Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 767339,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/767339/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 70,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Dr.) Musuruve",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13188,
        "legal_name": "Getrude Musuruve Inimah",
        "slug": "getrude-musuruve-inimah"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to also add my voice on this statement. First, I thank the Senate Majority Leader for the effort he has made to issue a statement. From the statement, there are begging issues that come out. There is need to interrogate them further. First of all, from the statement, only four counties submitted their reports. There is need to investigate why only four out of the 47 counties did so. What is it that is making them lag behind when it comes to issues of disability? So, governors also need to be accountable just to find out; what position do they have for PWDs with regard to procurement. There are also some begging issues that come out strikingly, for example, the issue of percentage. The Constitution talks about 30 per cent procurement to be given to youth, PWDs and women but why should a negligible percentage be issued to PWDs? Why 3.2 per cent? It is supposed to be 30 per cent. This means that if it is 30 per cent, and we want to help the disadvantaged groups or minorities, then it should be equal so that the youth get 10 per cent, PWDs get 10 per cent and women get 10 per cent. I am wondering what the rationale behind this; giving that negligible percentage to PWDs, especially if we really want parity. We are seeing that even in that group, the PWDs are marginalised further. So, there is need to interrogate this statement and see what exactly is being done to help PWDs. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes"
}