Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 945119,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/945119/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 187,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kitui Central, WDM-K",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Makali Mulu",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1955,
        "legal_name": "Benson Makali Mulu",
        "slug": "benson-makali-mulu"
    },
    "content": "Hon. Speaker, I want to start from where Hon. Katoo has left on the issue of the Political Parties Act, 2011, and more specifically, on the issue of sharing the Political Parties Fund released to political parties. Looking at the relevant clause, there is 53 percent, 20 percent for all other parties and 20 per cent for the SIGs and this amount is tied to the number of MPs, governors and members of county assemblies (MCAs). I think this is an area I will request the Chair of the Committee to do a bit of work. Currently, there is confusion and this arises more in coalitions. I am just imagining what would happen if only one party qualifies for the 20 per cent for the other parties based on the issue of governors, MPs and MCAs. We will find one party, which is not the majority or minority, getting a very huge share based on this legislation. The other issue concerns coalitions. For example, there is the NASA coalition, where the Wiper Democratic Movement (WDM-K) - which I belong to - is a member. Currently, Wiper, FORD-K and Amani National Congress (ANC) do not benefit from this Fund because they have not met the threshold in terms of governors, MPs and MCAs. There is an argument which is being pushed forward that we cannot benefit from the allocation which goes to ODM, that is our big brother. The question is: Would ODM have managed to achieve that threshold if these other partner parties were not participating in the election? The answer is no. For example, if you take the South Eastern region and look at the number of MPs who come from that area, they are all purely Wiper MPs. Implying that, if Wiper was not participating in the elections, most likely, even the vote for the presidency would have gone to another individual and not ODM. To me, this is a grey area and if it is not properly structured in terms of legislation, it can cause a lot of problems in political parties. This law is meant to ensure that there is proper representation in Parliament and this cannot be effective if political parties are not effective. This is an area I would urge the Chairman to ensure that whatever legislation comes out is very clear. The other area is definitions and I like the proposal that they should be clear. Looking at Article 100 of the Constitution, there are people who are categorised as Special Interest Groups (SIGs). It is very important that we get the definitions correctly. As Hon. Oundo has said, when you talk about women in this country, there are those who are economically empowered more than the men in the country. The question is: When you group them together, what is the implication? My proposal is: It would be wise under the category of women; we find a way of stating which group is marginalised so that they can benefit from nominations or the special treatment when it comes to elections. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}