Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 81740,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/81740/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 453,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Kimunya",
    "speaker_title": "The Minister for Transport",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, the crux of the matter is that we should use one of the two documents, and not the other. For those who have just come in, the reason as to why I am stating these facts is so that we can tell that the document that was released by the Government after a one-year survey is certainly more superior than the document containing the projections that were made in 1999 based on a three-month survey. There is much more that we need to look at in terms of what have been the patterns of poverty in Kenya over a period of time. We are all happy to say that the 2005/2006 report showed that only 46 per cent of Kenyans were living below the poverty line. We accept that fact, and we quote it every day. We also said earlier that in 1997, 52 per cent of Kenyans were living below the poverty line. We are happy to quote that fact in all documentations. We also say that in 1994, 40.25 per cent of Kenyans were living below the poverty line. We know that in 1992, 44 per cent of Kenyans were living below the poverty line. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, once we accept those figures, we must not run away from the individual components of how those figures have been aggregated. This is the crux of the matter. We are happy to quote one figure but when it affects us negatively, we do not want to accept it. Looking at the dynamics of how the regional differences and incidences of poverty have been factored in documents which have been approved and accepted by the people of Kenya, you will find, for example, that the poverty index for Nairobi Province in 1992 was 26.45 per cent. In 1994, it was shown as 25.9 per cent. All of a sudden, in 1997, because the study was done with all the limitations that I mentioned, the poverty index for Nairobi was shown as 50.24 per cent. In 2005/2006, it was shown as 21.3 per cent. One can see that there is a correlation between the poverty indices in the years 1992, 1994 and 2005/2006. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, looking at Nyanza Province, in 1992, the poverty index was 47.4 per cent, and in 1994 it was 42.21 per cent. In three years’ time, in 1997, the poverty index in Nyanza Province rose from 42 per cent to 63.05 per cent. In the years 2005/2006, it corrected itself to 47.05 per cent. The reason as to why I am referring to these figures is because we seem to be looking at only two reports for the years 1999 and 2005, and forgetting that there is a history of this data. If you look at---"
}