Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 707997,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/707997/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 133,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Eng.) Gumbo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 24,
        "legal_name": "Nicholas Gumbo",
        "slug": "nicholas-gumbo"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Deputy Speaker for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the Senate Amendments on the Health Bill (National Assembly Bill No.14 of 2015). I am going to be very brief. The proposed amendment on Clause 5, seeking to introduce new Sub-clause (3) to ensure that the national Government and county governments provide free and compulsory vaccination for all children less than five years old and maternity care is good. This ought to have been in the provisions that we already have. However, before we are able to do this, we need to conduct accurate demographic surveys. I have seen what is going on in the counties at the moment. Many of our people are not able to access free and compulsory healthcare services. This is particularly with regard to vaccination of children under the age of five years and maternity care. If we have an accurate demographic survey to, for example, ascertain how many of our people are not covered by the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF), we can provide them with this facility. It should be possible. This can be done with the resources that we already have. I notice that there is a proposed amendment to delete Sub-clause (3) of Clause 7. This is a bit worrying because Clause 7(3) says that any healthcare provider who fails to provide emergency medical treatment to a person while having the ability to do so commits an offence and is liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding Kshs1 million or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both. I am aware that when this matter came up, there was a lot of argument on who should meet the cost of providing emergency medical treatment. Instead of deleting this sub-clause, we should provide for the creation of a fund to reimburse expenses incurred by healthcare service providers in giving emergency treatment. Anybody who has required an emergency treatment knows that it is important for emergency treatment to be provided when it is needed. In many cases, people lose their lives because of a requirement to pay before being given emergency treatment. I do not understand the real reason for the Senate proposing the deletion of Paragraph (c), which seeks to actualise the 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."
}