Tom Joseph Kajwang'

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 2561 to 2570 of 10308.

• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: He is deleting sub-clause (1). Sub-clause (2) remains. view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: I hear you, Member for Kajiado North. Departmental Committee Chair, how do you retain sub-clause (2) if you delete sub-clause (1)? The two sub-clauses are related. If you are going to delete sub- clause (1), you must delete both. If you leave sub-clause (2), it will be hanging and will not make sense in the law. Can you respond to what the Member for Kajiado North and I have said? view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: I profess no technical knowledge in planning. I only know something about law and legislation. What worries me is that you want to say that there is no period within which an applicant should complete the building works but you want to leave the part which penalises such person. Why would you be penalising if you are going to delete sub-clause (1)? If sub-clause (1) goes, sub-clause (2) must also go. You want to delete sub-clause (1) and leave provision for penalty in sub-clause (2)? You will not penalise anybody because there will be nobody to commit the offence. view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: Can you rise and speak on record and see what you must do? view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: Departmental Committee Chair, I have no problem with that one. So that we save time, can you make a further amendment to say that Clause 66 be amended by deleting sub-clauses (1) and (2)? view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: Let me propose this first. view
• 3 Dec 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
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: We do not want to make law on the Table, but I have seen and I have been advised by the Clerk- at- the- Table that even as we deal with Clause 66, which we are going to deal with, think through Clause 68. We will be coming to it. You are trying to punish some people ahead there in 68 for not having this permission and it is this permission that you are removing. So, think through it so that when we come to it, you have something to tell us. But we do not want to help you ... view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: That makes sense; I did not see it that way. “The planning authority may impose conditions or a fine to be prescribed in regulations on an applicant for development permission for building works where that applicant fails to complete the building works within five years”. It makes sense. view
• 3 Dec 2015 in National Assembly: I had proposed a further amendment and the Member for Gilgil has raised a very important point. This is the work of making good laws. You all consult. He is saying that even if you remove (1), you will have (2) standalone which says that, therefore, even without (1), the planning authority can impose conditions or a fine if you do not complete the works within five years. So, let me start with the further amendment. view