Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 295455,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/295455/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 259,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The letter that is addressed to the Chair of the Parliamentary Budget Committee is with regard to the report on the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for the Financial Year, 2012/2013. This letter from the Treasury reads as follows:- “I am writing to you in reference to the report of the Budget Committee on Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for 2012/2013, which you presented to Parliament on 6th June, 2012. We commend the Committee for being thorough in its review of the expenditure so that taxpayers can be assured of value for their money.” The letter goes on to say:- “The Treasury is in principle agreeable to the recommendations made by hon. Members of Parliament. However, we have noted that some of the proposed expenditure cuts while implementing the Budget could have adverse effects on the ability of the Government in delivering some critical services.” This letter is purporting to instruct Parliamentary Budget Committee that whatever this House passed on 6th June cannot be implemented by the Treasury. This is clearly a violation of the Constitution and it is unacceptable. We cannot have the Treasury writing to Parliament to tell us that what we legislated, we did in vain. Further, the same Ministry has written to the Clerk of the National Assembly indicating that today, they will introduce Vote on Account for the Financial Year, 2012/2013. There is even a court ruling which is very clear on page nine and which I will table in the House. The Judge ruled last year that a Vote on Account can never be introduced in the House unless there is an Appropriation Bill before the House. If you allow me, I will just go through two paragraphs of the ruling. Let me go straight to the last paragraph of the ruling of the Judge. The judge was Justice Majanja of the High Court. I, therefore, hold that for there to be compliance with Article 222 of the Constitution, which is Vote on Account, there must be an Appropriation Act in place. It was in breach of the Constitution to proceed to withdraw money from the Consolidated Fund without the existence of the Appropriation Act."
}