Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 810673,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/810673/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 221,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipkelion East, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Joseph Limo",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1915,
        "legal_name": "Joseph Kirui Limo",
        "slug": "joseph-kirui-limo"
    },
    "content": "working in local authorities throughout the country on permanent terms. These two schemes operated until the new structure of county governments came in. There was a proposal by the National Treasury that we move away from defined benefit schemes so that we embrace defined contributory schemes. Therefore, those schemes which fell under defined benefits were advised to fold and operate a new scheme. When the new structure of government came in, there was no clear procedure on who would then become a member of LAPTRUST and who would become a member of LAPFUND. What happened is that they started competing, recruiting members from one county to another, which caused confusion. Therefore, it was a view of the county governments, under the umbrella of the CoG, that there should be order. There were consultative meetings by the county governments and they finally settled in Naivasha where they came up with a taskforce which recommended that these county governments should move in one direction. What we observed during the presentations by the stakeholders is that there is still a lot of competition. They are competing for attention. One side is competing to have a county governments pension fund and another side was fronting the one in the Senate, which culminated to the one which we have now - the government came up with a Bill. During public participation, we found out that whereas county assemblies were supporting the current Bill as proposed by the Leader of the Majority Party, the CoG were in opposition and supporting the other one which is called the county pension scheme, which the Leader of the Majority Party said will still come to the Floor of this House for us to determine. But the leadership must give direction whether we are going to support this one or the other, or we amalgamate the two, or we have one managing one side of the county governments and the other one managing the other side. It was clear that there is a push and pull between the county assemblies and the county governors represented by the CoG. In this Bill there are pertinent issues which we must tackle. One is that whereas this Bill proposes to transition the LAPTRUST and LAPFUND into one fund, there are issues which are very serious on what happens with the assets and liabilities of the old schemes. If the assets and liabilities of the old schemes are balanced, there will be no problem. The main problem is that there are a lot of unremitted deductions from the pensioners to the tune of over Kshs20 billion, which is owed by the various county governments together with the defunct county councils. Therefore, it will be very difficult to amalgamate two funds together if one has liabilities which cannot be recovered. Therefore, the proposal on this Bill is to have the existing funds closed for new members but allow them to operate separately, side by side, until the last member of that particular scheme is paid off. That means the proposed new pension scheme will be such that it will not inherit the liabilities of the previous ones. So, the new Members who join especially the young people employed by the county governments will not carry the burden of the past."
}