Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1403870,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1403870/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 257,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Osotsi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13588,
        "legal_name": "Osotsi Godfrey Otieno",
        "slug": "osotsi-godfrey-otieno"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Chairman, Sir, earlier on I rose on a point of order to demand that whenever the Mover moves these amendments, justification of the same is very important so that Members can follow up and so that any ambiguities can be handled. If I look at this proposed amendment, there is ambiguity in it because a similar amendment is on New Clause 19. We must decide on which one to adopt. Is it the new clause or this amendment? At the same time, Clause 19 (d), talks about deleting the heading appearing immediately after the subclause (3). That heading talks about Part Three of the Bill, which is licensing and regulation. It is jumbled up because this particular Clause 19 is talking about a miller and grower and whether they have an agreement or not. I am wondering why the deletion of a heading comes in here. The next thing is what happens to all those provisions under that heading? So, we need to look at Clause 19 at the same time we compare what has been proposed under New Clause 19, so that we do not end up having two clauses that are talking about the same thing. Mr. Chairman, Sir, that is not proper law-making."
}