Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 530592,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/530592/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 32,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, this Bill amends Sections 31, 32 and 33 to rename the Public Complaints Committee the National Environmental Complaints Committee. Under the existing law there is a Public Complaints Committee. One of the complaints that have been there over the last 15 years or so, of implementation of EMCA, is that there are too many institutions. There is NEMA, Public Complaints Committee, National Environmental Tribunal and the National Environmental Council. One of the things that this Bill is doing is to try and reduce these institutions for purposes of giving effect to Article 201 of the Constitution that talks about prudent utilization of state resources and making sure that there is no duplication of functions. One of the casualties of this proposed streamlining is the Public Complaints Committee. There is a Public Complaints Committee which is like the Ombudsman in the environmental field and also, at the same time, we have the National Environmental Tribunal. So, what the amendment Bill is doing is to actually maintain the National Environmental Tribunal with more powers and better procedures of offering adjudicative functions in the environment field, but removing the Public Complaints Committee which was like an Ombudsman in the environmental field and transferring those functions to a department within the Ministry, so that you can have an administrative way of launching complaints. If you want a judicial process, instead of having both the Public Complaints Committee and the National Environmental Tribunal, you can actually use the tribunal in its new format. Mr. Speaker, Sir, Section 37 of the principal Act is amended to entrench the principles of public participation in the making of the National Environmental Action Plan. There exist a National Environmental Action Plan under the current law, but this amendment Bill is saying that there would be need to enact within three years of entering into force of this amendment law, a new National Environmental Action Plan, which is alive to the issue of devolution and the role of counties and county governments, but at the time which involves public participation as a requirement and as a demand. In the past, public participation was just as a procedure of good practice which might have been adopted. However, now it is a requirement that it becomes part and parcel of the process. Otherwise, such policy documents will not have the force of law under the new Constitution. Mr. Speaker, Sir, Sections 38 and 40 of the principal law are repealed. They relate to the issue of the preparation of the action plan which I have mentioned. It is envisaged that there would be a new National Environmental Action Plan in three years time. At the county level, each county government through the County Environmental Committee is supposed to prepare County Environmental Action Plans two years after the entry into force of this law and every five years thereafter. In preparation of this action plan at the county level, each county government must ensure that there is public participation and that the county assemblies are given these reports or plans for consideration and adoption. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is one area that public participation can be improved because the county assemblies should not just be given these proposed County Environmental Action Plans for consideration and adoption, but it should be for consideration and approval. If the county assembly does not approve, then that 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."
}