Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 692131,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/692131/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 82,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Kagwe",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 229,
        "legal_name": "Mutahi Kagwe",
        "slug": "mutahi-kagwe"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, thank you for such an informed ruling. However, we have grown to expect from you no less than rulings that will be referred to in the future. For me, there are only two things. First, I think it is important for us to understand the difference in etiquette between a normal sitting of the House and that of a quasi-judicial House. I have chaired an impeachment Committee, and I am aware of the time that sometimes it takes. Sometimes, we would sit all the way to midnight and so on even though the report was eventually rejected by the House. However, there are certain issues. For example, is the quorum for a quasi-judicial sitting the same as that of the House? If we do not have a quorum of the House, do we have a quorum for a quasi-judicial sitting? What happens to those of us who go out and come in as we normally do and then ask a question that has already been asked by someone else? What happens when the witnesses’ side will have several witnesses, presumably brought by both sides of the House? What is the procedure for our questioning of these witnesses and at what point do we question them? Is it the whole House, a team or how do we proceed with that? In other words, I am raising etiquette issues and the difference between those two settings. I The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}