Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 358544,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/358544/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 209,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Hon. Deputy Speaker, it is too early for us to think about giving parastatals to county governments on a silver platter when we do not even know whether the county governments have capacity to implement what they have already been given. We should give time to the county governments to settle down and spend the money they have been given on their priority areas. This culture of Government doing business and competing with businessmen, as my colleague who spoke before me said, should come to an end in this country. On the other hand, if parastatals are said to be having a burden of debts, which one comes first? Why do we have to transfer a burden from the National Government to the county governments? We should think of doing this when these bodies start making profits, so that the county governments can boost their revenues. So, which one comes first? Do we have to write off the loans first and then transfer the parastatals? This is just moving a problem from one point to another other. For the reasons I have stated, I do not see how the farmers who produce the raw materials for the parastatals will benefit directly. The culture of parastatals, or Government doing business, and competing with ordinary people in the same field, should come to an end. We should not transfer these bodies to the county governments for the county governments to continue doing business and running factories instead of them creating an enabling environment for people to do business, and enable the county governments to collect revenue and deliver services. With those remarks, I beg to oppose."
}