Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1343310,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1343310/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 913,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Seme, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr) James Nyikal",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": " Hon. Temporary Chairman, that amendment is not on the Order Paper and that, in itself, is significant. I want to give information to the House so that it can make a decision. Enhanced medical schemes were those in which the Kenyan Government paid for health covers of civil servants such as teachers, and the police were brought into the NHIF to manage it. Therefore, they were getting a better scheme. In the case of the police, they remitted Ksh5 billion to the NHIF but, when it was worked out, it was found that the NHIF had used about Ksh10 billion. The argument for removing their scheme from the NHIF then was that it was a loss-making venture. I want Members to listen to this carefully, because our country is in danger. The moment their scheme was removed from the NHIF and they decided to pursue private medical insurance, the scheme now pays Ksh10 billion to the private sector. When the medical schemes are under the NHIF, they remit less but spend much more when using private medical insurance schemes. One of the Committee’s considerations was whether we could have social health insurance schemes for civil servants, but control them through the new Authority. This is public money. If this money is being paid out for workers’ medical schemes, how come when they were under the NHIF, only Ksh5 billion was remitted? Why is it that when they were under a private medical insurance scheme, Ksh10 billion was remitted? Why the difference yet the number of workers remained the same? If you ask me as Nyikal and not as a Member of the Committee, we should strengthen our systems and manage this money within the Authority."
}