Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 495085,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/495085/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 67,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Ng’ong’o",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 110,
        "legal_name": "John Mbadi Ng'ong'o",
        "slug": "john-mbadi"
    },
    "content": "Hon. Chairlady, I do not think that we are discussing the ruling of the Speaker, because he actually only reaffirmed Article 114 of the Constitution. Would it be in order for me to ask that we postpone the debate on this Bill until the amendments which touch on a money Bill, including the one by hon.(Ms.) Abdalla--- I know she has spoken to an issue about a money Bill. You cannot discuss a money Bill with the Executive. The law requires that it goes through the Budget and Appropriations Committee, and it is not the work of the individual Member to ensure that his or her amendment is taken to the Committee; it should go to them automatically. So, it is disadvantageous to Members when an amendment is not taken to the Committee. Again, why are Members not allowed to move their amendments just because someone did not take thm to the Budget and Appropriations Committee. There is no single day when the Budget and Appropriations Committee has been asked to sit to discuss any amendment – not a single one – in the Mining Bill. So, I do not see why we should apply double standards. We need to defer the Committee of the Whole House on this Bill and allow the Budget and Appropriations Committee enough time to look at all the amendments, including the one hon. (Ms.) Abdalla is saying they agreed on with the Executive. Indeed, that is unprocedural. It is for the Budget and Appropriations Committee to contact and consult with the Treasury and not individual Committee members. I have neither seen that in the Standing Orders nor in the Constitution. It is irregular."
}