Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1381492,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1381492/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 286,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Crystal Asige",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "costly. It also means that you have to get a special trainer to come in and assist someone like me to understand and work on these technologies and devices. Therefore, the cost of hiring a visually impaired person is seen as too high. What do people do to circumvent this? They hire someone with a more “palatable” disability. That is completely out of order and it is wrong. It is perhaps the reason I am the first and only Senator with visual impairment. Mr. Speaker, Sir, of all the years that this House has been running, I am the first and the only Senator with visual impairment. That should not be the case. I should not be the first and the only. There should have been many more before me and after me. I hope that my existence and my sheer being in this space will show people that people with visual impairment and who are blind are just as productive, if not more than, a whole range of people who have come through these doors. That is one amendment I wish Sen. Cherarkey would take forward as he continues to move this Bill and get support from colleague Senators. We have to look into not just the employment of people with disabilities but the training and retention of people with disabilities. I spoke to the Chairperson of the Public Service Commission (PSC) a week ago, when he appeared before our Committee on Labour and Social Welfare. I explained to him and his team that it is not enough to just advertise and recruit a person with disability. They should train them, so that they can continue to upscale. What is the PSC doing to make sure that they retain them and not just employ them for six months and say that they have ticked the box? We are progressively actioning the 5 per cent principle of employment representation as per the Constitution; but saying, how can we retain these Persons with Disabilities (PwDs)? What do we need to do? How do we go above and beyond what is required of us on paper so that we can have these PwDs stay with us for two or five years or even until retirement because like I said, there is a huge case for hiring PWDs? Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, this is not just in the Public Service nationally. When you look at the same in county governments, I have said before and will not tire to say that there are 21 counties currently that have no PWD representation. This House and the “Lower” House, the National Assembly, are doing nothing about it right now. I seem to be the only one talking about it. If we had full representation, we would have more voices amplifying this egregious misrepresentation of PWDs. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I applaud the Mover of the Bill, in his effort as well as the co-sponsor from the National Assembly in putting these issues forward regarding values and principles; and make sure that the sponsors understand the importance of what I am saying. It is not just semantics; adding a word here or removing a word there. Language and how is interpreted is extremely important and that is how people in this country have been able to go around this particular 5 per cent principle requirement. Our laws and the language we use in our laws is not specific and does not pin people down with consequences for a lack of adherence to the Constitution. I also concur with colleague Senators who have said that there must be consequences for non-compliance. With everything we are doing, there has to be absolute consequences. What is the consequences of not reaching 5 per cent principle in this 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 Services,Senate."
}