Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 459106,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/459106/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 262,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Prof.) Nyikal",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I stand to oppose that amendment. Basically, this amendment is in the same principle that we had in Clause 6. Whereas I agree that in a marriage people will share equally but, really, it is also important to note that every partner must make an effort to make a contribution. If it is taken for granted that just being in the marriage everything will be shared equally and there will be no question, I do not think that is fair. Therefore, by removing Sub-clause 2 in Clause 7, I think we are denying people the chance to interrogate that. I also believe that if we were to remove that, then we cannot leave Clause 9 which raises the same issue. I oppose this. I think the leeway should be left at the time of dissolution so that, if a partner wants to challenge the position that there was equal share, then they can do so. In this case, as one of the Members has said, you just get into a marriage, do nothing at all and know that the law is with you and nobody can question. I, therefore, oppose that."
}