Augostinho Neto Oyugi

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 541 to 550 of 895.

• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman. I would like to support the amendments made by the Chairman of the Committee. What he is seeking to do in this particular amendment is to tidy the Bill. I like the substitution of the word “may” with the word “shall” which then makes the Bill proper and enlarges the purview-- - view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: I am in agreement with this particular amendment because it then expands the purview in terms of the rights of the person who is eligible for the protection order. The second thing is that the Chairman of the Committee is right in making these particular amendments in Clause 10(a). It is tedious but you remember the reason why this particular amendment was being made is because we had tried to narrow down the persons who are supposed to be in a domestic relationship. We grant him this and we let him make this particular amendment. I support. Thank you. view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman. The hon. Member for Kibra is right in trying to oppose. However, the reason I am supporting the Chairperson’s position is that what is referred to in Clause 10(1) is something totally different. Clause 10(1) before it is amended has two portions. One, the clause talks about a person in a current domestic relationship, but also talks about a past relationship. That is what Clause 10 before it is amended speaks to. The Chairperson of the Committee is proposing an amendment to only make the current people in a domestic relationship the ones subject ... view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: No. I am supporting the Chairperson. The only point I am trying to clarify to you is the fact that Clauses 10 and 11 of the Bill are distinct and different. Clause 10(1) speaks to the definition of “protection order” in a past or a previous domestic relationship. However, Clause 11 is speaking to a child applying for protection order. Those two are distinct. view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: The Member for Kibra is dissenting on sub-clause (1). He is right to disagree and oppose sub-clause (1). I am clarifying why I understand his opposition whereas on the other side, I am supporting the Chairperson’s position of a deletion; an The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor. view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: amendment in the manner it is in the Order Paper. I am with my Committee Chairperson on this. view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you. I like the fact that the Chair of the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs is willing to make concessions. I suggest the following: In the original Bill, perhaps he only wants to drop the word “conciliator” which is in 2(f) and then (i), “church and any other religious institution.” You then leave everything else that is therein, and then try to use the words like those hon. Member for Narok brought in namely, “any other person with the leave of the court.” What that does then is that they take care of the concerns of hon. ... view
• 17 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman. I would like to support the amendment by the Committee Chairperson. I really think the reason why this particular deletion is necessary is because it is superfluous to ask the court to issue a warrant of arrest if someone does not appear in court. It is almost an express thing. It is always the initiative of the courts to issue warrants of arrest. I support the Chairperson. view
• 12 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker. I would like to support the adoption of this BPS as further amended. Before I speak to the main document, allow me to speak to the resolutions of the Senate that we adopted to have as part of the BPS. Paragraph 2 of the Senate Resolutions talks about direct cash disbursements to persons with disabilities, persons of old age and social safety net programmes. I think the proposal from the Senate is welcome. Presently, the way we conduct business in terms of advancing money to old people, orphans and other people in need is ... view
• 12 Mar 2015 in National Assembly: farmers are not given subsidies and incentives to ensure that they do their very best in terms of agriculture. Having agreed with a couple of proposals the Senate has made, I have an issue with two proposals they have made that I would like the house to consider. The first one is paragraph 12 which it talks about the extension of the term of the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC). In the Sixth Schedule under paragraph 5(7) of the Constitution, the term limit of CIC is stated. It was envisaged to be five years after its establishment ... view