Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 782116,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/782116/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 290,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "On Section 7 (3), I do not agree with the threshold of the number of members of county assembly that are needed for one to move a Motion for the removal. When you put it at one third, it makes it a bit too low and it is subject to manipulation by members who are disgruntled by small misdemeanors of the office of the speaker. As the Speaker, you are the head of an institution and sometimes you have to make difficult decisions that will protect the interests of devolution. We have heard stories of how speakers have been forced to approve members to travel out of their own counties to go for bonding sessions because they want to protect themselves from the wrath of the members of county assembly. This is bad practice that we need to avoid. To set a third as the number of Members of the county assembly which is required before passing a Motion on the removal of the speaker is extremely low. It will be better if they could garner the support of at least half of the MCAs. That is for the Mover of this Bill to think about. There is also another important phrase, and I like the diction that has been chosen by the drafters of this Bill where under Clause 7(4), it says that: ‘A Motion for the removal of a Speaker shall specify---’ Under part Clause 7 (4)(b), it says:- ‘the facts constituting these grounds’. ‘Fact’ in proper use of English is an undisputed knowledge of a subject. Therefore, you would not just rise up and say, as an MCA, I want to remove the speaker because of some reasons. This law requires the Member of County Assembly (MCA) to table the facts in the House before he is allowed to move the Motion. If you are claiming that your speaker is incompetent, you will be required to table evidence before the House allows you to move that Motion. I laud the choice of this word ‘facts’ otherwise, people may introduce rumors and all sorts of innuendos against the leadership of county assemblies and still be allowed to move the Motion to remove the speaker. I am sure this will be a subject of litigation in the future because people will demand to know whether the reasons for the removal of the speaker were adduced before the Motion was moved. While seeking to amend Clause 32B, it states: ‘when the office of the governor becomes vacant---- It gives a specific timeframe within which the vacant office will be filled. This is extremely important because we know that the Chief Executive Officer of a county is extremely important. Therefore, it will be a thing of the past for county governments to stay for prolonged periods without properly defined roles and measures and a functional head of that county government. Therefore, we must support this. The drafter of the Bill has listed several grounds upon which the office of the deputy governor may become vacant. They have also introduced the fact that the deputy governor may resign from office by giving a written notice to the governor. This has happened in Nairobi City County and other counties where men and women of integrity who realize that they cannot achieve the promises they gave the electorate while out on the campaign trail, because of one or two reasons, have resigned. It is good to provide the grounds upon which a deputy governor can resign and give their own reasons as they move to do other things. It is also good to provide the procedure for filling up that position. 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."
}