{"id":264069,"url":"http://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/264069/?format=json","text_counter":149,"type":"speech","speaker_name":"Mr. Orengo","speaker_title":"The Minister for Lands","speaker":{"id":129,"legal_name":"Aggrey James Orengo","slug":"james-orengo"},"content":"Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in fact, when I stood up when we were wondering what to do, I was thinking of a practical way to move forward rather than lamentations. In fact, my idea initially was that we can continue with the debate. I thought that probably we should use our time more effectively by knowing at what point to adjourn debate; if we adjourn at this particular moment, the arguments for and against will not go on record; but now that the Motion has come at this particular point in time I have no problem, but I would wish that in the spirit of keeping timelines when the substantive Motion comes for debate at the time appointed, as hon. Ruto is proposing--- It should be revisited this afternoon; it is important also to make sure that if the requisite number is not raised, then Parliament should be committed to continue the debate and meet the constitutional timelines."}