Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 744390,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/744390/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 68,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "would have to start all over again to spend a couple of millions of shillings going to Thailand, Japan or other countries that they want to benchmark. If you look at the Standing Orders of today, and you see the 24 Bills and there is no likelihood, the way I look at it, of those Bills being passed tomorrow, what does that mean? Does it mean that all the work we have done over the last four and a half years goes into waste in that legislative effort? Are we saying that unless Standing Order 146(3) is changed, all Bills that have been passed by the Senate and referred to the National Assembly, but have not been concluded, will lapse once we adjourn sine die ? This is a fairly serious issue. Looking at the Standing Orders, it would be inefficient and wasteful of us if we were to say all that work will not be considered again. If you look at the Executive which is part of the Government, its work continues even if there is change of regime. In other words, work that has been going on with the previous Government continues. The incoming Government continues carrying out obligations of the previous regime which are both national and international in nature. This should be the case with the legislature because we are running a country and not a Parliament. Therefore, we should be thinking of how to continue and save money. Madam Temporary Speaker, the issue of Brexit in the United Kingdom was started by the former Prime Minister, David Cameron and he left office before he concluded it. Currently, it is the Prime Minister, Theresa May who is carrying on with it. Probably tomorrow she will not be in office and somebody else will continue running the affairs of the United Kingdom. There may be changes or amendments on an issue that was initiated by the previous Government, but the subject matter continues. We should take advantage of what has been started by others and avoid being wasteful in the management of our country’s affairs. Madam Temporary Speaker, I agree with the number of the Committees that have been proposed in this amendment. This is because one of the mistakes that we made in this Senate was to create many Committees which subjected the 67 Senators here to impossible tasks. We ended up in a situation where one Senator became a member of three or four Committees because we wanted each committee to have enough membership. Worse still, was the financial burden that was borne by the various committees. Each committee got so little resources that it was unable to effectively perform its functions. Madam Temporary Speaker, one of the amendments that we should propose in our Standing Orders when creating committees is to have consultations between the two Houses of Parliament. For example, the Standing Committee in the National Assembly that deals with Information Communication and Technology (ICT) matters deals also with energy. If you look at the proposals here, the Senate one will deal with ICT and education matters. Therefore, it means without consultation of both Houses, you will find that you are dealing with two committees at the same time. Consequently, this may result in cross-referencing and cross-purposes, thus making the whole relationship inefficient. It would well be worth our while as Parliament to discuss this matter jointly; to have the committees created in such a manner that they can relate directly rather than have a large membership."
}