Francis Chachu Ganya

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 601 to 610 of 1798.

• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: 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
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, the Senate amendments that I have start with Clause 4. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady. As a Committee, we agreed with this amendment on the basis that, while the Bill captured the principles in the Constitution, the Senate went further and ensured the guiding principles under Chapter 6 of the Constitution are as well embedded in the Bill. So, we agreed with that amendment. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: As a Committee, we rejected this amendment because it suggested that there ought to be a place of negotiation between the Cabinet Secretary (CS) and the Mineral Rights Board. In the same token, it is problematic because the power to make a decision is not placed in any of the authorities - neither in the Mineral Rights Board or the CS. More than that, the Board is just an advisory board to the CS. The executive authority rests with the CS. On that basis, we rejected that amendment. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: We agreed with the proposed amendment from the Senate. That is because it provides for the issuance of the acknowledgement in writing of the receipt of the report made under sub-section (1). When the CS makes a decision, the firms that are trying to get mineral rights inform the CS of the same. Instead, the Senate felt that this should be done in writing acknowledging receipt of that information, which we have no problem with. So, we agree. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: THAT, Clause 16 of the Bill be amended in sub-clause (3) by inserting the words “in consultation with the Mineral Rights Board” immediately after the words “Cabinet Secretary shall”. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: On this amendment, we disagreed with the Senate as a Committee. This is similar to the one mentioned earlier, which is basically involving two authorities, the CS for Mining as well as the Mineral Rights Board. The Senate is trying to persuade us to agree that there should be some level of negotiation between the two and yet, none of the authorities are vested with powers to make any decisions. When they disagree, there is nowhere to turn to. Moreover, we felt that the CS has executive authority and the Mineral Rights Board is just an advisory to the CS ... view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: Yes. We rejected it. view
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: 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
• 22 Oct 2015 in National Assembly: I think I need to give more clarity on this to my colleagues. The duty of the Board is to give technical advice to the CS, and that is appreciated. The problem is that this amendment suggests that there is supposed to be negotiation and an agreement. It does not say what happens if they fail to reach a consensus on that agreement. In that sense, it is problematic. We felt that they should give the necessary guidance to the CS, but the final executive authority rests with the CS. That is true for any Government in this world. On ... view