Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 814945,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/814945/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 90,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "come from, where land is held in trust and is communal. Therefore, this lands itself into a lot of abuses that have already been meted on communities through compulsory acquisition. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, as I said before, this House is here to make law and stands for ensuring that we support legislative frameworks within which our country can be food secure and develop. This should be what we do on a daily basis. As this stands, in its letter and substance, it has many things that are not right. As I said, the impact of legislation on community-based management of water for informal irrigation does not seem to have been captured at all. If they changed this to mean a Bill for irrigation schemes to be managed at the national level, perhaps it could have passed our scrutiny. As it is, I do not think it is good for counties, communities and us, as a House, to pass and append our support. I have a lot of issues with this Bill. As I said before, because of many Bills that come from the National Assembly, we may need a bit of time to scrutinise them since we are supposed to do due diligence to protect counties in terms of little gains we have made, ensure self-governance and protect the livelihoods of communities which is the mandate of this House. In regard to how this is framed, the hierarchical approach and the fact that it should only be as delegated by the Cabinet Secretary that counties may be consulted and the fact that land issues find their way here--- Of course irrigation is done on land and we do not refute that but I have a problem supporting compulsory acquisition of land. I suggest that we take it back for further scrutiny or change it so that it becomes a Bill for only large national schemes in this country. I am not even sure whether it is for commercial purposes or for food security because if it is about food security, with 80 per cent of people being peasant farmers, then this Bill is designed for big projects. While I support frameworks within which we should develop our agriculture, this one does not have that desired impact. So, I do not support this Bill. I thank you."
}