Thursday, 15th June 2017

Ring the Quorum Bell.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to lay the following Papers on the Table of the House:

The Reports of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements in respect of the following institutions for the year ended 30th June, 2016 and the certificates therein:

The Vice-Chair, Departmental Committee on Administration and National Security, Hon. Lentoimaga, you have the Floor.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to lay the following Papers on the Table of the House: Reports of the Departmental Committee on Administration and National Security on the following petitions:

Let us now hear Hon. Geoffrey Odanga.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to lay the following Papers on the Table of the House: Reports of the Departmental Committee on Education, Research and Technology on its consideration of Petitions on:

Hon. Odanga, do you have another Paper to lay on the Table of the House?

Yes, Hon. Speaker.

Proceed. Wait Hon. Soipan.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to lay the following Papers on the Table of the House:

Report on the President’s Award Bill, 2017.

At their own request, the Chairperson, Departmental Committee on Finance, Planning and Trade will table the Report on the Government’s guarantee to Kenya Airways, and the Report on the Petition on irregular sale of Mwiri Coffee Estate. You must do it in the course of this sitting.

Let us now hear the Chairperson, Select Committee on Implementation, Hon. Soipan.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to table the Legacy Report of the Select

Committee on Implementation of the 11th Parliament running from May, 2013 to June, 2017.

Hon. Keynan, you have the Floor.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to table the exit Report of the Public Investments Committee (PIC) of the 11th Parliament, running from May, 2013 to June, 2017.

Hon. Speaker, I urge all Members to go through this Report and appreciate what was done by the PIC for the last four-and-a-half years.

Is it four-and-a-half years? I thought you said from May, 2013 to June,

Hon. Speaker, I beg to table the Report of the Departmental Committee on Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperatives on the Petition by the Kenya University Biotechnology Consortium (KUBICO) on lifting of the ban imposed on consumption of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) foods, and for the issuance of a permit to conduct field trials of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) maize.

Thank you, Hon. Speaker.

Did I approve that Report?

It is part of my legacy in this House.

I need to see it. Did I approve it today or yesterday?

Does the Leader of the Majority Party have any Statement, according to Standing Order No.44, which was not amended this morning?

Hon. Speaker, I do not have a Statement but we have an Adjournment Motion later. We will discuss what will be remaining. We will discuss the business that will be remaining and know its fate once we reach that Order.

Let us move to the next Order.

THAT, pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order No.30(3)(b), this House resolves to hold another sitting today, Thursday, 15th June 2017 for not more than three hours following the adjournment of the current Sitting or such other time in the course of the day as the Speaker may for the convenience of the House determine. Hon. Speaker, this is a precautionary measure in case we do not have enough numbers to put the Questions on the scheduled business. The additional sitting will offer a chance for the same to be done.

We have done very well as the 11th Parliament. We passed 180 Bills, which were assented to by the President. We have about 49 pending Bills. I am sure we will finish some of them today. We passed over 50 Motions by Private Members, and over 40 Private Members’ Bills.

We considered 124 petitions, which were handled by different departmental committees. We vetted key State officers, including Cabinet Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, ambassadors and the current Chief Justice and his Deputy. We sent home a number of State officers on impeachment. Some of them, like the Cabinet Secretary for Land, Housing and Urban Development, Hon. Kaimenyi, survived by 11 votes.

The 11th Parliament is different from the other Parliaments just the way day is different from night. Those who have ears can hear, and those who have eyes can read when history is written.

Under your leadership, Hon. Speaker, and under the leadership of most of the Members of this House, we have played our oversight role. We have given the Government and other State organs the required budgets. I am sure we are remaining with a few key important issues, including the amendment to the Standing Orders.

Let us have another sitting. This is not the first time we are going to hold an extra sitting. I thank Members because every time we ask for another sitting, they avail themselves. Because Members are aware of the other sitting, without anticipating debating, the House is supposed to adjourn today. If there will be very important matters, the Leader of the Majority Party and the Leader of the Minority Party will write to the Speaker, who using his powers, will recall the House. One thing must come out very clearly; we are Members of Parliament until midnight 7th August, 2017.

months. When we come to your office, do not make the mistake of referring to us as former Members of Parliament. I want to request my colleagues to be patient so that we finish the remaining business.

