Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 916188,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/916188/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 262,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Homa Bay Town, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Peter Kaluma",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1565,
        "legal_name": "George Peter Opondo Kaluma",
        "slug": "george-peter-opondo-kaluma"
    },
    "content": "My concern upon which I seek clarification is based on the interpretation of Article 206(3) of the Constitution looked at together with the proposed amendment. What Article 206(3) of the Constitution says: “Money shall not be withdrawn from any national fund other than the Consolidated Fund, unless the withdrawal of the money has been authorised by an Act of Parliament”. I understand that we are doing the Appropriation Bill and my understanding is that the Appropriation Act will send the money to the Consolidated Fund. My interpretation of Article 206(3) of the Constitution is that what the Chair of the Budget and Appropriations Committee needs to have as his proposal in the last line that instead of proposing regulations, he should talk about Parliament coming up with a Senate Oversight Fund and a National Assembly Oversight Fund or just a Parliamentary Oversight Fund Act. Otherwise, my believe on the interpretation which I am seeking is that this is the reason we had issues with the NG-CDF where we were forced to do the National Government Constituencies Development Fund Act. We did the Judiciary Fund Act the other day. Appropriation does not mean that this money will go to the Fund by regulations. My interpretation is that Article 206(3) of the Constitution requires a parliamentary oversight fund in whatever nature we want to put it in."
}