Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 782111,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/782111/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 285,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "because people can be so malicious and derail programmes. We have seen it happen in many areas. It is good that the threshold is so high because it will ensure that if it is a speaker to be removed pursuant to this amendment, then he must have been in gross violation or misconduct. This provision ensures it will not be easy to remove a speaker if there will be no sufficient grounds to do so. Without such a procedure, you can imagine the nightmare that can occur in removing a speaker from the office. Everyone will be applying their own ways. I am sure that if a speaker will be removed, it will be because of sufficient reasons and support for such removal. This Bill also provides for how we can recall Members and that is very important. Once you are elected as a Member, you may end up forgetting your duties and fail to carry out your mandate in the manner that is expected by your people. In that case, the people will have a right. It is unfair if people vote for you and then they do not have a say or a chance to vote you out or question you. If you make it impossible to be recalled, then it negates the importance of your voters. So, this is also a good provision because if we do not have it, people will feel so bad that they can elect but they cannot do anything once you are elected. The threshold is still high and it will not be easy for somebody to abuse this particular provision. I support these amendments but I have a concern about the duplication of some provisions in The Assumption of Office of the County Governor Bill and this Bill. So, the committee should look at both Bills because I have seen a lot of similar provisions in Clause 32(a) and (c) being replicated in Clauses 11 and 13 of The Assumption of Office of the County Governor Bill. If they are interrelated, then we will be duplicating. We should not duplicate but have other provisions in the other Bill. I have also noted that The Assumption of Office of the County Governor Bill duplicated the guidelines that had come before the Bill was passed. So, we have had a benefit of having a Bill that came after guidelines had been done. Normally guidelines flow from the Bill but for this particular Bill, guidelines were done before because there was no law. Therefore the Act came into being after copy-pasting of the guidelines. This Bill also came after the court had pronounced itself. You can imagine how rich the Bill should be because it is a Bill that has the benefit of an advisory opinion. So, we should pick what is good from the advisory opinion. The Bill also came after regulations have been done and they have been reflected. The Bill should be very rich and guide us in everything that we do."
}