Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 505310,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/505310/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 179,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "have infrastructure. Since our population is growing, why should we find it difficult to create a city? Like the previous speaker said, we would like to see Ongata Rongai, Kitengela and Ngong becoming municipalities or cities. There must be authority and criteria for giving these cities and municipalities. I would be very hesitant to allow this. Even when we say that the Governor shall confer the status of a special municipality to the headquarters of the county even where it does not meet the threshold specified under subsection 3 (a), again, we are inviting chaos. If you give the governors a free hand to declare municipalities and cities, you will find villages or small towns becoming cities. I think the charter for declaring a city should be left to an authority. This is a matter that we need to look at very carefully. The issue of transferring functions under Section 24, I thought the Senate met in Mombasa and eventually passed a resolution on the functions to be devolved. Are we going back to that? In my view, this proposal is redundant. It is the same with the County Governments Act, Section 26(2) where we are being asked to delete the word 15 and reduce to 10 wards. The first election under the Constitution was conducted in March, 2013. I do not think we are going to have another first election. I do not know what this amendment intends to serve. Again the issue of a forum to consult is a very good idea but I look at it as something meant to undermine the County Development Board Act which we passed. As you know, it was controversial and some people were trying to block it. After rigorous mediation - I believe the Speaker took part in it – it was agreed that the County Development Board Act goes through although it is still a subject of litigation. I think I am seeing a sinister motive here. It says here that the governor chairs this one and initially if you can remember, they were advocating to chair the County Development Board. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I have no doubt that this forum is meant to substitute County Development Boards. I think there is some mischief here which we must not accept. The forum is good, and if you include these professionals to participate in the development of the counties, we should make a provision and amend the County Development Act to include those professionals so that they participate fully but under the framework of the County Development Board which already exists. This is one area that we should ignore. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I have already spoken about the role of the Senate. I have said that we have already participated in the transfer of functions under Section 24 and we do not need this. All in all, I do not wish to continue with other areas of proposed amendments but the underlying principle here is that as we move to the Third Reading we need the Committee responsible to sit down so that when it comes, they would have proposed certain amendments after critically looking at these proposed amendments. I want to underline the importance of us moving fast in disposing all Bills that are referred to us by the “Lower House” lest we are accused of sitting on Bills which are important for the country. Having said that, I think it was a mistake to keep this Bill for so long but then two wrongs do not make a right. We cannot rush it. We must thoroughly scrutinize it especially during the Third Reading. 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."
}