Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 585374,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/585374/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 137,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Ms.) Kanyua",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 981,
        "legal_name": "Priscilla Nyokabi Kanyua",
        "slug": "priscilla-nyokabi-kanyua"
    },
    "content": "especially the one requiring consultations with the CoG and the ones that require a CS to have some roles. The rationale of the Committee is that to require consultation between the CS and the CoG in the nomination and the appointment of the Chairperson of the Board is acceptable by the Committee. It is only in consultation with the CS and the CoG in the nomination and appointment of the Chair of the Board. That is a matter that those interested in pyrethrum in this country should have regard to. These are some of the products whose growth we need to look into as a country. All the Members from the pyrethrum-growing areas should look at the Pyrethrum Act and see whether the proposals suggested by the Committee fit in well and protect the pyrethrum industry. The final Act that the Committee looked at is the Prevention, Protection and Assistance to Internally Displaced Persons and Affected Communities Act (No. 56 of 2012). The Committee proposes some amendments to that Act pursuant to the amendments that were proposed by the Senate. The Committee’s rationale in proposing its amendments is to limit the need for consultations to only the relevant county governments. There would be no reason for the matter of IDPs, who are situated in one county, to be taken to the council of Governors (CoG) or to the whole nation. The negotiations and consultations on particular IDPs and affected communities should be with the relevant county governments where those persons are based. Those are the proposals that the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs made in terms of the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill from the Senate. We urge the House to debate and consider the various proposals that have been put on the table. A Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill, unfortunately historically, carries in it many laws. It is an omnibus Bill, but it is possible for a Member to isolate and identify a law that relates to their area. If the proposed amendments are on the NACADA Act, the Sports Act or the Pyrethrum Act, Members can make their views regarding the proposals. We would urge the House to agree with the Committee based on the Report filed and tabled before this House on 25th August 2015, which Report is available to Members, as they consider the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill (Senate Bill No. 6 of 2014). The only other interesting thing to note with the Senate is that this is their Bill No. 6. In the National Assembly, we are doing much better in terms of our law-making processes. So, we would urge the Senate, as they originate their Bills, to continuously originate Bills that relate to county governments and to forward them to the National Assembly. Indeed, we still have many legal lacunas as far as county governments are concerned. I beg to move and I request Hon. Waiganjo to second the Bill."
}