Hon. Speaker, you need to do some good send-off party for us as our leader.

Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I rise to second. This House has done very well under the bi-cameral system. I also want to thank Hon. Members who have been here. You have set the record and particularly you, Hon. Speaker. You have been very frank. You have done very well.

As we look at the order of business, there are very critical Bills that we should look at, particularly the Division of Revenue Bill which we should conclude. Without passing this Bill, we are likely to have a crisis, not just within the county governments, but also within the national Government. This is an important Bill because it divides revenue vertically to the counties and also to the national level.

Hon. Speaker, I want to thank you for guiding this House very well. Many times, when we had issues here to resolve, you helped us. You have constitutional matters at your fingertips. We have never seen you referring or taking the matter to a research officer. That is why you have been ruling promptly. We want to thank you for that. You have also been very frank. If it is black, you would call it black and if it is white, you would call it white. You have not been a pretender. That is a very good quality in terms of leadership. If you are old, you are old and if you are young you are young.

Hon. Members, I may also wish to inform the House that the mediated version of the Division of Revenue Bill was tabled in the House earlier in the day. It will be considered later by this House and the other House. The County Allocation of Revenue Bill has been lying in the other House. We are expecting that in the course of today, they will be bringing it to us for our concurrence or otherwise.

Hon. Members, just like Hon. Wamalwa has said, that is an important piece of legislation that we must pass if the counties are going to function.

Thank you very much.

Hon. Members, it is important to understand this Bill whose debate was concluded. However, even before I put the Question, it is fair that I announce to the House that the Commission put in place a place for lactating mothers. Therefore, the new and younger Members who may join the House have a place suitable for their babies and their minors.

Hon. Members, perhaps, many of you may be aware that debate on consideration of this Motion was concluded in the Committee of the whole House. What remains now is for the Question to be put for agreement with the Report of the Committee.

Let us have the Mover.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to move that the Supplementary Appropriations (No.2) Bill (National Assembly Bill No.30 of 2017) be now read a Third Time. I request Hon. Gikaria to second.

Yes, Hon. Gikaria.

I second.

Let us move on to the next Order.

Hon. Members, debate on this Bill was also concluded in the Committee of the whole House, but the Question for agreement could not be put because of some technical reasons.

I, therefore, put the Question.

Mover.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to move that the President’s Award Bill (National Assembly Bill No.7 of 2017) be now read a Third Time. I request Hon. Bowen to second.

Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I stand to second.

Put the Question!

Next Order!

Hon. Cheboi.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, it was Hon. Gichigi who was moving the amendments.

I beg to move: THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 107 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order— Disorderly conduct

Sorry Members. Some of you have logged in. Is it for purposes of this business or an earlier one? Hon. Gikaria, you have the Floor.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I support the amendment, but with an intervention. If you look at Standing Order 107 (d) and (j) , you will find that they are the same. It is a repetition. But I think it is better to have some order in the House.

In the past, people have really misbehaved and they were citing some anomalies. Now it is very specific about the disorderly conduct.

I support.

Let us now hear Hon. Nyikal.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I rise to support the amendment. This is extremely important for keeping order in the House. Past experience has indicated to us that these are necessary. For example, paragraph (d) , although it is repeated, failing to record abstention in a division is something serious. Failing to declare personal interest in a matter and deliberately giving false information are issues that are likely to create a lot of disorder if not properly addressed. I, therefore, support the amendments.

Yes, Hon. Kangongo.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I want to support this amendment. This part of the Standing Orders of the House is very important because in the past we have seen some behaviour which does not match with the status of an Hon. Member of this House. All that is enumerated from paragraph (a) to (k) is very specific so that it is specific and spells out the punishment commensurate to any of this.

Hon. Wamalwa, you have the Floor.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I rise to support. However, Hon. Gikaria had indicated that there is repetition of (d) and (j) which talk about self-recording, abstention and division. My worry is on (k) which states:

“commits any other breach of these Standing Orders and in the opinion of the Speaker constitutes disorderly conduct”.

