John Muriithi Waiganjo

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 371 to 380 of 423.

• 28 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: will never be the same again but the country survived and moved on because of the efforts that they put in. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, It is for those reasons that Parliament must look at the Report of the TJRC and debate it, even without changing its substance. We can simply look at it and make recommendations on it. We also survived the turmoil of the civil strife that defined our nationhood following the 2007 general elections. We know what happened. There are people who have never recovered. Some people lost their relatives. We created orphans. People lost land and ... view
• 28 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: seconded. view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. Speaker. When the House adjourned I was addressing Section 67 of the Bill and it was my view that Section 67(3)(e) and (f) be deleted from the face of the Bill. This section particularly talks about culling and cropping which literally means the harvesting of animals. My contention was that we do not have enough wildlife to entertain culling and cropping. I gave an example and said that cropping contradicts wildlife conservation efforts and I want to refer to our past experience. In 1991, large ranch owners put a lot of pressure to have experimental cropping and ... view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: experiment was, of course, thereafter suspended but the people who are behind cropping and culling are the large ranchers. view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: I think it is important that ranch owners are told that animals in their ranches do not necessarily belong to those ranches. There are animals which could have migrated to those ranches or are on transit. This is because some of those ranches are not even fenced. So, it is an anomaly to talk about cropping and culling. What statistics are we using when we do not even have data to show how many wildlife we have? We should, therefore, not compromise our wildlife heritage by entertaining this cropping. view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Hon. Speaker, Sir, consumptive utilization of wildlife has been tried in other jurisdictions with disastrous results. I invite hon. Members to think about West Africans, for example. What wildlife do we talk about in West African countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire, Cameroon and Liberia? They have none. This is because they opened up their game reserves to cropping. That is how this country will go if we do not delete Clause 67 from the Bill. view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Most significant is around Loliondo area in Tanzania. Unfortunately, Tanzania which is our good neighbour has managed to open its reserves to wanton destruction of wildlife habitat. It has invited a Dubai-based company called “Ortello Hunting Business Company” which organizes hunting parties. This has effectively denied Tanzania its wildlife heritage. We do not want to go that way. We want to preserve our wildlife because we do not have enough wildlife as it were. Our game reserves and our wildlife are being disseminated by poachers. Can you trust the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) to keep the lions or leopards safe? ... view
• 21 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Hon. Speaker, Sir--- view
• 20 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker for giving me this opportunity although I notice that I do not have much time. This is a very important Bill we are discussing this evening. Of course, this Bill is coming to replace the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, Cap.376 of 1975 which is the operational statute. I would like from the outset to congratulate the Committee for doing a good job. This new Bill is coming to take care of the challenges that have ensued since the passage of the new Constitution. One of the challenges that are rampant is poaching. It ... view
• 14 Nov 2013 in National Assembly: Thank you, hon. temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, for giving me an opportunity to debate the all important Media Council Bill. The need to pass the media legislation arises from a command of the Constitution under Article 34. The constitutional freedom of the media of a right to information was not enshrined in the old Constitution, thereby explaining, perhaps, why the former regimes were running amok, wrecking media establishments and generally jailing journalists on trumped up charges of sedition. Now, we have a clear provision in the Constitution guaranteeing media freedom, and under Article 34 it is clear in the Bill ... view