Millie Grace Akoth Odhiambo Mabona

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 601 to 610 of 6553.

• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: word “Ministry”; That is exactly the same as the amendment by the Committee. Therefore, the Order Paper that Hon. Sankok and Hon. Shamalla have is the wrong one. I know that these things are sometimes confusing. I also get confused. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chair, thank you for the opportunity. I do not have a problem with providing for a corporate body and for fining them, which is a good thing, but my only concern is in relation to sub-clause 2 where the Chair says “when an offense against this section is committed by a body corporate”. I have actually noticed that the problem is not even in the amendment by the Chair, but in the Bill. I was hoping the Chair could have tidied this up. The Chair has made several proposed amendments with penalties, the ones that Hon. Sankok ... view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: My understanding is, as the Mover, I can, on my feet, move an amendment. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: I agree with the Chair that, that amendment would be similar to Clause 58. So, my suggestion is either myself or the Chair could move an amendment to delete 57(2) because it contravenes all the amendments on penalties that the Chair has moved. It provides that a person who commits an offense under subsection (1) shall upon conviction be liable to a fine not exceed Kshs500,000, meaning this one provides for Kshs500,000 and the other one for not more than Kshs5 million. She has provided for penalties in each section and so, as the Mover, I could then move that ... view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Yes, Hon. Temporary Deputy Chair. I think that is neater and I support. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: So Hon. Shamalla has withdrawn? view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Whereas I support the amendment, I notice that the Chair is also proposing to delete Clause 59(i), which states that the cabinet secretary may make regulations in respect of the number of children that may be created from the gametes of one donor through the application of assisted reproduction procedures. 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 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: I am just wondering whether the Chair can give a good justification because I saw a case in America or somewhere else where one person produced almost 1,000 children. I do not know whether they were 1,000, but it was some ridiculous number. The children were all seeking to know who their biological father was. In that country, some of them were actually seeking for support. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Yes, Clause 59. In Clause 59, the Chair seeks to replace the word “Authority” with “Directorate”. She also seeks to delete paragraph (d) which is on the number of times a patient can be assisted. I agree that that makes sense as one can do it 1,000 times if they have challenges. However, Clause 59(i) implies that one person can donate their sperms even 1,000 times, which could result in 1,000 children from one father. Is there a possibility of people marrying their relatives? I am just wondering whether the Chair has seen that. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: (Spoke off-record) view