Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 350307,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/350307/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 1054,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Wentzel audit report. One of the recommendations was that looking at some of the practices of the Cooper Motors Corporation, the governance and controls were very weak; therefore, some of the directors took advantage of the weak controls to benefit, particularly from procurement of logistic services. That is one of the recommendations. One of the other recommendations was that in order for the CMC to take any action against Andy Forwarders and Peter Muthoka, who is the Managing Director of Andy Forwarders, further investigations were necessary, because, according to him, the findings by PriceWaterHouseCoopers were not conclusive to either find Andy Forwarders culpable or not; this was because there were so many disclaimers in the PriceWaterHouseCoopers report. Actually you need to read that report to appreciate the number of disclaimers that are in it. Actually after reading the report, you ask, then why did you write it all? It is as if it says “We have done this but because we could not interview so and so, we did not have the chance to read--- Therefore, and this information must be corroborated by further investigations”. Therefore, we kind of put little emphasis on the PrinceWaterHouse Coopers Report and put much more emphasis on the Webber Wentzel audit report, which had been commissioned by the Capital Markets Authority. In one of the meetings, we called the Minister of State for Immigration and Registration of Persons to come and throw light on what action he was going to take in terms of having found that there were these discrepancies between giving work permits and then withdrawing them more or less arbitrarily. He came and actually told us he had made up his mind. He even gave a copy of an internal memorandum that he had written directing the immigration boss--- I think it was the Director of Immigrations; I do not know the title but there was a memorandum whose copy he gave us. In it, he directed the chief immigration man to cancel immediately the work permit of Bill Lay. He said this was in the public interest and in the interest of Kenya. I think this was on 20th or 21st of December. I think two or three days later, we saw a newspaper article, where he was quoted as saying that he was under pressure from wherever and, therefore, he had to reinstate the work permit that he had directed to be cancelled. So, we felt that this was something very strange and unusual; you keep changing positions three or four times on the same issue. More importantly, we called Bill Lay to come and appear before us. As a Committee; we interviewed him on his experience, his qualifications, education and he stated that one of his educational qualifications was a degree, which was one of the requirements that was in the application for a work permit. So, we demanded to see evidence of that qualification and he promised the Committee that he was going to produce evidence by January, 2012. We have not got that evidence up to now. That is actually what made us to come up with a very harsh judgement on him. He said before the Committee that he had a university degree but it had been destroyed by floods. We told said even if it had been destroyed by floods, surely, in this modern age and day, he could get his university to give him a transcript or a certificate fairly easily even through the internet but that was not forthcoming, up to the point I am speaking today. Therefore, after the Report had been tabled, we held a meeting after the House Business Committee directed that we sit as a Committee and agree on areas of"
}