Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 774315,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/774315/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 162,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "“The review of the Act was necessary since the criteria provided in the Act are not achievable by the county governments under prevailing circumstances unless the law is amended.” I have a problem with this. We came up with an Act of Parliament in response to a constitutional requirement. However, four years down the line we are saying that, that Act is not achievable unless the law is amended. Why are we lowering standards instead of raising them? Is four years sufficient time for us to say that the Urban Areas and Cities Act is not achievable? On what basis are we making this recommendation? Has the Senate come up with a Motion, report or study that has looked at the implication of this Act, for us now to spend valuable man hours trying to amend the Act? I have a problem with the rationale and justification that has been put in the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons for this particular Bill. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the effect of this Bill, as has been reported even in the media--- In fact, when you discuss this Bill there could be citizens sitting in Eldoret Town or Nakuru Town who expect that this amendment will lead to conferment of city status on those two great towns. You know Eldoret Town very well and when I talked about your passion for education, I meant that we were together at a university somewhere in Eldoret. Given the kind of facilities and investments that have gone into Eldoret Town, probably it deserves to be a city. Nakuru Town was once the cleanest town in East Africa. It probably deserves to be a city. When you change the population requirements for determination of a city from 500,000 to 250,000, you might find that there are certain areas like Kakuma that might claim to be cities by that definition. Thankfully, the Bill attempts to introduce other criteria for consideration. Further, when you change the threshold for municipalities from 250,000 to 50,000, then we should expect to end up with a lot of municipal councils in this country. One of the problems that I have encountered in my home county of Homa Bay is that Homa Bay County was cobbled up from about seven or eight municipalities and town councils. As a result, you will find eight people doing the same job because they used to do different jobs in eight different municipalities. But when it was merged you find eight people doing the same job. Therefore, you have got redundancy to the power of eight. If we go ahead and implement this lower threshold we will end up with a lot of municipalities. I pray that, that will not increase the redundancies that currently exist at the county level. The biggest question that this Senate should ask on behalf of the people that we represent is: How will this Bill and change of the threshold and proposals that have been put in here benefit the common person out there? My colleague, Sen. Olekina, has already educated us on what the implication will be on issues of land; from freehold to leasehold. The people out there must be educated, so that the benefits of this amendment will not only go to the people who will sit on the boards. In this country we are very good at coming up with legislations that create positions for “the boys” to be appointed. In fact, it is usually the best way for politicians to solve problems. Instead of bringing tangible development we want to create bodies and boards. We are now talking of city boards, municipal boards, city managers, municipal managers The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}