Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 483999,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/483999/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 100,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "qualified lawyer are both competent persons. I believe that when this House voted unanimously to endorse that Committee they did that because they had faith in those eleven Senators. I believe that at this point, it is not in our interest and neither is it right that we should cast aspersions on any Senator who sat in that Committee. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to state clearly that the reason why that process has been set, that after the Senate Committee listens to all the charges, those charges are still brought back to the House, each Senator is given an opportunity to express what their views are, and the Deputy Governor is given another chance to be heard and finally, a vote is taken even after the Senate Committee has made up its decision - that procedure is set in the interest of integrity of the elected Members of this House. The Members of this House have a conscience and they vote according to that conscience. It is my belief that none of all those eleven Senators made a decision because they did not believe that the threshold was met. As a Senate, we endorsed all the eleven Senators and seven have returned a verdict. Then are we saying or would we argue that then the opinion and the threshold that has been set by the majority will be null and void or it will be accepted? That is the question we should answer. To think otherwise or to resolve otherwise would be saying that what the majority of those eleven Senators who we endorsed have said is incorrect. I believe that this is not the way this House wants to go unless we made a mistake in the first place. I support."
}