Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1422310,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1422310/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 483,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cheruiyot",
    "speaker_title": "The Senate Majority Leader",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13165,
        "legal_name": "Aaron Kipkirui Cheruiyot",
        "slug": "aaron-cheruiyot"
    },
    "content": "There are certain Bills which they hold the view that this is not even something for debate. They have listed a number of them including the annual County Allocation of Revenue Bill, which is something we do on both Houses, the Appropriation Bill, which is done in the National Assembly, the Finance Bill, any Bill that provides for taxation and revenue-raising powers of the national Government, and a Bill concerning county governments. Therefore, that is something, which I will request our Members of Justice, Legal Affairs and Human Rights Committee to guide us appropriately, even as we make that decision. Clause 9 guides on after the resolution of the question has been arrived at. and it reads- “Whenever a Speaker of the second House, agrees with this question raised as contemplated under Section 8.2, the Speaker shall prepare and transmit a certificate of joint resolution in duplicate for endorsement by the Speaker of the originating House.’’ Remember, I have explained the history of how the National Assembly views this issue of the resolution of the question of whether it concerns or does not concern counties. That is why it is drafted as it is. Peg somewhere at the back of your mind what the views of the Senate are, and that is well known. Then, finally, it is issues such as the money Bill in accordance with Article 109 (5). This is something that has also given us a lot of difficulty. In fact, until we resolve this issue of the money Bill being determined by the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO)- -- I must thank the Parliamentary Budget Office. I must say, over time, their views on Article 109(5) have evolved as opposed to what I used to see in my earlier days in this House. If you raise any Bill and they feel that for whatever reason--- You imagine how difficult it is to have a Bill or a law that does not cost a charge to the exchequer. It is hard to imagine that you can come up with a law which, for one reason or the other, has absolutely no charge and responsibility to the Government. So long as there is even the slightest imagination that somehow this Bill will create a charge to the exchequer then it was declared a money Bill and at that particular time the view was that money Bills could only commence in the National Assembly. Therefore, as a Member of the Senate, even if you tried to think of whatever legislation, you would not succeed or there are certain provisions of your Bill, though close to you, though consequential, you had to drop for that Bill to pass. It happened to me a couple of times while considering certain Bills. That has since evolved and they are a bit more accommodating in their consideration. Therefore, I must thank the Parliamentary Budget office for that view. Section 12 speaks on that particular Bill. I expect that the Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs will provide the cover. We know it is a constitutional doctrine that a money Bill can only be introduced in the National Assembly in accordance with Article 114. That is fine, but then the devil is in the details, as they say. It is in the determination of what a money Bill is, that the fight is in and that is where we depend on our Members of the Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs to provide clarity on that particular issue. 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."
}