Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 396369,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/396369/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 102,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Orengo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 129,
        "legal_name": "Aggrey James Orengo",
        "slug": "james-orengo"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to support this Motion. I want to recap what my colleagues have said and go beyond what has been said; that this is not a simple matter. It goes to the very root of the system of government that we have established. Where matters of this nature are involved, we, as Senators, must go beyond partisanship, look at each and every case on the basis of facts under law as presented to us. The Governor of Turkana is a friend and colleague. I have worked with him and know that he is a responsible person. So, I would not in any way want to cast aspersions on his part or on the part of the County of Turkana. Looking back at what we have fought for in terms of creating this new constitutional dispensation and also ensuring that the systems of government project accountability, transparency and openness in the management of public affairs, we cannot sit back and call a spade a small spoon, but take the case as it is. To that extent, I want to agree with Sen. (Dr.) Khalwale that this is not a partisan matter and the Senate should pronounce itself strongly and clearly in respect of this Motion. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the office of the Controller of Budget set out to carry out investigations, but did not do so. Instead, they shied away. Also the Parliamentary Committee shied away because the issue in the report by the Controller of Budget as found on page 6, No.22 (c) says that the Committee should determine whoever is responsible for the alteration, if any. In answering that question and making that determination, the office of the Controller of Budget found the alteration, but shied away from determining that question and recommended that there should be further investigations. The office of the Controller of Budget must also be taken to task because there are materials before them that would have enabled that office to determine that question. We must ask them why they refused to determine that question. They are a constitutional and independent office which has powers which we do not have. They can conduct this investigation, call for documents, and summon those who are responsible. Therefore, to say that some of those responsible were not available is to run away from a constitutional task that they were given, particularly when they were doing the report with a view of passing it on to Parliament. The office of the Controller of Budget works under the guidance of Parliament and the Senate. Our Committee also shied away from determining that question. Allow me to read the recommendations on the last page. It says:- “That the Budget presented to the Office of the Controller of Budget was not the one approved by the County Assembly. The Committee recommends that further investigations be carried out.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, here is the Office of the Controller of Budget recommending that further investigations be carried out. The Committee also recommended that further investigations should be carried out. Probably, while approving this report, this Senate will recommend that further investigations be carried out. So, in a nutshell, we will end up doing nothing. There will be much talk, but no substance. If you want to look at the seriousness of this matter; by making those alterations, on the face of The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}