Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 192527,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/192527/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 330,
    "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. Speaker, Sir, I wish to support the Motion, but first of all I wish to say that we should not be grandstanding, because the role that this Parliament is to play in the next five years has to measure up with other Parliaments. There have been Members of previous Parliaments who have been detained for standing up for what was right; they were not talking about issues like this, but about grander issues and ideas that shook this nation. There are people who were assassinated and who were Members of this Parliament. I think we should not be grandstanding, but be up to the task. I like what the Members in the opposite side are doing. These are not new things. I even understand why this Motion had to be opposed. I understand the underlying current. If we did not want this Motion to be opposed, then it would not have been put before the House. So, I think nobody is restraining anybody from supporting or opposing the Motion. What I find very strange, and which is different from the way I was trained, is that when you have a Motion of this nature moved by the Minister for Finance, making specific recommendations--- I have listened from the time we started debating this Motion, unfortunately I was not given a chance to speak earlier. But I have not heard anybody on the opposite side saying anything about the Schedule and why that money should not be given to any particular Ministry or Department or service of Government. That is what Parliament is all about. Parliament was founded on the principles of \"no representation, no taxation\"; so, that every element of taxation and expenditure should be looked into and scrutinised by Members of Parliament. I find it strange that we are electing the easier part of taking global kind of positions in a Motion of a substantial nature. In fact, if this was the House of Commons, probably, somebody would have moved a Motion to deal with the specific Vote, and give the reasons why they do not want that particular Department or Ministry to get the amount which is contained in the Schedule. I hope that in this engagement and conversation, we will make this a greater Parliament by talking about the issues that are before the House, and the ones that are not before it. If it is to think out of the box, those who constitute the current Government have not behaved like animals in Mara, where when a wildebeest goes south they all go south. There are issues where we have disagreed. That is the way it should be. If you are telling us to think out the box and somebody on the opposite side is saying that we should not disagree, then I do not know what you are talking about. We are a vibrant Government and are not going to allow anything to be presented before this House, if there is no agreement and consensus. The Prime Minister made it loud and clear, more than two months ago, about that what he thought of that part of Africa that has shamed the rest of the Continent. That was not a Government position. The Government did not quarrel with it because he took a different position. But I think the Government has eventually come to that position."
}