Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 116849,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/116849/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 481,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "there are companies which are not legal entities and they do not exist. We understand your position, but there is nowhere in the world somebody will give you approval of a company which is not a legal entity. Supposing, tomorrow, it turns out that, that company is owned by dubious characters, then the general public will never trust Parliament! So, as the Government, you need to understand the position of the House. The idea is acceptable, but you are not telling us why should you commit citizens there – not the Government now – because they are the ones paying directly for 30 years and yet you have not given us the information of these unregistered companies. Who are the people behind these companies? I did take time, myself, this afternoon to go to the Registrar of Companies and it is true that they are not registered. But it is you who is looking for the approval and, so, you should have come with more details. But the issue of this House giving you a blank cheque will actually be out of question! This is like going to the bank to ask for a loan, you are given the money and the bank does not know the legal entity of that person. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have looked at the document again. The articles--- What you are proposing to us, in case there is a dispute, this company does not want to recognize the arbitration laws of this country. So, these are very touchy issues! Why would you want to deal with a company, part of which we suspect is Kenyan and part is foreigners, and they do not want to respect our laws here? Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, in any procurement, there are mandatory requirements. Going by this, one can easily qualify this company as a briefcase company because it has no postal address, it has no physical address and it is not tax compliant! What I would have really pleaded to the Minister is for him to go back and look into these issues afresh, because I find it very hard, as an hon. Member of Parliament and as a House, to approve it. Supposing tomorrow it turns out that this company is owned by one of the people who were involved in previous scandals, then what will people think of this House? On that basis, I beg to oppose."
}