Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 899425,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/899425/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 728,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipipiri, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Amos Kimunya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman. Indeed, you highlighted one of the things I wanted to highlight because within the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, it is very clear when a contract is deemed to be in force. It is from the time it is signed to the time a person is discharged of their responsibilities under the contract after the completion of the defect liability period. Basically, what the Member for Gatanga is trying to do is to now limit the contract to commencement and completion. Between signing and commencement, it is not covered. After finishing the works and the guy disappears, he is not covered. Then there is a defects liability period of one year, which is not covered by any contract. I cannot quite understand what we hope to achieve by exposing public resources between signing and commencement and from completion to defects liability period. I would urge either he withdraws the amendment or we oppose it and work with the existing definition, which is more inclusive and protective of public resources, especially given the high levels of corruption and misuse of public funds that we see at different stages. There is so much happening from signing. You are given the 10 per cent to commit mobilisation before you commence. Who covers that 10 per cent mobilisation fee and under what is it covered? Let us move from signing to when your liability is discharged, when the defects period has expired and you have been discharged…"
}