Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 902064,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/902064/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 304,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Homa Bay CWR, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Ms.) Gladys Wanga",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 590,
        "legal_name": "Gladys Atieno Nyasuna",
        "slug": "gladys-atieno-nyasuna"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker for protecting me. I might lose my clout in the Committee if my Vice-Chair is upset. The point I was making is, if there is anybody who is a custodian of public interest it is this House. It cannot be relegated to a CS to determine what is in public interest. So I oppose this amendment. I would like to shed some more light on the amendment to the PFM Act, having been a commissioner of PSC in the last Parliament. As I said earlier on the Floor of this House, before the new Constitution we had a unicameral Parliament. Of course after the new Constitution, Article 127 is very clear on who the secretary to the commission is. But when we got into the commission, we realised that it was very difficult to have one accounting officer dealing with everybody. You know the interests and the numbers in the National Assembly, for example, are very different from the interests and numbers in the Senate. So if you have just one accounting officer dealing with everybody, sometimes that one accounting officer may be bashed for favouring one House and not the other given that he is a Clerk of one of the Houses. This is how, through an amendment of the PFM Act, we resolved to have two accounting officers, one for the National Assembly and another for the Senate. But even as we progressed, there was always the challenge of who takes care of the Joint Services."
}