Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 132923,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/132923/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 294,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "After he lost his job, he was given time to pay the Kshs750,000 or lose his house. He went to his employer and asked to be paid his retirement benefits, but because of the rule that was introduced, he could not get this money. It is sad to say that James Ochieng Gone lost his house for Kshs750,000. Had he been allowed to access the close to Kshs2 million that he had which had been locked up on his behalf as a result of this rule, James Ochieng Ngone would have saved his House. He and his family would not be destitutes today. These are some of the harsh cases that have come to our attention. Some of these have come in form of open letters to the relevant Ministries where Kenyans have talked about their suffering, but the Treasury and the Government has remained insensitive to the suffering of Kenyans. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we do urge that though the rule was well intentioned, the Government should re-consider because the time has come when the suffering of Kenyans must be listened to. Something must be done to allow Kenyans not to continue suffering. We do know that in Kenya today, whereas in 2005/2006 when Mr. Mwiraria introduced this rule, the retirement age was 55 years. Today, that age has been extended to 60 years. So, if you were in Ngone’s shoes when you had neared 55years of age, you would be told that the date has now been changed and that you will to wait for another five years before you retires. It is something that we must look against the life expectancy of this nation. We are a nation whose life expectancy is set at about 46 years. Looking at the distance between that and the magical age of 60 years that has been set, not many are able to reach there and have suffered in the process and become destitute as they wait for the magical age when they can actually access their employer’s contribution. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have borrowed from other countries in the Commonwealth and from the best practices around the world. We do know that this rule has been applied elsewhere. A country such as Tanzania has had to amend their Pensions Act, so that they were able to remove the restriction and allow anyone to access their employer’s contribution at any time upon leaving employment. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in Tanzania, they had an amendment to their Pensions Act in 2001. This was an Act to amend the Parastatal Pensions Act of 1978 which was assented to by Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania in 2001. Article 12 of the proposed amendment reads as follows: “The Principal Act is hereby amended by deleting Section 44 and substituting it with the following: withdraw Section 44(1)” Where a member ceases to be employed in circumstances in which he is not eligible for any pension, gratuity or any other benefit under the provisions of this Act, he shall be refunded the amount of his own contribution and that of his employer to the Fund”. I believe this amendment was brought about by a situation similar to that one of James Ngone. The good people of Tanzania amended their Act, so that they could allow Tanzanians to access the benefits of not just their own contributions, but as well as that of their employers. So, there is no reason we should not listen to James Ngone as a country"
}