Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 358673,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/358673/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 338,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "particular parastatals can be owned by the people around there. People living within that area can buy shares through the co-operative model and run such factories profitably. What I would be opposed to is giving these parastatals to the county governments for one basic reason; that business is not for the county governments. Most business should be put in the hands of private organizations and that is where business thrives best. Governments, be they county or national, more often than not, are not the best runners of business because there is a conflict all over. The money may not be put where it is supposed to go and that is why even at the county level, I am surprised that the many boards that are supposed to be constituted right now are not in place. People within towns who are contributing a lot of money to have services provided within the towns will find this money going to the wrong areas. You are supposed to have water, good roads but in the absence of bodies to run those particular functions, you will find that the people who are contributing revenue will not have benefit of that revenue. Similarly, I do not see how a county government will manage a factory or parastatal in the best interest of the farmers there. If that parastatal made profit, you can be sure that those profits may not be ploughed back to give the best benefit to the farmers or the owners of that parastatal. So, I would prefer at a later date maybe the Mover can bring in a Motion to have this privatized and follow the model of the co-operatives."
}