Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 200917,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/200917/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 330,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Muite",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 235,
        "legal_name": "Paul Kibugi Muite",
        "slug": "paul-muite"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I beg to move:- THAT, a new Clause 78A be inserted immediately after Clause 78 therefor a new clause as follows - New 78A The Retirements Benefits Act is amended by inserting the following new section immediately after Section 37 - Benefits 37A. Every under retirement benefits occupational scheme and regulations retirement made by the Minister benefits under Section 55 of schemes. this Act shall ensure that a member leaving employment after three years of membership shall, thereupon be entitled to - (a) a refund of his contribution together with the investment income accrued thereon; and, (b) payment of the employer's contribution together with the investment income accrued thereon. I was explaining that employees who are retrenched are denied access to their retirement benefits until they reach the age of 55. When one is retrenched at the age of between 30 and 40, when he or she has children in school, and others in universities, it cannot be right to deny the employees their retirement benefits when they most need it. If you continue being in employment, you continue to receive a salary and you are able to support your family and do your own things using the salary. Therefore, you can wait for your retirement benefits until you reach 55 years. However, where one is retrenched or dismissed or retires for whatever reasons, why would we deny those employees their retirement benefits if they want it? It has been argued that people get their benefits and they misuse the money. If your son or daughter has not become financially responsible at the age of 38 or 40, then they will never be responsible. If fact, it is their money. Indeed, those who are benched on misusing their money with ndogo ndogo, they will still do it even at the age of 55! So, let us allow these people to access their money and start up their business and educate their children. The wording of this clause is clearly set out on page 664. If hon. Members, whom I am appealing to, through you, support this new clause, employees will be able to access their benefits. No employee has complained about this amendment. It is only the managers of these schemes. We should not be paternalistic by saying that they will misuse their money. The managers of these schemes want to cling on to the money of employees for as long as possible, trade with it and make a lot of money for themselves. That is why they do not want the employees who are retrenched to access the money. They want to be left with that money for many years. There is no justification. That is their money, they have worked for it and they are entitled to it. I beg to move."
}