HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 117166,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/117166/?format=api",
"text_counter": 262,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "1. Organizational weakness in the operations of the internal audit unit; 2. A porous staff establishment. 3. Poorly kept personnel records. 4. Lack of policies and registers of imprest, advances and assets. 5. Irregular procurement of goods. 6. Lack of marketing policy. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to make it quite clear that I have no problem with Mr. Mwangi as an individual. It has been claimed that I declined to renew the contract against the wishes of the Board in which my Permanent Secretary; the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance and the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Livestock Development are represented. However, it is my duty to clarify as follows: As per Mr. Mwangiâs contract, he should have notified us if he wanted to renew his contract by 1st June, 2009. He did not do so. On 29th August, 2009, I personally raised the issue with the Chairman. It took up to 13th October, 2009, for the Chairman to receive the request, according to the information given to the Board during its meeting on 14th October, 2009, that is, one-and-a-half months later. In between, there were both committee meetings and even full Board meetings where the subject was not raised in spite of my having raised it. This delay became a matter of concern to me because anybody interested in renewal of his contract would normally move faster to make his or her intentions clear. During the Board meeting of 14th October, 2009, the Chairman brought up the subject under Any other Business (AoB). The Board decided that this was too important a subject to be dealt with under AoB especially without any prior notice. This clearly indicates that the Managing Directorâs letter of application dated 4th August, 2009 was backdated. It was then decided that the matter be handed over to the Board Committees Chairmen. On 27th October, 2009, this Committee decided on an evaluation tool to use and forwarded it to the full Board on 3rd November, 2009. What is clear is that during the deliberations, the Board was far from being satisfied with the overall performance of Mr. Mwangi. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Board, even though, went ahead and gave the Managing Director the benefit of doubt and accepted the results as tabled by the sub-committee. They decided to adopt a draft performance evaluation tool as presented by the Board Committees Chairpersons with amendments. This tool was supposed to be used to assess the performance of the Managing Director, but the Board felt that it had left out more important information in other aspects which would be required for the evaluation of the CEO. The Board then resolved that the performance evaluation tool be finalized in a special retreat on 13th to 16th December, 2009 with the assistance of the Public Sector Reform Office. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Board further expressed disappointment that the MDâs application for renewal of his contract was late, and only allowed the Board less than six weeks, instead of six months, to deliberate. The contractual requirement of lead period of six months was not followed by the applicant. The applicant stated that it was an oversight on his part. After deliberations, the Board resolved to recommend the extension of the contract of the MD for a further 12 months, instead of three years, to allow the completion of the performance tool and consequent six months evaluation."
}