Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 194848,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/194848/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 190,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Namwamba",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 108,
        "legal_name": "Ababu Tawfiq Pius Namwamba",
        "slug": "ababu-namwamba"
    },
    "content": "Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, I have looked at many examples across the world. Two things come to my mind. One is that there are very few nations that have had a challenge like we have here. The first is Sri Lanka. Before the reign of Prime Minister Bandaranaike, Sri Lanka established the tradition of Opposition heterogeneity. This is where they had a multi-collection of parties and individuals, marxists, communists, conservatives, all gelled into one with the sole purpose of checking the Government. The Government, and I hope this Government is not going to do the same, fought the Opposition until the Speaker of the House came to the aid of the Members on his left. He allowed them to elect a leader who would be recognised as an Opposition. I ask the Chair to rise to the challenge and ape that great tradition of Sri Lanka. The good thing is that when Prime Minister Bandaranaike crossed the Floor in an election to become the Prime Minister, she did not only ensure legislative anchor, but also that the Opposition was handed the full wherewithal and institutional back-up to function. We had an example in Sri Lanka Today, there is an arrangement in Russia called \"Other Russia\". It gravitates around the former chess world champion Gary Kasparov. \"Other Russia\" is a multi-collection of politicians and individuals that have arrogated to themselves the responsibility to check the Government. They are playing that role. What we are doing here may not be exactly similar to that. That is why the second plunk of that argument is that what we are attempting to do here, if, indeed, we proceed to provide legislative anchor for this process, will have set a precedent. It will have shown an example to the world. 890 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES May 7, 2008 Hon. Members, Mr. John Lork said: \"New opinions are always suspected and usually opposed without any other reason, but because they are not already common.\" Do not oppose this Motion and its agenda merely because it is not yet a common agenda. Support this Motion because it is a known palliative that we cannot run away from. I want to appeal to this House that this is a special day and occasion. Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, I beg to move and ask hon. Linturi to second the Motion."
}