HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 240430,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/240430/?format=api",
"text_counter": 191,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Muturi",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 215,
"legal_name": "Justin Bedan Njoka Muturi",
"slug": "justin-muturi"
},
"content": ". Thereafter, strict surveillance and monitoring by the KSB be done at the Port of Mombasa and other designated ports of entry to guard against paper clearance. Only the quantities allocated were to arrive at a particular time and should be cleared. During the Board's 60th meeting of 13th January, 2006, the Board further resolved that the importation of the sugar quota be spread throughout the year; from March, 2006, to February, 2007. It was also resolved that only sugar importers or exporters whose registration has been issued as at 11th January, 2006, would be considered for allocations. Further, the management was requested by the Board to formally communicate the Board's decision to the parent Ministry and work in close consultation with other arms of the Government to ensure effective administration of the sugar quota as approved. At the adjournment of its 60th meeting of 13th January, 2006, at 2.15 p.m., the Board was presented with copies of Legal Notice No. 2 signed by the Minister for Agriculture. The members of the Board were surprised because, among other things, the Gazette Notice read as follows:- \"In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 33 of the Sugar Act, the Minister for Agriculture, in consultation with the Board, makes the following regulations:- These regulations may be cited as the Sugar Imports/Exports and By-products (Amendment) Regulations, 2006. The Sugar Imports/Exports and By-products Regulations are amended by deleting Regulation 6 and substituting therefore the following new regulation- \"The Board shall facilitate the importation of raw or milled white sugar, mild and final sugar by registered importers and millers on a none discriminatory and liberalised basis.\" Made on 12th January, 2006, and signed by Kipruto arap Kirwa, Minister for Agriculture. The Board had all along been deliberating on how to regulate, in exercise of its powers under Section 27(1), which reads as follows:- \"Subject to such regional and international trade agreements to which Kenya is a 2446 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES July 27, 2006 party, all sugar imports into the country shall be subject to the prevailing Import Duties, taxes and other tariffs, and such imports shall be controlled by the Board.\" Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is, therefore, very clear that when the Board was burning the midnight oil, trying to see how best to come up with regulations that best address the question of these imports, after concluding its 60th meeting, during which it mandated the Chief Executive to communicate to the parent Ministry its decision regarding how it intended to have the imports regulated and controlled, its members were served with copies of a Legal Notice that purported to say, among other things, that the Board had been consulted. The members of the Board were, obviously, taken aback. They were actually, in the words of the chairman, \"surprised\" because, in their view, this was a misrepresentation; that the Board had been consulted, because they had not been consulted. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Agriculture appeared before the Public Investments Committee. In his evidence, excerpts of which are reproduced in this Report, he said that, in his view, when the chairman and the vice-chairman of the Board walked to his Kilimo House office and discussed the problems that had been experienced regarding sugar imports, that amounted to consultation of the Board. We took the Minister to task over that position. It is clearly indicated in the Act that importation of sugar shall be controlled by the Board. Are the chairman, vice-chairman and the chief executive the Board? Clearly, the answer is in the negative. The constitution of the Board is provided for under Section 5 of the Sugar Act, 2001, which reads as follows:- \"5(1) The Board shall consist of a none executive chairman elected by the Board from among the representatives of growers, representatives on the Board and appointed by the Minister; seven representatives elected by growers and appointed by the Minister; three representatives elected by millers and appointed by the Minister; the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry for the time being responsible for matters relating to agriculture; the permanent secretary to the Treasury; the Director of Agriculture, and the Chief Executive of the Board appointed under Section 10, who shall be an ex-officio member and the secretary to the Board.\" It is clearly indicated under the same Section, Sub-section 2, that the Board shall elect a vice-chairman from amongst its members. That should be the composition of the Board. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, of course, the quorum for Board meetings is also provided for within the Act. So, the question that we asked ourselves is: \"Was the meeting of 10th November, 2005, which was called at the behest of the then Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Mr. Ongwae, at Kilimo House, a Board meeting?\" Again, the answer is \"no\". Was the meeting between the Minister for Agriculture and the chairman, and vice-chairman, of the Board a meeting of the Board? Clearly, the answer is \"no\" because the Minister is not even supposed to sit in the Board. Therefore, a meeting between the Minister, the chairman and vice-chairman of the Board cannot, for all intents and purposes, constitute \"consultation with the Board\". That is the point we are making. We have tremendous respect for the Minister for Agriculture. We appreciate the very good work that he has done in the Ministry. However, as PIC, we have a responsibility to point out mistakes. It is very clear that when the Minister for Agriculture prepared Legal Notice No.2 of 2006 on 12th January, 2006 and published it in the Kenya Gazette issue of 13th January, 2006, when the Board was meeting to develop the criteria that was to be followed in the issuance of the Gazette Notice, for purposes of clarity, he was misleading not just the Board but the entire world and Kenyans, that he had consulted the Kenya Sugar Board in making that Gazette Notice. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, misrepresentation constitutes a crime. The Public Officer Ethics Act, Sections 10 and 19, obliges public officers to act within the law. So, the question that the Committee Members asked themselves was this: \"Did the Minister act within the July 27, 2006 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 2447 law, as provided for under Sections 10 and 19 of the Public Officer Ethics Act, which we passed here in 2003?\" And in his capable answer, he would say \"no\". The Minister did not act in accordance with the law. The relevant body, the Sugar Act, 2001, specifically Section 33, enjoins him to consult. Indeed, among the appendices here, is the Board's resolution in which it directed the management, through the Chief Executive to communicate to the parent Ministry, its resolution which forms the basis of what we would call consultations. Consultations cannot be done over a cup of tea or within corridors and the Board cannot, certainly, be consulted by the Minister in Kilimo House. The Board can only be consulted in writing. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, we gave the Minister the opportunity to appear before the Committee and provide any evidence of consultation with the Board. The records which are here, show that the Minister did not provide the Committee with any empirical evidence of any form of consultation, other than what we alleged he assumes, because of the word \"may\" in Section 33. That is why as I read it out, I took the liberty to point out where the comas are. It reads in part: \"The Minister may, in consultation\"--- If the Minister decides to make regulations, because he may decide not to or he may decide to--- If he decides to make regulations such as this one relating to sugar importation, then---"
}