At times, it becomes difficult to know where the boundary is. Suppose we have a rogue Speaker, he could easily abuse this provision. That was my only concern. Otherwise, order in the House is very important and we need to have some strict rules so that people can respect the Floor so that we can transact business.

I support.

(Standing Order No.108 agreed to) Standing Order No.109

THAT, Standing Order 109 be amended by—

Let us have Hon. (Dr.) Robert Pukose. Did you want to contribute from there? I am sure it is not about this. Let us have Hon. Joseph M’eruaki. Do you want to contribute to this matter?

Yes. I just want to support the amendment.

Let us have Hon. Lemein

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. It is fairly a straight forward amendment.

I support

Standing Order No. 110

THAT, the Standing Order 110 be amended by deleting paragraph

(2)

. It has equally been captured elsewhere.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out,

put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 114

THAT, Standing Order 114 be amended by—

I can see there is nobody wishing to contribute.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Question, that the words to be inserted in place thereof be inserted, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.114 as amended agreed to)

THAT, Standing Order No.121 be amended by—

THAT, Standing Order No.121 be amended by—

Yes, Hon. Wamalwa.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. We do not have the Standing Orders, and so I thought it would be in order to highlight them so that Members know what paragraphs one to eight are. Do we just delete the paragraphs without knowing what they state?

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I have a lot of respect for my good friend the doctor from Kiminini Constituency. This matter has been in the membership’s domain for some time now and we also have the Standing Orders available. In fact, I will give you mine because I have already gone through them. There are areas where we have created new clauses and yet they have been captured elsewhere. We could save time if Members could look at that. I know this one has been captured. We also have new clauses which we will get to shortly as we move along. There will be some new clauses which will be produced.

Let us have Hon. Rasso.

Thank you very much, Hon. Deputy Chairman. If you look at the original or current Standing Orders and the suggested amendments, you will find that they are very repetitive in most parts. I would invite Hon. Members to follow the amendments with the current Standing Orders so that we are able to follow the proceedings.

Standing Order No.123

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.123. This is the one which deals with communication between the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the National Assembly in terms of concurrence. We are just deleting it so that we make it a little easier to have a good working relationship.

Let us have Hon. Nyikal.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, if you look at the Standing Order No.123, it actually calls on the two Speakers to agree as to whether a Bill is a county Bill or not. I have seen this in the other deletions that we have made. The explanation we got is that they are elsewhere. I am now getting a bit concerned because this is an extremely important communication between the two Speakers of the House. If you merely delete it and there is nowhere else that calls for that communication--- We should not delete this unless we are convinced that there is a Standing Order that calls for that communication.

I know we obviously cannot do away with the concurrence because it is not just within the Standing Orders; it is also a requirement in the Constitution.

Let us have Hon. Dawood.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. If Hon. Nyikal would go to Standing Order No.121 that we have just amended, he will find that it has that provision. It is in the Order Paper

That satisfies the Member for Seme.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.123 deleted)

Hon. Members, even as we proceed with this, I must say I am happy that there are Members who are keen. This is because we have had complaints from Members of the previous Parliaments saying that they did not know how the Standing Orders were amended when they came back. I assume that the continued presence of Members in the Chamber is indication of those who have hopes. Standing Order No.124

THAT, Standing Order No.124 be amended by deleting paragraph (2) and substituting therefor the following g new paragraph— “ (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to or in respect of—

Let us have Hon. Rasso.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. If you look at the current Standing Orders and the suggested amendment, you will find that this provides more meat and understanding into what needs to be done. This is particularly if it is about appropriation and the Consolidated Fund. In particular, they are the two subparagraphs which have been added to the suggested Standing Orders.

Let us have Hon. Nyikal.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I support this amendment. I find it simply important. Considering the incidences we have had with the Appropriation Bill, making it easier with more details is important so that we can pass it as quickly as we need.

As concerns an amendment of the Constitution, there is the issue of raising the quorum. If we make things extremely stiff, we may find it difficult to raise quorum if we cannot do it all at once.

I support this amendment.

