Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 815014,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/815014/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 159,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "cannot do roads maintenance if you do not have that unit. However, governors refused and said that we cannot legislate for them. They said that they know how to carry out their functions and can legislate at the county level. We are now seated legislating for county governments that they need to have a unit, whereas agriculture is a county government function. So, by nature, they must have that unit, but we do not need to legislate for them and then go ahead and say: “To carry out irrigation functions delegated by the County Secretary as may be prescribed in the Regulations.” The county government is forming a unit to perform its functions which will be delegated to them. By delegation, it means that it is not their function, but that of the CS who now delegates to the Governor to do some work. The county government has been given that right under the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution. Now, we are putting county governments even below that Authority. We form an Authority and then put county governments below it to be delegated works by the CS. That is belittling the Constitution. Whoever drafted this Bill should have known that the way to go is to give counties power to make their decisions on how best to serve residents of that county in terms of food production. The Government should be very clear when coming up with policies. Livestock keepers have no policy. There is tea, coffee and other crops’ policies. For livestock, specifically, what is available now is just for the big ranchers. We, the pastoralists, are told that it is just a way of life. For over 50 years the Government has not come up with any policy on that. That is what it should be concentrating on and not going into implementation of small irrigation schemes, where we are told that we cannot have a 100 acres irrigation scheme, until we get a license from a CS. I think some parts of this Bill might even be unconstitutional if we look at it that way. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, if we have come up with a Bill, then it must be specifically on policy issues. There are many policy issues lacking in this country, especially concerning livestock production. We have been thinking of coming up with disease-free zones. If it is not possible to do the disease-free zones, then we should have some way to control quarantines so that people who rely on pastoralism can export their animals through policies which will enable them to meet the export standards. However, nobody is talking about that. We are still struggling with who should license 100-acre irrigation schemes. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, based on those issues, we need to have a Bill on how the national Government should execute its agricultural policy function but not a Bill like this. If it is the way it is, I oppose."
}