Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1108706,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1108706/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 233,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipipiri, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Amos Kimunya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Hon. Speaker, I am not quite sure how that fits in. What I was basically requesting of you, as you make a ruling on this matter, is not to dismiss the references to the Mwongozo Code because it has constantly been used in this House. If we challenge it now, what will be the implication of all the other laws that have been premised on application of the Mwongozo Code? What we are doing here will have the impact of people going to court to argue that this has been quashed. So, what happens to other laws that have been referenced to the Mwongozo Code? I am just highlighting the issues that came out, that the Bill has precedence in terms of an amalgamation of laws over certain sector with an example of the Health Laws of 2017 and the Tax Laws (Amendment) Bill. This Bill has more than the professional bodies. If Members have a problem with referenced professional bodies, then, those should be brought out in debate during the Second Reading. Indeed, no Member will be denied an opportunity to bring amendments during the Committee of the whole House because that is how we make laws here. So, trying to kill a Bill because we do not like its provisions is perhaps not exactly what we would want to do as a House. That way, we will be encouraging people out there, and even the courts, to start telling us not to debate certain Bills yet we have opportunity to raise any issues on the Floor of the House and propose amendments to refine the draft law. It is only after a Bill has gone through the Third Reading that people can take it for interpretation. As for now, it is work in progress. I urge that we continue with this work in progress. Let those who have issues with this Bill to raise them on the Floor of the House. Let them be on HANSARD rather than make pronouncements through the media or fighting the Bill on social media platforms like WhatsApp. Let any issues be captured in the HANSARD, so that every Member can have opportunity to see the logic of why a Member is opposed to certain provision of the Bill. If a Member persuades us, we will bring amendments during the Committee of the whole House. That is how we make laws. I urge that we do not kill the spirit of the universal health coverage (UHC) by stifling debate on this Bill because some of us are uncomfortable with the fact that health management boards are being opened up to professionals other than the traditional ones. This is a trend that would be seen not just in the health profession. Even in the Accountants Council, there are more than accountants sitting there! In the Engineers Board, we have more than engineers sitting there! We have lawyers and accountants, and that is what we want. We want to ensure that there is a variety of expertise 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."
}