Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 615313,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/615313/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 133,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Nyong'o, for moving this report very ably. I listened to him and think his better days are still ahead, as a Professor and a teacher, after he is done with his term as a governor. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I want to support two things. There is the question whether entities where the Government owns part of the shares can be audited by the Auditor-General and whether there is an oversight mechanism by all of us. If you read Article 229 of Constitution, it says that one of the functions of the Auditor-General is to audit and report on the accounts of an entity that is funded from public funds. It also states that the Auditor-General can audit accounts of any other entity that the legislation requires him to audit. Therefore, there are two ways to go about this. The first one is to assume that because of the challenges we are already facing, if the Auditor-General, suo motu - “on its own motion”- cannot do the auditing, he should at least do an audit for the 29 per cent shares that the public owns. For the reasons that we are being asked that the taxpayer should inject money into the KQ, it would also be prudent – I hope this could be the case in improving this report – that we amend the Auditor-General’s Act to include that “the Auditor-General will audit all public entities where the public invests money.” I know that those companies have their own auditors, but for purposes of safeguarding public interest and situations where you have companies like the KQ where the public has a lot to lose, it is very important that that is done. In the interest of time, the second issue I want to talk about is the management structure of the KQ. It is prudent that the recommendations that the Committee has come up with are adopted, for example, the strengthening of the internal oversight by ensuring that the board of directors is not composed of too many people, because that creates conflict of interest. Anyone who has studied Company Law will appreciate that in the management structure of a company, it is important that you do not convolute the work of the directors and managers. Therefore, it is important these recommendations be expeditiously implemented. The Committee has insinuated that the person in charge is not qualified to run the company as the Managing Director, and I have heard Sen. (Dr.) Khalwale also saying so. I beg to differ. One can manage salt and something else well. It is not a question of the background of the person, but a management responsibility. I would rather we assess the current manager by his managerial abilities as a person or from his track record as a manager, than to worry very much as to whether he was managing cement or salt and now he is managing the KQ. All over the world, experience has shown that people who manage even eggs can manage other sectors, like roads, because it is about management, which involves running people, but not a question of technical expertise. One of the things that Mr. Naikuni failed to do was managing human beings. The industrial conflicts and fights within the corporation really bothered me. If you look at the structure of staff, where you have those who are paid more and those who are paid less, we should recommend a person on basis of abilities to manage. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I beg to support and, once again, congratulate the Committee for doing a good job."
}