Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 640707,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/640707/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 147,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "(d) One person who has relevant qualifications or experience in mining, geology, geophysics or engineering nominated by the Council of Governors. (e) The Chairperson of the National Land Commission (NLC). (f) The director of mines who shall the secretary to the Mineral Rights Board. (g) The director of geological service. (h) Two persons with professional qualifications and experience in the mining industry who shall be appointed by the Cabinet Secretary. The justification for this is that Clause 30(d) provides for the nomination of a representative of the Council of Governors into the Board. It also provides that the nominee shall be a professional on matters of mining. Clause 30(f) provides for the director of mines to be the secretary of the Mineral Rights Board since he or she is the officer charged with the day to day management of mining and, is therefore, the most competent custodian of documents, minutes, grant concessions and notices. The Committee noted that the Principal Secretary responsible for matters relating to mining may not necessarily have the technical expertise in mining. The Committee proposed that Clause 33 of the Bill be amended by deleting sub clauses 7 and 8. Sub clause 7; where the Cabinet Secretary has rejected an application, the affected applicant may apply to the Cabinet Secretary for the review of the decision. Sub clause 8; the Cabinet Secretary shall within 30 days communicate with the applicant on the decision in relation to the review. The justification for this is that once an application has been rejected, an applicant should have a different appeal mechanism. We also proposed that Clause 34 of the Bill be amended at sub clause 4 by deleting the words “and reconnaissance license” appearing in paragraph (a). The justification for this is that, this provides for doing away with the need for consent of a person or community for granting reconnaissance license. In addition, we proposed that the word “a prospecting” appearing before the words “mining rights” be retained and insert the word “registered” after the words “consent of the” That means the sub clause now would read, “A prospecting and mining rights shall not be granted under this Act with respect to private land without the express consent of the registered owner and such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The justification for this is that there is need for a grant of prospecting rights of a private land to be subject to consent of the owner and the land, hence the need to retain the words “a prospecting.” Further, there is need for the consent of the owners to be registered. That means not just any owner but the registered owner. Concerning Clause 40, we proposed that sub clause1 be retained. It reads as follows:- The Cabinet Secretary may take steps under the law relating to the compulsory acquisition of land, rights or interests in land to face the land or areas in question or rights The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes"
}