Tom Joseph Kajwang'

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 1231 to 1240 of 10308.

• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Issues to deal with land laws sometimes can be very complicated and it is necessary also that we have a wholesome view. You can have a property and a spouse can obtain interest by virtue of Company Law that we passed the other day. A spouse can have a property by virtue of what used to be Transfer of Property Law or because of laws we have inherited. That is because under the Judicature Act, we have received laws that we are using. So, this is a technical area. Yes, I can see my sister is struggling that we should ... view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, these things are just about the kind of tenure that we deal in. Previously, we used to have land which was owned under the Registration of Titles Act. They were divided with land which was owned under the Registration of Titles Act. This is where the problem is with definitions, but we have since brought all the laws together. We are trying to have one tenure system. view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: If the Leader of the Majority Party--- view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, this is a technical area. Hon. Members can only benefit if they just listened. I will not proceed until the Leader of the Majority Party sits down. view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Leader of the Majority Party, this is a technical area that I am sure lawyers will help you understand. When you have joint tenancy, it is because it is indivisible shareholding. You cannot say that you have three acres out of ten acres. The whole 10 acres belong to you. If it falls in an estate, it will be decided who becomes the benefactor of that estate. On the other side, the shares are in common, in which case the registrar may define the shares. It has nothing to do with either person of those who are living together, or ... view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, we need to understand where we are. I have the principal Act and have also considered the Bill and the amendment as intended in the Order Paper. It seems that having lost the amendment that we sought for, which was by my learned friend, Hon. Mwadime, we come to the amendment proposed by the Chair of the Committee, which seeks to delete the words “and for future generations”. 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
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: To satisfy myself that these words “and for future generations” are offensive, I looked at the Act. Section 5(2)(c) of the Act reads:- “Ensure that public land and land under the management of designated state agencies are sustainably managed for their intended purpose and for future generations.” view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: I hope I am right. The Chair needs to convince us that the words “future generations” are offensive either to the law or to ethical practice. If we want to preserve public land, or supposing there is a police station and we want to say that the police station will be used in a sustainable manner for the intended purpose and for the people who live after us, what harm is it that we have created? In my view, we are just buttressing that people who will live after us will also be interested in the police station. So, would ... view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: On a point of order, Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady. view
• 4 May 2016 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, this is the National Assembly. We are legislating for the whole country. All of us depend on this country. We live here. Members, before you speak, will you just listen to each other so that we move on? We are handling a very emotive issue which is called “land.” Some of us may have not been in the Committee to discuss some of these issues. view