Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1105631,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1105631/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 313,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Seme, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) James Nyikal",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I rise to oppose this Bill. I was involved in the Bill and the Act that is being repealed. As far as I can see, even looking at the Committee Report, the only issue is that this Authority is going to handle the funds that are currently being handled by the Ministry. That is the only thing. There are statements like it is not in line with the PFM Act. I know many other funds that have also been started and have not been in line with the PFM Act. Why are those funds not declared unimplementable? The other thing is that it says it is not in line with the policy on social assistance. The Ministry went to court and the court said that there is need to give the Ministry time, so that the policy is aligned with the law. I do not think you work backwards, that you repeal a law because it is not in line with a policy which you have not put in place properly. The court said that it has given the Ministry time. The court provided for time to look at the policy and therefore, allowed for the delay in implementation of the Act. So, the only other thing that I can see would have been cured by just an amendment. I have looked at the Act, and this would then be an Authority probably under the Ministry of Labour and Social Development. I think there is enough room for amendments in this Act to make it operational. 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."
}