Ochilo George Mbogo Ayacko

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 791 to 800 of 1046.

• 15 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I want to know specifically, how much money, in terms of liability, is owed to South Nyanza Sugar Company (SONY) arising from that insurance brokerage? Could the Assistant Minister also give the names of the specific brokerage companies and insurance companies? Which years in question do those debts arise? view
• 15 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, could the Assistant Minister confirm or deny that the insurance company that covered the period between 1997 to 2001 also occasioned liability? How much was the liability? When was it paid, if the answer is in the affirmative? view
• 15 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. view
• 15 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Assistant Minister has not answered the entire question. How much money was owed in respect of that period? When was it re-paid? view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, I want to plead with Dr. Manduku, we had discussions about this and thought it would suffice to exclude "growing" and deal with "production" and related issues, just in case he forgot it. view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, the reason I support the amendment is: When tobacco products are being exported out of this country, if you designate them as "manufactured in Kenya," or any jurisdiction, that may make them uncompetitive or disadvantaged vis-a-vis other best practices in the international market. view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, I do not support that. I would like to support the amendment. I believe that punishment should not be made draconian. Punishment should provide an opportunity for rehabilitation. If the figure Kshsh1 million is put there, then the court may have to apply it, and we may end up putting people in jail who may not pay that kind of fine. So, I want to support this amendment. The main reason is that the people who will be selling are agents. They are basically local people; they are not the manufacturers. So, it is the locals who ... view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, I wish to support this amendment. If you read Clause 15(5), it talks about products that resemble tobacco products. If we are talking about products that resemble tobacco products, we are definitely not talking about tobacco products. To raise the standard of punishment the way the original Bill captures it, is to punish people too harshly for merely imitating. If we reduce the punishment a bit, we will still be achieving the same purpose. view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, those who have smoked--- I once used to be a smoker and I also know that the Assistant Minister is a smoker. When you are a smoker, you actually know the brand you want. You just go and ask for it. For your convenience, it should be affordable to you, if you choose to smoke. So, this kind of difficulty that is being created here is not useful to somebody who has the addiction. That person has already decided to take the dip and should be facilitated to do as he or she pleases. I beg to ... view
• 9 Aug 2007 in National Assembly: Mr. Chairman, Sir, there are various forms of advertisement. Some are merely informative and others are persuasive and misleading. Therefore, my take on this Clause - I want to say that I am supporting the amendment - is that if a blanket ban of advertisement is imposed upon the trade of tobacco, then even the informative ones are precluded. I think that is negative and regressive. We are not advancing. If we have a board that prescribes the standards, the mode and the ethics involved in advertisements, then we do not need to ban it altogether. view