Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 111360,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/111360/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 315,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "organs, namely the CoE and the PSC. Our role, as the third organ, indeed, under Section 33(4), is to pass this Draft with or without amendments. Indeed, we do not have a freehand, as Parliament, to do whatever we wish because we remain guided by the guiding principles that were put in the Constitution of Kenya Review Act, under Section 6. The first guiding principle states that the national interest must take precedence over regional, sectarian or tribal interests. The second principle is that all the organs of the review, be it the PSC or the CoE or Parliament, must be accountable to the people of Kenya. In delivering this Report and the Draft Constitution to the PSC, the CoE said:- “The proposed Constitution of Kenya herein attempts to capture the consensus achieved by the PSC in Naivasha without – this is very significant – sacrificing the views of Kenyans as expressed throughout our history of constitution-making. It also seeks to conceptualise such consensus and public views within a coherent framework of time- tested constitutional principles and structures.” Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, looking at those principles that we have been given, indeed, any changes we intend to make – because we have the powers to do it – it is either we pass it without amendments or we pass it with amendments. However, it must be within the principles that we, ourselves as a House, set in the Review Act. We must not go beyond the wishes of the people of Kenya. On the consensus that was built around contentious issues, we did have the issue of devolution and system of government and transition. The PSC sat in Naivasha and built consensus, taking into consideration the views of the majority of Kenyans. They chose a two-tier system of government. This is the devolution that was agreed upon in Naivasha. Indeed, when we came to this House, we did propose that we go to Naivasha again to build further consensus. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I recall that you were amongst those who were against the trip to Naivasha. I do recall that Mr. ole Ntimama was amongst those opposed to that retreat. I was amongst the proponents of that retreat. However, I must say today that, indeed, I do regret having proposed and having so vehemently argued for the retreat in Naivasha that ended up at Kabete. Instead of planting the seeds of consensus, what we did out there was to plant seeds of discord. We did open the door. Indeed, when we went there, I had in mind what I had seen in Kakamega a few weeks ago. The people of Kakamega were arguing that amongst the counties given Kakamega was two large. It had nine constituencies in one county. The neighbours in Vihiga had only four. The next day, I was in Meru. I went to Igembe and the same complaint was there that Tharaka and Nithi which are two constituencies had one county, and the larger Meru had seven. The issue was how do we look at the issue of getting more counties so that we can make it fair to all in terms of equitable distribution of resources? This is the issue we were looking at as we went to Kabete. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think when we arrived there, we got more than we bargained for. We went beyond the counties that we were looking at and we had the issue of regions introduced. We know that we are entitled to bring these amendments at this hour but we must be careful to ensure that we do not, as a House, violate the very principles that we have established."
}