HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 191374,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/191374/?format=api",
"text_counter": 320,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Kimunya",
"speaker_title": "The Minister for Finance",
"speaker": {
"id": 174,
"legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
"slug": "amos-kimunya"
},
"content": " Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you. This is a landmark Motion, and I am happy for the decision that you have taken. It is the integrity of myself today and tomorrow it will be the integrity of any of us. I proceeded to recover public land that had been taken away. I am very happy with the record I hold on that. What I recovered includes the plot where the Procession Way is. I recovered that with the co-operation of some current Members of this House. When I proceeded to the Treasury, I found claims amounting to Kshs109 billion against the Government. Working together with a committee I stood firm and managed to reduce that to not more than Kshs1 billion. That means Kshs108 billion saved for the Kenyan people. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have worked tirelessly to maximise on the revenue of this country. I will just give you an example of the Telkom Kenya Limited which has been mentioned here. Whereas we even put in the Budget that we are anticipating to raise only Kshs6 billion through the procedures that we put in place, we were able to raise Kshs26 billion under my leadership at the Treasury. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on Safaricom Limited, I took up the issue when it was to sell 11 per cent for US$100 million, in other words, for Kshs6.8 billion. We managed to float, with the substantial benefit to the Kenyan people, 25 per cent which at those rates would have been Kshs15 billion, for Kshs51 billion, an extra Kshs36 billion. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when I moved to the Treasury in 2006, you may recall that it was at the height of the Anglo Leasing infamy. The image of our country had been soiled the world over. We had been suspended by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Our programmes had been suspended. I worked tirelessly to regain the confidence, not only of the World Bank and IMF, but the entire international community. For the first time ever, we completed an IMF programme in November last year. I am saying all that by way of background. Is that the behaviour of a man of no integrity? Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, a number of suggestions and allegations have been made here and elsewhere. Perhaps, we may not even be able to complete all the issues. But I would like to give 1602 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES July 2, 2008 this country a comprehensive response to each of the issues as raised by Dr. Khalwale and the other hon. Members who talked today, so that Kenyans will know that truth. Just touching on a few issues for purposes of shaping up the debate today, I think everyone is in the clear on the issue of Safaricom. We have done all the due diligence. We worked together with all the teams. At no time did I benefit or withhold any information. I did issue a Ministerial Statement on this Floor. I believe that the discussion on that Ministerial Statement is still pending the return to the House of Dr. Khalwale. So, I am sure we could discuss that at a different time. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in terms of the payment of debts for the Kenya Post and Telecommunication Corporation (KPTC), it is Government policy. It not a personal debt to Mr. Amos Kimunya. These are debts that were owed by all the parastatals. It is part of the my responsibility to clean up the balance sheet of the company and pay all the debts in terms of paying the power bills and who was owed. In terms of the recovery, the Government has within it a mechanism for following up those who looted from it in the past. That is the responsibility of the Attorney-General and the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC). My responsibility is to work on the issues within my responsibility. In terms of the privatisation, we have come out on a committed programme and said that we want to build value for Kenyans and share that value with them. It is what we have done with Safaricom Limited and Telkom Kenya. It is what we did with KenGen and Kenya Re-insurance Company. We have cleaned up all those companies which have been looted and messed up in the past, and shared them with the Kenyan people. Now, if by doing that I was wrong then, perhaps, I have no business working for the Kenyan people. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the issue of Mobitelea keeps on coming up. I have only been Minister for Finance from February 2006. Mobitelea is an issue that was brought into focus in 1999. I was not the Minister then. I have said that there are people, some in this House; including the Chairman of the Committee on Finance, Planning and Trade who was the Minister for Finance when it came up, who might be able to shed more light for us in terms of who Mobitelea is. This is because he was the Minister then and he immediately moved to the Ministry of Telecommunications. The two issues of Mobitelea in Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Telecommunications was done when he was responsible for those two dockets. So, it will be unfair to ask me a question which can be answered by Members who are in this House. