Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 362213,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/362213/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 21,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "am saying. But anyway, Article 110 details how to transact those Bills that touch on the county governments. It states the procedures of transacting them. Article 110(3) states that “Before either House considers a Bill, the Speakers of the National Assembly and the Senate shall jointly resolve any question as to whether it is a Bill concerning counties and if it is, whether it is a special or an ordinary Bill.” So, even after you have agreed with the Speaker of the Senate that a Bill concerns county governments, you need to determine whether it is a special Bill or an ordinary Bill. Now, what is a special Bill? A special Bill is defined under Article 110(2)(a). It states that, “a special Bill, which shall be considered under Article 111, if it relates to the election of members of a county assembly or a county executive”. There is the Annual County Allocation of Revenue Bill mentioned in Article 218. There is no mention of Division of Revenue Bill. So, those are the only two Bills that the Constitution recognizes as special Bills concerning the county governments. The procedure of transacting them is very clear in the Constitution. The National Assembly can only overrule any amendment from the Senate by a two-third majority. In terms of the ordinary Bill, if there is a disagreement or the Senate proposes amendments, the National Assembly can reject the amendments. However, the two Houses must form a mediation committee. In the event the mediation committee fails to resolve that stalemate, the Bill is lost. That is an ordinary Bill. A special Bill cannot be lost. I have said that there are only two special Bills and they are clearly defined. If the Constitution had envisaged that Senate will also be involved in the Division of Revenue Bill there would be clear provisions of how to solve it in the Constitution. Why is it that Article 110 failed to recognize the Division of Revenue Bill as a Bill that concerns county governments? We could not have such a careless Constitution! The Constitution had contemplated the Division of Revenue Bill as a pure and exclusive function of the National Assembly hence no need to have a mechanism of mediating or resolving any disputes arising because there would be no disputes. I expected the Senate to address itself to the following: If he insists that the Division of Revenue Bill should go to the Senate, what kind of a Bill is it? Is it a special Bill or an ordinary Bill? If it is a special Bill, why is it that Article 110(2) does not recognize it as a special Bill yet it recognizes the County Allocation of Revenue Bill? In conclusion, this thing should not be seen as a tug of war between the National Assembly and the Senate. I plead with the media that it is not necessary to bring differences between these two Houses. However, it is important for posterity that we agree on how division of revenue should be transacted. If the Bill on that matter can be transacted by the two Houses, we need to be clear on the procedure of doing it. If there is no procedure chances are that we are going to end up with a stalemate which will lead to mediation and if we fail at mediation then the Bill is lost. Are you telling me that this country can work without the Division of Revenue Bill simply because it is lost? It cannot be that careless. This thing, to me, is very clear. Hon. Deputy Speaker, I ask you to rule that this Bill was improperly forwarded to the Senate and, therefore, please, send the original Bill that this House passed to the President for assent."
}