Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 522748,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/522748/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 156,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Ochieng’",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 2955,
        "legal_name": "David Ouma Ochieng'",
        "slug": "david-ouma-ochieng"
    },
    "content": "Most definitely, hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I am going to bring a particular amendment to ensure that is done. You have heard Members contributing. They are confusing provisions relating to preferences in this Bill. If you look at how they are defining “preferences,” they are not talking about young people, women or disabled persons. Preferences are areas where for example you will prefer to use one method of tendering to another. It is not talking about disadvantaged groups. It is talking about you deciding to buy Kenyan products first where they are available before you move to buy something outside the country. Therefore, preferences in terms of the way they appear in this Bill are not related to disadvantaged groups. I agree with you. I am going to bring amendments to entrench the rights of these young people in this particular Bill. There are very curious provisions in this Bill. These are provisions that appear currently in Clause 83 which relate to professional opinion that is offered by the procurement expert within the procurement entity. When submitting the evaluation report for award - Here an evaluation has been done and it is being submitted to the body that will award the tender. We are saying that the procurement professional in that body will give an opinion which we are calling professional opinion to the awarding authority. The awarding authority will, while looking at the report of the evaluation committee, consider the professional opinion of the expert. I would like to read it, if you allow me, because it is curious that what is so professional is what this person could not bring on board during evaluation. Why must it come outside the normal framework of evaluation? It says this: “The head of procurement function of a procurement---”"
}