GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1407277/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1407277,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1407277/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 201,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Central Imenti, UDA",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Moses Kirima",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": " Hon. Speaker, this House seized the matters of agriculture, fertiliser distribution and fake fertiliser distribution that came before it to be part of its proceedings. They were referred to the Departmental Committee on Agriculture and Livestock to investigate and bring a Report to this House. The Committee has not been given that chance because it has not concluded its investigations. Assume we go ahead and impeach the Cabinet Secretary and at the end of the day the verdict of the Committee is a different version altogether, all will be in vain. The decision which this full House would have taken, would not be reversed. A matter being handled by a competent Committee, which has quasi-judicial powers, is being brought before this House yet the Committee is seized of the same. The Committee has the same powers as the House, for it is a creature of this House. The decision it makes will bind this House. In a nutshell, the provisions being quoted by the mover of the Motion do not pin the Cabinet Secretary down per se. The provisions are in general terms just to whip Members’ sympathy. Yes, we sympathise with farmers who were affected, but who is culpable in the issue? Who was involved in the manufacturing and distribution of the fake fertiliser to the extent that it is now going to mess up farmers? Is it the Cabinet Secretary? The Cabinet Secretary has nothing to do with the matter. His role is policy articulation, which is the general responsibility of the Executive. The powers of this House are similar to those of the courts. The powers of the courts talk of the rule of prejudice, it should be considered. We should not consider a matter which is pending before a Committee. Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I oppose the Motion."
}