Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1490447,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1490447/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 260,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Methu",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13581,
        "legal_name": "Methu John Muhia",
        "slug": "methu-john-muhia"
    },
    "content": "nature of the water services. The role of the Water Services Regulatory Board, as the regulator, is crucial. In a subsequent clause, you will see that we have reinforced this particular Clause. I will keep jumping through the clauses, so that we can follow the way we agreed on this mediated version. I want to then go to Clause 7, an amendment to Section 72 on the powers and functions of the Regulatory Board. The Committee considered Clause 7, which outlines the Board's powers and functions to evaluate and recommend water tariffs. The Committee concurred with the Senate proposal to separate WASREB's authority to evaluate and recommend water and sewerage tariffs for water service providers from its jurisdiction and evaluate and recommend bulk water tariffs for the Water Works Development Authority. Madam Temporary Speaker, you recall that bulk water would then be the preserve of the Water Works Development Agency. It is fair that we allow it, and we do not combine it, so the tariff for bulk water is the same as the tariff for the water provided by water service providers because most of this water goes to the consumer. If we allow the water that is going to the consumer to have the same tariffs as the water that is being provided for at the bulk level by the Water Works Development Authority Agency, we shall make water an expensive commodity, and we have to protect the people of Kenya. That is why we had to set in this particular Section (72)(1)(c), which already provides that WASREB's role in evaluating and recommending water and sewerage tariffs for water service providers. The Bill needed to distinctly address the evaluation, recommendation and approval for processes for bulk water tariffs. We had to have them separate. Let me turn to Clause 6 on the handover of completed works. The Committee considered clause 6 of the Bill, which outlines the handover of completed works, and rejected the Senate's proposal to hand over national public water works to county governments. It is the same explanation that I gave earlier. Some of these projects are trans-counties; they transfer to different counties. So, it will be difficult to even administer such a project that runs in three counties. Even agreeing upon which county this project will be handed over to will be a challenge administratively. So, we ceded to this proposal by the National Assembly, just as we had agreed. It is also important to note that the main intention of this Bill is to create a framework for making water a tradable commodity, so that private people can engage in water projects. The easiest people to engage with are the waterworks development authorities. If a private person is the one who developed this project, then it has been handed over to a county, and the agreement has been entered into with the Water Works Development Authority, it would be an unneat situation. Please, allow me to then go to Clause 5, Section 72 of the Water Act, CAB 372, which empowers the regulatory board to publish the regulatory standards without the approval of the Cabinet Secretary. For consistency with the law and to maintain WASREB's independence and autonomy in its operation, the regulatory board should be empowered to set national 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."
}