Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1422309,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1422309/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 482,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cheruiyot",
    "speaker_title": "The Senate Majority Leader",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13165,
        "legal_name": "Aaron Kipkirui Cheruiyot",
        "slug": "aaron-cheruiyot"
    },
    "content": "us and the National Assembly then input that into their report and bring us the amendments. I expect a radical departure on what is proposed in this particular Bill. After that, we can meet with our colleagues of the National Assembly at the mediation stage and agree to something. If fine, then we should have a law that will guide this process. That way, this dispute will become something of the past and we would have behaved like a mature democracy as is expected of us. That is the context of this important Bill, which I will explain properly. Clause three of the Bill provides for the various objects of this Act. For example, to provide a framework for the manner of conducting matters of bicameral nature; publication and gazettement of Bills to be introduced in Houses of Parliament as dictated by Article 109(4); and outline a sticky issue of Article 110(3), so that you define what constitutes consideration of a Bill for purposes of Article 110(3). It is something that has as varied opinions in this Parliament as you will ever imagine. Part two of the Bill speaks of the publication and enacting formula. If a Bill is to be introduced by any Member of a committee of a House of Parliament, pursuant to Article 109(5) of the Constitution, it shall be published in a Gazette in such a manner as may be specified in the Standing Orders. This varies from one House to the other. What we do in the Senate does not necessarily hold true in the National Assembly and vice versa. Madam Temporary Speaker, part three of the Bill, is at the heart of the dispute. It is something called the joint resolution of the question of whether that Bill concerns counties or not. At what point does that question arise? We in the Senate hold a completely different view with our colleagues in the National Assembly. We hold the view that that determination needs to be made prior to the publication of any Bill. Our colleagues in the National Assembly say that until somebody rises on the Floor of the House, the Speaker is blind, deaf, and anything that you can imagine to the Constitution until they are appointed to by a Member of the House and told, I believe this Bill as drafted, concerns counties. Therefore, you need to make a determination. Then the Speaker rises and says, I will make a determination. Of course, there is an obvious flaw in that school of thought. The question then that you ask yourself is, after making that determination, where is the chance for the Speaker of the Senate? Yet at that particular time, they had not consulted as the two Speakers. We will listen to them during the mediation process. I trust the ability of the Justice, Legal and Human Rights Committee (JLAHRC) to resolve this question very ably. We will listen to how they propose this particular section. Therefore, that is properly covered in Clause six of the Bill. When a Bill is published, what happens, and the nature of determination. Clause 7 speaks to other consequential amendments that will come. There are various Bills relating to the election of a Member of County Assembly (MCA) or County Executive. For the provision of Clause 6, we are saying that there are certain Bills that these clauses do not apply to for obvious understanding. May be obvious to them, but not necessarily obvious to us. 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."
}