Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 176309,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/176309/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 327,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Orengo",
    "speaker_title": "The Minister for Lands",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 129,
        "legal_name": "Aggrey James Orengo",
        "slug": "james-orengo"
    },
    "content": " Mr. Chairman, Sir, I think the major reason why this must be opposed is that it is the Constitution which spells out who can be Deputy Speaker. You cannot, in Standing Orders, which is not even a Statute, impose sanctions which are not in the Constitution. The second reason is that, and I agree with Mr. Imanyara, there was a situation in Canada when the Liberal Party was voted out completely, and if you had a Standing Order like this one, then you would simply be inviting a situation where Parliament cannot work. It is known in all Parliaments that people horse-trade, and that has happened before. In any case, the Speaker himself does not need to support any party because this Parliament, like in the First Parliament--- Sir Humprey Slade was not really a member of any of the parties which were the majority in the National Assembly. It was a consensus in that Parliament that Sir Slade became the Speaker. So, to assume that at all times, everybody who is going to be a Speaker is going to be that person who is necessarily sponsored by the political party in power--- The last Speaker, Mr. Kaparo, was not really known as an hon. Member of NARC, but that party decided to sponsor an hon. Member of the party opposite, which party was in Opposition to become the Speaker of the House. So, I think this would be imposing conditions which need to be addressed in the Constitution. If it is in conflict with the Constitution, it cannot hold."
}