Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 204970,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/204970/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 202,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Kajwang",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 164,
        "legal_name": "Gerald Otieno Kajwang",
        "slug": "otieno-kajwang"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Chairman, Sir, I think the amendment merely seeks to explain the consequences of failing to get the concurrence of the party. We have had it that you must get the concurrence of the party before you can nominate a Member of a party which is not the governing party into your Cabinet. But it has been ignored. I think the gist or the thrust of the amendment is to give seats through to the concurrence. If you do not get the concurrence, then what happens? That is what my friend is trying to bring out, and I think it is in order that we make sure that we do not make law which is impossible. We made laws here under the IPPG and said September 6, 2007 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 3753 that if the Government wants to nominate a Member who is not a Member of Government, then they must get the concurrence of the party. It has been ignored, people have gone to courts and the courts have not given us direction. Now, today, we are saying: Please, explain to us what \"concurrence\" means and what will happen if it is not obtained\". We are saying that if you do not obtain it, but somebody decides to accept the appointment, then he loses the Membership of the party that nominated him. That is the only way in which to protect multiparty democracy. We have said it before. We are either a multiparty democracy or we are not. We cannot have a situation where we are sometimes a multiparty democracy and at other times a no-party democracy. I beg to support the amendment."
}