Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 837128,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/837128/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 54,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "October 4, 2018 SENATE DEBATES 9 Sen. Kang’ata",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Sir. Pursuant to Standing Order 47(1), I rise to make a statement on a county matter regarding the management and also the wrangles in the water sector in Murang’a County. I am going to address myself on two issues. The first one is the conflict regarding whether Murang’a County should levy some charge on the water that is coming to Nairobi. I am also going to address myself on the issue concerning the wrangles which are happening in Murang’a County, particularly Murang’a Town; on the Murang’a Water and Sanitation Company (MUWASCO). Mr. Speaker, Sir, more than 84 per cent of the water which is consumed in Nairobi comes from Ndakaini Dam which is located in Gatanga Constituency in Murang’a County. Surprisingly, it is only about 30 per cent of the people of my county who have piped water. Squabbles for the control of that water and as to whether a charge should be levied commenced in mid-September 2018, following a proposal by Murang’a County Government to levy a charge of 25 per cent of the revenue generated from water drawn in Murang’a County by Nairobi City County. I am also aware that Members of Murang’a County Assembly went to Ndakaini and they were dispersed by police when they were supposedly planning to have a public participation session. While I appreciate the proposal by the County Government of Murang’a to generate some revenue out of that water, I hold the view that the issues can only be redressed through formal means but not informal. I would like to also draw your attention to the fact that, yes, it is true there may be a case in support of having water coming to Nairobi City County levied a charge by Murang’a County. There are three reasons for this; one, there is the fact that we are being compelled as the people of Murang’a to do re- afforestation. That costs money. We are also being compelled not to use wood energy to burn our tea or even to do any other activity. That also costs money. Also, there are people who live in the areas adjacent to that forest and they are being told not to do anything in that region. That has a monetary component. On that basis, to compensate for all these and to ensure there is protection of the environment, I would propose probably we consider giving Murang’a County something. However, that is not a proposal to give money directly into the county coffers. No, that will set a dangerous precedent. My proposal would be, any support given by any entity, whether the Government or even NGOs, should go directly to the people of Murang’a, to their pockets, to their environmental groups. Let me address the next issue on wrangles concerning MUWASCO. Yes, I am aware there has been a dispute concerning tariffs which some people of my town feel are quite exorbitant. I urge that any issues concerning that should be done in a peaceful and legal manner but not through fights. Finally, I will reiterate by asking Members of Murang’a County Assembly to take advantage of the powers which have been conferred upon them by the Constitution and proceed to use budgetary tools and seek any other remedy concerning those two issues. Alternatively, they could propose a law like Murang’a Water and Sanitation Act, for instance, which will address the wrangles in Murang’a Water and Sanitation Company (MUWASCO) and the issue concerning that levy. That is what is provided under the law. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes"
}