Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 640814,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/640814/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 254,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "March 29, 2016 SENATE DEBATES 41 Sen. Wako",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "The truth is that I am developing a headache because of not having reading glasses. I support the provisions of the Bill in so far as it relates to the removal of a deputy governor, deputy speaker and the others. However, I strongly feel that one cannot regulate something that is a political process. No reason has been advanced. It may be true, I think it is.We hear it particularly me who sits in the sessional Committee on Devolved Government, that governors are not treating their deputies properly in the way they are supposed to be treated under the Constitution. We have heard many of those complaints. We have met many deputy governors and so on but that should not in itself be a reason to amend this. If you look at the entire history of presidents and vice presidents, the only clause that has been there under all constitutions in the world has been that vice presidents assist presidents; full-stop. The mechanics, their relationship and synergies is never legislated. In American history, the vice president has played a very big role but that has been because the president allowed it. At other times, he has played a minimal role and that is because the president does not want him to play a big role because of maybe some political differences that may have arisen, since they were elected into office. So, it is very difficult to regulate the relationship between the president and the vice president. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in our constitutional review process which led to the promulgation of the new Constitution, many other sections were amended, replaced, repealed and so on. However, the one common feature in both the old and the new is that the vice president, whose title was changed to deputy president, even though he is now elected alongside the president, his job is to assist the president. That is all. Therefore, the excellent relationship that exists between the President and the Deputy President today is because they get along very well, they know that they depend on each other and they are gentlemen. That is what we should be aiming at. Not so much to regulate but create what people will appreciate. The argument that because deputy governors have been instrumental in elections and there were some memoranda of understanding between different ethnic communities and so on, is not a new one. Even in the USA and everywhere else, the president chooses his vice president from a community which is very far from his. The vice president is always chosen because he can add value and bring votes to that ticket and ensure that the president wins. So far, the argument that has been advanced from what I have heard here is not new to warrant an amendment the way we want to amend it. Had they said that if we adopt some of the amendments – I have been coming to it – in the way that they want us to amend, then you will be creating a prime minister, and the deputy governor and the governor will become ceremonious. In my view, it also verges very close to being unconstitutional. The amendment that the governor consults the deputy governor is a very pregnant clause. “Consult the deputy governor.” If the governor wants to go to the loo, he must consult the deputy governor. If the governor wants to do anything, he must consult his deputy. What amounts to consultation? Challenges can be brought that on this decision, the deputy governor --- There can be many cases which can be brought up in a court of law by saying that on this particular issue, the deputy governor was not consulted. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes"
}