Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 472508,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/472508/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 180,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "what is happening is that nearly 80 per cent of these contracts are going to one group, particularly the women. Part of the reason for this is because PWDs have a number of limitations in terms of applying, but for the youth the issue of financial constraints that Sen. Muthama had mentioned is one of them. Although some of the programmes like YEDF announced last month that they would allow financing of LPOs. If you have an LPO or a contract to supply any institution of the Government or any public institution, they will be in a position to finance youth groups in that regard. Even then the kind of facilities that the funds are giving will be inadequate to support some of the contracts that these disadvantaged groups in this affirmative action will be getting. Some of the contracts can be up to Kshs20 million, Kshs30 million and Kshs50 million. What those institutions are providing to the youth is about Kshs2 million or even Kshs100,000. I agree with Sen. Muthama that the provisions should be there, but the youth who have difficulties in startup may have difficulties in taking advantage of this. However, that is not to say that youth are just those who are struggling to start up. There are youths who are in this House who have resources and who are very enterprising and are in significant business. We are talking of people who are 35 years age. There are those who are in big businesses who can actually take advantage of this affirmative action to go for large value contracts. That is the advantage of this. The youth should not always look at small things worth Kshs2 million or Kshs3 million. If the youth have resources, they can go for the big contracts on the basis of affirmative action. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, things that we need to go into, when we come to the Committee of the Whole, is to introduce amendments that are useful. One of the things we need to be very cautious about in particular is to discourage these procuring entities to give an excuse that they have not met the requirement for one reason or another. Although the reporting mechanism is there, I still think that we have to look at ways of tightening that loophole. That is an avenue that they can use to escape or fail to meet the requirement of 30 per cent. Some of the amendments which are in the report, I am sure hon. Senators have seen them, is to expand the definition of public entity in Clause 3. The definition has been expanded significantly to include all kinds of public institutions, including those at the county level, independent offices and commissions. Therefore, all public institutions are covered. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the other amendment that we will propose is that in terms of preferences provided for, there are specific areas that procuring entities need to look at. These are the specific procurements that are reserved specifically for the disadvantaged groups. In terms of determining the preferences, the Bill proposes that the Cabinet Secretary shall prescribe the preferences. We are suggesting that it must be with approval of Parliament. The idea of having preference is to help us to attain the goal of the 30 per cent. As much as possible, we should set aside specific procurements. In the current regulations, it is mainly in printing, stationery, cleaning and those kinds of things. There is need to expand so that we can target the 30 per cent. 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."
}