HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 237229,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/237229/?format=api",
"text_counter": 213,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. M'Mukindia",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 271,
"legal_name": "Kirugi Joseph Laiboni M'Mukindia",
"slug": "kirugi-mmukindia"
},
"content": "Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. I think that is the right way to do things. I support the view that we should all declare our interest if we have an interest in any matter. So, I fully support what the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs has said. A few things that have happened in this House have made our own integrity questionable. If we make our own integrity questionable, then the integrity of the whole House becomes questionable. A couple of these things have happened, and I agree with the Minister that we should look at ourselves again and again. I rise to support this Bill and have a few points to make. First, I agree with the hon. Members who have said that the Minister has proposed amendments to the Insurance Act and the Central Bank of Kenya Act through the back door. As you are aware, an Insurance (Amendment) Bill has already been published. Really, it is not proper for the Minister to propose additional amendments through this Finance Bill to the Insurance Act, when already other amendments have been published. It is important for us to be given the opportunity to interrogate fully the Insurance 3336 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES November 1, 2006 (Amendment) Bill. Therefore, I would suggest that any mention of the Insurance Act in this Finance Bill be deleted. The amendments in this Bill should be made in the Insurance (Amendment) Bill. I do not know why the Minister has made these proposals. I am not an expert in insurance matters, and do not know the reasoning behind this move. Why do the amendments have to be made piecemeal at this point in time? The second issue relates to the amendments to the Central Bank of Kenya Act. We are all aware that we discussed the Central Bank of Kenya (Amendment) Bill in this House and passed it. It went for the Presidential assent. Unfortunately, the President brought it back with a memorandum. Since that time, that Bill, which we passed, has been in abeyance. It has not been brought back to this House for us to discuss it fully. This raises a number of questions. Why does the Minister not bring to the House the Central Bank of Kenya (Amendment) Act that we passed in this House? Why should we not discuss it to see whether we need to amend it further? Why does the Minister want to make amendments to the Central Bank of Kenya Act through this Finance Bill? That is suspect. Why he wants to do this raises unnecessary questions. Do we take it that the Treasury is afraid of bringing the Central Bank of Kenya (Amendment) Act back to this House? We know the main reason why we passed that Act. Primarily, it was because many banks in this country had bankrupted many Kenyans. They were supposed to pay back all the extra interest money that they had stolen from Kenyans. While I am a big supporter of this Government, at times I feel unhappy when it conspires with businessmen to suppress the weak in this country. What is the reason for not bringing the Central Bank of Kenya (Amendment) Act back to this House? What excuse can the Minister give for not having our people, who were bankrupted by these banks, refunded their money? We can all declare our interest. Anybody who has had a house or car loan in this country over the last 25 years has been adversely affected by this illegality. Therefore, I totally oppose the proposed amendments to the Central Bank of Kenya Act. I believe that the Minister is trying to achieve something that he ordinarily would not achieve if he brought the substantive Bill to this House. I have no problem with the principle of having a chairman, a board of directors and a chief executive for the Central Bank of Kenya. That can be debated for or against. The House should have the time to debate the merits and demerits of such a proposal substantively. I believe that that, that matter should come before us as part of the Central Bank of Kenya (Amendment) Bill which was passed by this House. Let the Minister bring it before us. However, the question of the in duplum rule will not go away. The Ministers and the technocrats here are hoping that this issue will somehow disappear. It will not disappear! So, the only way it can disappear is for us to confront it, handle it and finalise it, one way or the other. It will not just go with the wind. It will not disappear! We cannot allow it to disappear because we know how many people in this country have been affected adversely while banks are raking in billions of shillings and exporting the capital to foreign countries. This is terrible! We are embarrassing our people and making them poor. What are we doing? Transferring wealth from Kenya to overseas and we are very happy doing it! We are quite happy in our big offices and not seeing that we are impoverishing our own people. That, to me, is criminal. I think something should be done as quickly as possible to correct that situation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the other issue is the Capital Gains Tax. I do not know, again, the rationale behind the introduction of the Capital Gains Tax. This is an issue that over the last 20 to 25 years has, indeed, been brought up, tried and failed. It cannot be solely for the purpose of raising revenue. I do not believe that!"
}