Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1556321,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1556321/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 263,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Osotsi",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The Sports Act, 2013, was passed in February, 2013, just a few months before President Kibaki left power. The betting companies were being deducted money, which went into this fund. When President Uhuru Kenyatta came to power, they found idle money which was around Kshs10 billion. They started salivating for it. Instead of investing that money in sports, his Government decided to repeal the Sports Act by removing the entire chapter on the national sports fund and created something called the Sports Act and Social Development Fund through public finance regulation. You will be shocked to hear how Uhuru Kenyatta’s Government proposed to allocate this money. In the regulations, that is the Sports Act and Social Development Fund Regulations, they proposed that 60 per cent of it go to Universal Health Care (UHC). Remember that money was meant for sports. They further proposed that 20 per cent go to promotion and development of arts and five per cent for strategic intervention, whose expenditure will be subject to approval by the Cabinet and not Parliament. Strangely and annoyingly, they proposed that only 5 per cent of that money go to promotion and development of sports. If there is a fund that this House must investigate then it is this fund. When they moved to the Sports Arts and Social Development Fund, the National Sports Fund was left hanging. They operated it for a few months. So, we had two funds: the Sports Arts and Social Development Fund and the National Sports Fund. The initial idea by the Kibaki Government of this Fund was to promote sports. It was to promote our young people, but when President Uhuru saw free money, he decided that this money should go to UHC. We now have the Social Health Insurance Fund (SHIF) and the Social Health Authority (SHA). Why do we need to continue taking 60 per cent of this money to UHC? The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and Audio Services, Senate."
}