Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 639691,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/639691/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 250,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "going on. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, according to the annexed notes, the contractor and the National Water Conservation and Pipeline Corporation had set 21st March, 2016 to amicably sort out this issue, which date has passed. The Chair should inform the House what was discussed and what was agreed upon by the two parties on the issue. Secondly, can we have a timeframe when the process of this contract will be commenced? Since the date has passed, is there anything fruitful out of that discussion? Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I had asked for the reasons which led to the stalling of the project. From the information I have, it is the extension of time and liquidated damages. All these must be because of the other issues that arose. In a normal contract, the contractor cannot ask for extension of time, for instance, six months and another six months. What did not come out clearly is the cost involved. This is a Kshs2 billion project which by the time it stalled, the whole cost had been paid to the contractor and he was demanding for more payments. In fact, what the contractor is claiming is about Kshs300 million over what had been paid. The information in the public domain is that there are technical faults involved in this project. So, some people must be held accountable even if they are professionals. If there are technical problems, then a contractor cannot be held accountable when designs and quantities are changed. If you look at the normal procedure, a contractor can only be given a 15 per cent variation. This project has been awarded 53 per cent variation over the normal 15 per cent. Therefore, someone is quietly accepting blame; that he made the mistake and is covering it by giving variations simply like that. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, the National Water Conservation and Pipeline Corporation should have been held accountable for violating the law because of giving out a variation of more than 15 per cent. They are hiding something. Can we be told why this extension was warranted and why the variation? There are technical issues that the National Water Conservation and Pipeline Corporation and which to the public, appears like it is the contractor’s problem and not the technical matters."
}