Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 980588,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/980588/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 199,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Suba South, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. John Mbadi",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 110,
        "legal_name": "John Mbadi Ng'ong'o",
        "slug": "john-mbadi"
    },
    "content": " Hon. Speaker, if you look at this Bill properly, you will see its intention is to majorly take the functions that are currently bestowed on the Agriculture and Food Authority regarding issues of tea to a specific board called the Tea Board of Kenya. It is creating a specific Act of Parliament to regulate matters of tea and tea marketing in the country. In fact, if you look at Clauses 15 and 21 of the Bill, they largely describe the functions of the Tea Board. If the House cares to give me a minute, I can read some of the functions of the Board that are suggested. You will find this Board is the one that is going to license anybody in this country who wants to export tea. The Board is the one that is going to regulate the production of tea and the quality of tea, and it will do all the other functions including the ones that are spelt out under Clause 21, It states: “Every processor shall keep or cause to be kept, for statistical purposes, a register of all tea growers registered under the sub-section (1), specifying- (a) the name of the grower (b) the location, size and parcel number of the land on which the tea is grown (c) the variety of tea grown and such other information as the Board may require.” It even goes a step further to say that for anybody to grow tea in this country, that person must be registered with a processor. What I am saying in a nutshell is that the Senate has proposed legislation called the Tea Bill which specifically is going to take the responsibilities bestowed on AFA currently, regarding tea matters, to this specific law. The question we need to ask ourselves as a House is whether this is the route we want to go. Do we want to start recreating pieces of legislation for specific crops? Today, we have the Tea Bill. It may make sense, because this Tea Bill came about because of the current problems that the tea sector is facing. And it is real. We must accept that there is a problem in this country regarding tea growing and marketing. The tea farmers are complaining and that must be addressed and addressed properly, through policy decisions and other ways. So, tea is facing challenges. But, equally, other crops are facing challenges. The coffee sector is facing challenges. The sugar industry is currently on its knees. So, if we decide to start recreating boards to specifically deal with those individual crops, then we should go the full hog and create for each and every crop which is facing challenges. My thinking is that we could operate within the current legal framework and body. If there are weaknesses that we have identified on that body, then we need to address them. If we feel that this particular Authority has so much on its plate, that we need to create several boards, then we need to decide on how many we would want to create. Are we going to amalgamate? We could even decide to amalgamate tea and coffee or something, then sugar with others. Even 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."
}