Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1367800,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1367800/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 354,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Wakili Sigei",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "is clearly defined so that it does not conflict with the national legislation on intellectual property. It similarly does not prescribe for timelines within which one is done. In this one, it gives 30 days and whether this requirement will be the one that is under the national legislation or will be limited to what the CECM shall define under the policy at the county government or will also be required to be the one that is at the national legislation. In this case, it does not provide for a requirement for publication for a certain period of time whilst in most cases, the national legislation requires publication so that if there is another person who has that brand, that person can raise an objection for there to be no conflict or breach of brands that have already registered or conflict among owners and prospective owners of designs and brands. Madam Temporary Speaker, this bit runs through from Clauses 6, 7, 8 and 9. I believe in the fullness of time, Sen. Cherarkey will look at those provisions to ensure that they are fully aligned to the laws that are already in place. The provisions of Clause 10 provide for obligations to branding. Besides the registration of the brand itself, it gives a timeline within which an individual is required to brand his livestock. In this case, under 10(1), one is required for all the livestock that has attained the age of six months to be branded within the period of six months upon the passage of this legislation. Sub Clause (b) provides that if the livestock are of six months upon passage of this Bill, the owner will be required to ensure that registration is done within three months. It has not factored in the timeline within which the county legislation will have been developed and relevant policies put in place. I believe that there will be need for time for the county governments to process and enact legislations and related policies. Madam Temporary Speaker, one might be seen as being in breach of this law if they will not have branded and registered within six months of the passage of this Bill. I urge the sponsor of this Bill to relook at that so that there is a grace period provided within which, upon the passage of this legislation, the county governments are given time to pass the relevant county legislation and policies so that they align with provisions of this Bill. Under the provisions of Part III in Clause 12, movement of livestock; I wish to implore the sponsor of the Bill to rethink how we are going to deal with our brothers and sisters who deal with pastoralists. It is making reference to movement from the premises where they are ordinarily kept to other premises for the purpose of sale and slaughter. How do we deal with our brothers and sisters whose day-to-day life is dealing with movement in search of greener pastures? You need to relook at how we define the movement of livestock so that we do not limit the provision of the Act to movement only for purposes of sale or slaughter. This will not protect the pastoralists. The issue is very key. In Mulot, where I come from, we have a livestock yard and a regular market day where we trade thousands of livestock. We similarly have one in Chepalungu Constituency, and Chebunyo where Narok and Bomet traders do livestock trading. We need to make sure that the law is clearly providing on this bit of movement so that we do not hamper the thriving businesses across the counties. Not only within The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and AudioServices, Senate."
}