Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 193303,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/193303/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 102,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Imanyara",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 22,
        "legal_name": "Gitobu Imanyara",
        "slug": "gitobu-imanyara"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, given the thoroughness with which the Assistant Minister answers Questions and the aggressive nature in which his answers are couched, I am very disappointed by this answer. The Question asked about what specific measures were being put in place, particularly, with regard to the task force, what recommendations they made and what they are implementing. My question is, with regard to part (c), where the Assistant Minister was specifically requested to talk about the Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), but he instead talked about the Tea Act. It is a matter of common knowledge that, on 29th November, 2006 the High Court of Kenya, sitting as a Constitutional Court, ruled that the manner in which the Kenya Tea Development Authority (KTDA) was converted into the Kenya Tea Development Agency Limited was unlawful. All the problems facing the tea industry arise as a result of the privatisation of KTDA against the law, with the result that the KTDA managers no longer address the issues of farmers, but talk about the shareholders who are very few. The issue is when KTDA was declared unlawful due to the legal notice that was issued, what measures did the Government take with regard to ensuring that the Government's intervention remains in place, so as to save the tea industry from collapsing? I can give you a copy of that judgement if you do not have it with you."
}