HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 426534,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/426534/?format=api",
"text_counter": 180,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "(ii) Is it that we have more committees than we ought to, or is it that our present committees tend to concentrate on similar matters that, probably, appear to be popular? (iii) Is it possible, hon. Members, that by tending to focus on the familiar issues, committees may overlook other important matters falling within their mandate and lose the opportunity to be more innovative? (iv) Is it optimal use of our time as a House, if more than one committee were to investigate the same matter and report to the House, whether separately or jointly? (v) Who really gains when committees continually contend with overlap of mandates? Hon. Members, it is my view that if we were to boldly answer these questions, we, probably, would not seek the guidance of anybody on the mandates of committees, let alone a ruling from the Speaker. If we were to be faithful to our Standing Orders and practices of this House as, indeed, urged by hon. Kaluma on 18th March, 2013, I have no doubt that I would rarely be asked to provide guidance on such matters as the interpretation of words used in the Standing Orders. However, since I have to adjudicate, I will not fail to rise to the occasion and on my part, I will be very bold. The first question relates to the extent to which the PIC and Departmental Committees should engage with State corporations in the execution of their mandates. Hon. Members, as I have ruled before a State corporation established under the provisions of the State Corporations Act, Chapter 446 of the Laws of Kenya, or indeed, established by a specific Act of Parliament is not, and cannot be construed to be a department of a Ministry, within the meaning of Standing Order No.216. If that was to happen, then we would be assuming that there is no difference, for instance, between the Department of Finance in the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure and a familiar and similar department at the Kenya Airports Authority. That will not augur well as the organ that made the laws that separated such two institutions and described one as a body corporate--- Then we should not shy away from treating them as such when it comes to applying our Standing Orders Nos.206 and 216. Why would one be comfortable to acknowledge that a public body is a State corporation, when the usage of the term favours the intention but retreat to a different meaning when the term does not favour the intention? In my last communication on 5th December, 2013, I mentioned the matter of audit of Ministries and State corporations under the Public Audit Act, No.12 of 2003. If, indeed, State corporations were to be mistaken for departments, then it would follow that they would be audited and reported on together with Ministries. This is not the case; each is treated separately and distinctly. That is why I encourage all of us to apply our minds in the consideration of these matters and remain consistently faithful to the law and our own Standing Orders. Hon. Members, Article 125 of the Constitution empowers any committee of the House of Parliament to summon any person for purposes of giving evidence or providing information, but that is not the end. Here, I want to refer to Derek Lee, a former MP in the House of Commons of Canada; in his book titled: “The Power of Parliamentary Houses to Send for Persons, Papers and Records”. That book recognizes that a Committee has no authority except that which the House has delegated to it. Invariably, the House exercises that delegation by way of Standing Orders and resolutions. It, The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}