitution which recognises the existence of county and national governments. Agriculture being a devolved function, the issue of farming shall be ably handled by county governments while the industry will be overseen by the national Government. We will see involvement of county governments in terms of cane farming and participation in the board. What is also good in this Bill is zoning. There has been misunderstanding when we refer to zoning as it is envisaged in the Bill and as it used to be in the initial times. Initially, zoning was simply for a factory and its neighbourhood; the nucleus and the immediate out-growers. The elaborate discussion that the Committee had, stakeholder submissions and the Report of the Committee, for which I want to thank Hon. Tiren for the good work his Committee has done, is that we will not just tie-up one factory to market and attend to farmers. Instead we are going to have various factories put as one, so that in case one factory is not functioning or is under 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."
}