Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 678057,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/678057/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 270,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Bill provides that the number of special seats under Clause 1(c)(a) and so on--- That is why I was saying that we need to look at the entire structure of electoral positions in the country so that if we put more thinking in this process, it will be very possible to have the one-third gender rule achieved without having such a bloated Parliament. When you go to some county assemblies, you will find that all elected MCAs are male. If, for example, they have 50 wards they are obliged to nominate about 16 women which is one-third of 50 yet with some ingenuity, we can create structures where women can be elected to meet the one-third gender rule. Some countries have done it and it is not rocket science. Madam Temporary Speaker, I do not mean to demean the National Assembly, but if we have a House of 290 plus 47 plus 16 plus 5. Therefore, it will take you a month before you even have an opportunity to raise a point of order. Probably, it will take you half a year to have a meaningful debate because everybody is competing to speak. In fact, it will be serious sense of guilt on anybody who will stand there and speak for more than 10 or 15 minutes because you have to give room to others yet we can do much better. We are a country with a population of 40 million. If India with 1.3 billion people has a Parliament of 500 MPs, what justification do we have for having close to 400 MPs for a population of 42 million people? Madam Temporary Speaker, this Bill speaks to reviewing. It states that Parliament shall review Clause 1(c)(a) on the expiry of 20 years from the date on which the Members under Clause 1(c)(a) are first elected to the National Assembly with a view to determining whether the principle under Article 81(b) can be achieved without the special seats provided. We need to be more ingenious than this because the moment we have nomination as a cure to an electoral deficiency, very few people will make a serious effort to fight. I wish Sen. Sijeny plucked the Clause that we had put in the Naivasha Draft Bill that just gave a determinate sunset clause of 20 years other than a review because when the 20 years are over, knowing how Kenyans behave, it will open a hole of very angry arguments as to what we want to do with it. I would prefer that we just have a sunset clause and after 20 years, we must take care differently of these special seats. Of course, there is a basic constitutional provision that one-third of every House must be of either gender and that will never go away. What will go away is the methodology that we have. Once that methodology exits, then we must be ingenious enough to think of another way of achieving this. How do we have women elected without stress? How do we have women coming to the House without duplicating the numbers of men who are here? I am sure we can find a way of getting special constituencies that can accommodate this process and have enough women coming to this Chamber. In fact, I have seen that even in this House where men are the majority, the Senators who sit here and debate up to evening are women. The men are out there looking for all manner of things---"
}