Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1474419,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1474419/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 321,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Oketch Gicheru",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "amendment of DORA, but that did not happen. The shocks now are not bigger than at that time. Madam Temporary Speaker, as a matter of principle, the framers of the Constitution would have expressly indicated in the Constitution that in terms of a shortfall of revenue, then the national Government should bear the entire shortfall. The reason for that is that counties do not have the luxury to raising their resources by floating bonds or any other means of raising money like the national Government does. Although the framers of the Constitution did not put this in the Constitution, there is the spirit in the Constitution, which technically could have made Parliament functusofficio, that we should not touch the DORA by any means possible. This is found in Article 175 of the Constitution. If you read Article 175 of the Constitution, it talks about the principles of devolved government. Article 175(b) says: “County governments shall have reliable sources of revenue to enable them to govern and deliver services effectively.” The thought is furthered in Article 203 of the Constitution, which I will also refer to. This is Article 203(1) (J). It says:"
}