Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 609804,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/609804/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 235,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have taken trouble to read the HANSARD on this debate. I do actually respect hon. Musyimi. He is a friend of mine and we have gone through many struggles together. I know that he is for the new Constitution and devolution. But when I read this HANSARD, I do not see that appearing. For example, if you read page 20 of the HANSARD, you will find that actually hon. Mutava Musyimi did mention that this extra amount must come from among others the Parliamentary Service Commission. By that he meant the Senate and the National Assembly itself. He said: “We Members of the National Assembly must also pay the price and contribute something, so that we are seen to be supporting devolution.” But at the end of the day, what we see is no contribution at all or whatsoever from the National Assembly. In fact, when hon. Duale, the Leader of Majority was moving, he did not mention the National Assembly. He just mentioned the Judiciary, Senate and the SRC. Then he went on to say:- “I have now given hon. Musyimi food for thought.” Indeed, hon. Musyimi removed the National Assembly’s contribution because of what he had been told by hon. Duale and others in the National Assembly. Why did he not stand firm and say the Members of the National Assembly must also contribute? The way to contribute, to me, was very easy. In fact, there was no need for contribution at all from any other organ. The contribution should and ought to have come from the CDF. This is because the court itself had said that it is unconstitutional, unless certain matters are attended to. Part of those matters would be amending the Constitution. However, if we want it to continue in the present state, maybe this whole objective must be focused on something that is constitutional. Although the Budget says that the CDF will only focus on national projects, what ought to have happened is that because we have that ruling and no amendment of the Constitution has been done, at the very least, maybe they should have preserved the amount as it was last year, pending these other issues being dealt with. If they had done that, there was more than enough money to make the Kshs3.3 billion."
}