Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 685267,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/685267/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 117,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Mulu",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1955,
        "legal_name": "Benson Makali Mulu",
        "slug": "benson-makali-mulu"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Deputy Speaker, for, at least, giving me the chance despite waiting for long. I take this chance to also support the Finance Bill, 2016. This House passed the 2016/2017 Budget and I am on record having said that it was a very ambitious Budget because out of the Kshs2.71trillion Budget, we are expected to collect about Kshs1.3trillion locally. This Bill is going to help the Government to collect that amount. Looking at the proposed revenue raised, we still have a challenge and we have to do much more in order to get this money. In this Bill, there are some proposals which, from my assessment, are good for the majority of Kenyans. A good Budget is assessed from whether it is a pro-poor or a pro-rich Budget. Some of the things here are good for the poor, but we have not targeted the poor properly. At the end of the day, the poor people might end up suffering more than we expect to assist them to improve their livelihoods. The issue of enhancing personal relief to 10 per cent is good in terms of direction and the fact that we are enhancing it. It is good for the people. The issue of increasing the banding upwards is also good. It will help Kenyans. At the end of the day, what matters is what goes to your pocket. It is not the gross, but the net. That is what determines how much you will eat. Some of these things will help the poor people to get more money into their pockets, which is good. Let me focus more on areas which are tricky to us. As Members of Parliament, we have to think seriously about the reduction of the Corporate Tax from 30 per cent to 20 per cent. This is being tied to construction of, at least, 1,000 residential housing units. This is a very tricky area. I know we have challenges of residential houses in this country and more so in cities. If we reduce the Corporate Tax from 30 to 20 per cent, the difference is 10 per cent. I am wondering whether that particular loss of tax is good enough to attract somebody to put up 1,000 residential The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}