GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/135319/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 135319,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/135319/?format=api",
"text_counter": 127,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "commencement date for the Privatization Act; a power which the House itself could have exercised, if it so wished. The undertaking by the Minister to appoint a commencement date for the Act was therefore based on something the Minister was both lawfully entitled to do and in fact legally required to do. As the Minister had the power and the obligation to discharge the undertaking, the Chair held the Minister to account for that undertaking. Hon. Members, that case is clearly distinguishable from the matter in which Mr. Ojode gave an undertaking which in law he was not obliged nor compelled to do. As stated in the ruling on 29th July, 2009, no public interest can be served in holding the Minister to his undertaking in a situation in which it is not legally possible for him to discharge the undertaking. The undertakings given by the two Ministers were therefore informed by two distinctly different situations, one in which the Minister was seized of the necessary powers to honour the undertaking and the other in which the Assistant Minister lacked the requisite powers to do so. In the upshot therefore, hon. Members, there is no contradiction between the two rulings given by the Chair on the respective undertakings given by the two Ministers. Where the law confers a power or imposes an obligation on a Minister to perform some function or discharge some duty, and the Minister gives an undertaking to exercise that power or to perform that duty, the Chair will not hesitate to hold the Minister to the undertaking. Ministers of Government, as I have said before, are duty bound to properly consider the law on any matter and its implications before giving any undertaking before this House. Thank you. Hon. Members, it is now 3.00 p.m. and, according to our Standing Orders and, indeed, the business as appearing on the Order Paper today, we should move on to the Prime Ministerâs Time."
}