Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 744412,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/744412/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 90,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "bring any matter to this House even if it was a domestic dispute the way the laws are currently structured. We might need to tighten that a little bit. Madam, Temporary Speaker, I am one of those aspiring to come back to this House. We need to see some rationalization of Committees. We need to ensure that we have Committees that are able to undertake a mandate that is wide enough so that you do not have two Committees with overlapping mandates. Within those Committees, we have seen situations where they tend to focus on the things that are juicy and forget those that appear to be less juicy. I do hope that with the proposed amendments to the Standing Orders, we will be able to see some rationalization of Committees and also be able to get them to focus on the right things. Finally, I want to talk about the issue of the Presidential Address. The current Standing Orders did not really anticipate a situation where the President would come to address the Senate and I can see that there is an attempt to cure this. This is because the proposal is to have a section that talks about an address to the Senate by the President. The current Standing Orders focused on the joint Presidential Address where the Senate has always been treated badly. We have been sent to the National Assembly, cramped up in one corner and generally treated as strangers in an event that is supposed to capture the entire Parliament. The proposal in this Report anticipates that the President or any other visiting dignitary is capable or in a position to address this House. The Chief Justice graced the Senate when he was retiring and made one of the finest speeches that he had ever made in the years he served as Chief Justice. It was instrumental, significant and historical that that fine address was delivered in the Senate Chamber. We must also allow the President or any other visiting dignitary to come to this House and the Standing Orders should be clear on that. Madam Temporary Speaker, I have seen that there is greater clarity on disciplinary matters. The choice of English that the Committee decided to adopt in this case is curious. For example, in amending Standing Order No. 110(1) in the definition of disorderly conduct, the Report says that conduct is disorderly if the Senator concerned “creates disorder”. I think the Committee should have gone a little bit deeper. The English language is quite rich such that we cannot have a Standing Order that says as stated above. You need to define what disorder entails beyond any reasonable doubt. This is because some of these things could be cultural. Yesterday, for example, the Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Wetangula, made some screeching sounds while he was making his final address to this House, which can be construed as disorder depending on how you look at it. We should not be ambiguous in our definitions of disorder. I could walk in here with a whistle and start whistling because may be where I come from that is how we appreciate good points. You need to be very clear and not just say that “disorderly conduct is when someone creates disorder”. Madam Temporary Speaker, it is also important that we have gone further to expand the definition and the instances of disorder. When I look at some of the proposals, I do not want to accuse the Committee that was working on this that they were trying to legislate for one Senator Moses Otieno Kajwang. I can see there is a definition of “disorder”. It says: “A Senator commits an act of gross disorderly conduct if the Senator concerned attempts to or causes disorder of whatever nature during an Address by the President.”"
}