Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1425301,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1425301/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 238,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Sifuna",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13599,
        "legal_name": "Sifuna Edwin Watenya",
        "slug": "sifuna-edwin-watenya"
    },
    "content": "The best example was during the debate on the Division of Revenue Bill that was passed by this House. It was clear that, in fact, it is only a small section of Members of the National Assembly who think that everything should be perceived through the lenses of conflict between these two Houses. However, a vast majority of the Members of the National Assembly are people who believe in devolution and making sure that these institutions of devolution, including the Senate, work. You will see this demonstrated when we go to mediation over the Division of Revenue Bill. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, you as the chair of the committee, rightfully pointed out that if you look at a provision such as the one you referred to, relating to when a dispute can be said to have risen, or when it needs to be dealt with, is in accordance to Article 110(3). Section 6 of that Bill wants to rewrite Article 110 (3) of the Constitution. The wording of Article 110 (3). I have my copy of the Constitution here, presupposes that any dispute will be dealt with prior to any of the Bills being introduced in any or either of the Houses. However, Section 6 of the Bill proposes to rewrite that to mean a Bill can go before the House and undergo the First Reading, but then the timeframe at which point we can raise objection to that Bill or declare a dispute under Article 110 (3) to move just before the Second Reading of the Bill. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, the resolution of those questions needs to happen jointly and in the language of the Constitution under Article 110 (3), before either House considers a Bill. I do not know what the National Assembly defines ‘consideration’ as, or when consideration of a Bill begins. However, by the time you are introducing a Bill at the First Reading, that is consideration of the Bill. All matters must have been resolved before that is done. Secondly, you and hon. Colleagues who have spoken before me, have made reference to the provisions of Section 19(6) of the Bill on the question of public participation. Again, under Article 118 of the Constitution on public access and participation, there is a requirement that every single piece of legislation that is being considered by either House goes through public participation. In fact, my argument is it does not matter where this Bill originates. If a Bill is introduced into this House from the National Assembly as far as the Senate is concerned and as a legislative body, that is the first time we are interacting with it. Therefore, a key component of our consideration and passage of that Bill is public participation so that as a House, we can never have an excuse to abdicate that responsibility and go through a Bill or any proposal before this House, without subjecting it to the constitutional requirement of public participation. When Sen. Maanzo was speaking, he made reference to the Housing Bill that was introduced from the National Assembly as well. The HANSARD will bear me witness that we in the Minority side"
}