HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 721758,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/721758/?format=api",
"text_counter": 386,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Hon. Keynan",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 41,
"legal_name": "Adan Wehliye Keynan",
"slug": "adan-keynan"
},
"content": "go to court, they instigate the system and it comes around and you are forced to negotiate. When you negotiate, you are asked to develop it on their behalf. This is the scenario with that piece of land. Eventually, when we learned this, we said that this is a matter of immense public interest and, therefore, it is our obligation as the PIC to inquire into this issue and ensure that the taxpayers get value for their money. It is as a result of this that my Committee, one of the most active Committees with some of the best brains - the kinds of reports this Committee has generated have saved the taxpayers billions of shillings - intervened. Had it not been for our intervention, maybe the state of the Tassia Project would have been completely different. I will talk about the recommendation and observations. If this Report would have been debated about 30th April, 2014 or thereabout, the circumstances would have been different today. This is why I am pleading with the leadership of the HBC, through you, to fast-track and prioritise reports generated by these two critical oversight Committees, namely, the PIC and the PAC. This is consistent with the history of these two Committees dating back to 1880s. As a member of the Commonwealth, this practice and tradition must be jealously guarded because it is the only way we can have a vibrant parliamentary driven oversight. In the absence of this, these two Committees will be reduced to any other Committee, therefore, waning the critical function of their oversight roles. In preparation of this Report, we met the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and the Managing Trustee, Mr. Langat. We also met Mr. Francis Atwoli, the Secretary General of the Central Organisation of Trade Unions (COTU) and the CEO of the Federation of Kenya Employers (FKE), Ms. Jackline Mugo. We also met the former Minister and Permanent Secretary. We met the former Chairman and the Board of Trustees and the Auditor-General. The Committee came up with the following observations: This land was purchased in 1995 at the cost of Kshs2.2 billion from Tassia Coffee Estate Limited and Nikon Investment Limited with an objective of developing them into a residential/commercial property as part of the NSSF investment portfolio. However, as alluded to, in 2011, just before the general elections, squatters in court were incited and they had the courage and guts to occupy the land. Kenya is not just an ordinary nation. This is why sometimes I am pained when I see individuals trying to project Kenya as a banana republic. Where on earth do individuals move to private property? They occupied it and that is the state of things today until they forced the management of the NSSF to develop the piece of land on their terms. That piece of land today is not developed, simply because of the challenges. This has been the trend and the history of the NSSF. This issue was taken to court in 2004 and even after the court made a ruling in favour of the NSSF, the Government security agencies were tasked with providing security and maintenance of law and order in the name of our good governance, they did not provide the requisite security. Was it a conspiracy between the trustees and the security apparatus or was it because of the influence of the high and mighty who are involved in this? To date, the squatters I have alluded to have remained on that piece of land. The Board of Trustees realised that given the level of unplanned subdivision, encroachment and development of the land, executing the court order on eviction and demolition will present a logistical and security challenge. They, therefore, had to negotiate with the land grabbers, invaders and squatters in court on their own terms. Following consultation between the NSSF, the Office of the President and the Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services in the year 2005, agreed to sell the 5,500 acres. It is like the NSSF’s piece of land is subdivided on their own terms and then they are told that the occupiers want to buy it. You can speculate who determined the purchasing price. It 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."
}