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the issue of Alcazar has been raised as having 11 per cent in Safaricom. As far as I know, Alcazar is a company that is within the consortium that bid for French Telkom in a very open and transparent system. I have absolutely no interest at all. I have only met one of the people who said that they represent Alcazar, in a delegation when the French Telkom people came to present the French Telkom cheque to me, in terms of the Treasury. In terms of Safaricom Limited, I have checked the records. There is absolutely no connection with Alcazar in the shareholders' register of Safaricom. In any case, an allegation that Alcazar could be owning 11 per cent of Safaricom is totally impossible. The largest shareholders in Safaricom, apart from the Government and Vodafone Kenya, does not exceed even 1 per cent after the privatisation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we come to the issue of De La Rue. I did issue a Statement in this House. We were advised to await the return of Dr. Khalwale, so that he can seek clarifications on exactly where we are on the printing of the money. But I want to say this: This country has been surviving on currency that we all know. On the excuses that we now need tamper-proof currency, we need to check carefully what is hidden behind this. I found a tender for US$51 million to print money to last from 2007 to 2009. Because of the new generation currency, it is going to mean that we wipe out all the current money that we have and replace it with new currency. The rationale for going for new generation currency is because there was going to be competition and, hence, each of the competitors will need to protect their patent. Nobody should have undue advantage of the July 2, 2008 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 1603 others because they have to tender. So, the natural reaction - and I asked this - is: Does that mean that every three years when we have to go for fresh tender we need to be changing our currency? I was told: \"Unfortunately, yes.\" I asked: \"Who would stand that kind of waste of public resources, where you change currency every three years because you are going for tender?\" We worked out what the next alternatives were to ensuring that we get good value for our money, stable supply of currency and, at the same time, save Kenyans money. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for record, US$51 million roughly translates to about Kshs3.3 billion. But through what we have done so far, by utilizing the 50 per cent deposit that had been paid, to print currency at almost the same rate as our currency now, we have assured the supply of currency to this country for the same period. Now, if I have saved 50 per cent of the money that had been paid, am I being corrupt or saving Kenya money? These are the facts that we need to discuss here so that we can discuss from a point of knowledge. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have been told all those things about De La Rue deposits and all that, but let me turn to the new issue of the Grand Regency Hotel. Let me say this from the word go. The Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) is an institution that falls under Treasury. When a Question is asked about CBK in this House, the Governor cannot come here to answer it. A Question was asked on the Floor of this House about what is happening with regard to the Grand Regency Hotel. As the Minister for Finance, I came here to provide the answer. I even appeared before the relevant Departmental Committees and I took along with me the Governor and the Permanent Secretary to provide answers to the Committee. I want to assure Kenyans that whatever has been said about me and the Treasury--- We are doing all that purely from the point of view that the CBK is under the Treasury. I have not sat in any meeting nor met any of those people who were discussing. I have not been involved in any discussion. When I say that \"we are selling to this\", I am essentially using the collective \"we\" as Treasury and our subsidiary, the CBK. My hands are totally clean on this transaction. I will be giving a more detailed statement, specifically on this matter, because I would like Kenyans to know the truth. In terms of the allegations that I have kept off the Attorney-General from this matter, I am aware that the lawyer representing Mr. Pattni and the buyers, Mr. Adan, from Wetangula and Adan Company, has met the Attorney-General, at least, six times, to discuss matters pertaining to the Grand Regency Hotel. I also would like to put it on record that the Governor of CBK has not only briefed in writing, but also orally, the Prime Minister about that transaction. The brief was copied to me and to the Prime Minister. The issue we are talking about here, of secrecy, does not arise. I believe that if we remove the politics and the sensational issues that have been raised about it, we will be able to appreciate the issues. We salvaged that hotel when it was on the verge of disappearing. Since the time it was taken away in 2003 to the time we started requesting for it in March, 2007--- That is the time when I asked the Permanent Secretary to write to the Director of KACC and say: \"We want that hotel reverted back to CBK!\" There was no action being taken. When we succeeded on 8th April, 2008 and the hotel was surrendered back, the Governor wrote to the Director of KACC and said: \"Yes! We have this here, but unfortunately, the law does not allow CBK to own commercial businesses and, hence, we need to discuss how we can dispose of this hotel.\" The modalities were agreed upon and that hotel has been disposed of with what we believe was the right value. I gave all that information to the Committee and I am prepared to provide that information. Like I said before, this may not be the last time--- I do not have all the time to give you the information, but I would like the House to actually get---"
}