(Standing Order No.124 as amended agreed to)

THAT, Standing Order No.127 be amended—

THAT, Standing Order No.131 be amended by deleting the words “more than ten” appearing immediately after the words “the Whole”. Basically, this is to remove restrictions so that we do not restrict it to more than 10. It could either be less or much more.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.131 as amended agreed to) (Standing Order No.132 agreed to) Standing Oder No.133

THAT, Standing Order 133 be amended—

THAT, Standing Order No.136 be amended by deleting paragraph

(3)

. Basically, this is because it has been captured in a proposed new Standing Order. It has been improved.

Hon. Nyikal, you have the Floor.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I know that fate is important but in this particular case, this is an extremely important Standing Order referring to re-committal of clauses. It has saved many issues. I would like to be shown where it is so that as I finish this Parliament, I go home in peace knowing that I did not pass something without knowing what it is.

Yes, Hon. Rasso.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. If you look at the writing of our Standing Orders, when certain parts are hidden, it would be extremely difficult for new Members

to follow or even to master the Standing Orders of this House. For that reason, having gone through very many parts of the Standing Orders from morning until now, if this part has not been clearly pointed out, it is important for this one to be preserved.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman.

Hon. Cheboi, do you wish to respond?

I wanted to clearly indicate, for purposes of my good friend, Dr. Nyikal, that the issue of the re-committal procedure will be captured under new Standing Order No.136. He should be patient. As we all know, new clauses are always brought at the tail end of a Bill. It will capture that aspect. This amendment is for purposes of making the re-committal procedure a little easier.

(Question, that the words to be left out

be left out, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No.137

THAT, Standing Order No.137 be amended in paragraph (2) by inserting the words “established pursuant to Standing Order 127 (2) ” immediately after the words “report of the Select Committee”.

This is basically to give clarity by placing additional words pursuant to Standing Order No.127.

(Question, that the words to be inserted

be inserted, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No.141

THAT, Standing Order 141 be amended—

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.143 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

Consideration of Bills originating from the Senate

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.154 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

Referral of Bills by President

Hon. Nyikal, you have the Floor.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, this is also an extremely important Standing Order. Since we are providing for the Committee that will be set up as proposed under paragraph

I fully appreciate what you are saying Dr. Nyikal. This proposed amendment is in keeping with some ruling that I have had to make in the past which gave the House or whichever the committee is referred to, the ability to propose certain amendments which do not radically change the text but largely accommodate the reservations. Hon. Cheboi could perhaps speak on this.

Yes, Hon. Deputy Chairman. There are times when the amendments do not fully accommodate the President’s reservations and there are times when the amendments fully accommodate the reservations. In areas where the President’s reservations are fully accommodated, you would require two-thirds of all membership voting against it. But in areas where the amendments are fully accommodated, the reservations of the President can be supported by a simple majority of all Members. That becomes easy. It is a bit clearer.

The Leader of the Majority Party, you also wanted to speak? Hon. Gikaria, you have the Floor.

These amendments are in line. In the past, the minority particularly have always questioned the reservations by the President. It gives procedures. When the President brings reservation, we can look at it. It will give it some strength. If they have any reservation, they can bring their report as indicated. It is a better amendment in the Standing Order where the President will not just bring a reservation and it ends as he has brought it.

I support. The Deputy Chairman: Yes, the Leader of the Majority Party.

This is a very important amendment. I want to thank you and the Committee. We had incidents where a Bill was touching on both Houses and the President sent a reservation to both Houses. The National Assembly dealt with it but the Senate kept it for two years. An example is the Petroleum Exploration Bill and the Energy Bill. This is now setting a stage where in case the reservation concerns both Houses, a joint Committee of both Houses is set and a timeframe is given. If we had this in the Standing Orders, those Bills could not have been there today.

I am sure that was very good foresight. It had made clarity on how far you can amend a presidential reservation with the permission of the Speaker. I support.

Let us now hear Hon. Rasso.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. When I look at the original Standing Orders vis-à-vis this, clearly, this has provided a clearly laid down guideline to both the Speaker and the House in terms of how to proceed once the President refers the Bill back to the House.

Secondly, as the Leader of the Majority Party has said, it is about timelines. Once that guidance is in the Standing Orders, Members will also understand the urgency that is needed here.

Thirdly is the nature of referral in (a) and (b) that has been clearly set out in these Standing Orders. It is a major improvement to what we had in the current Standing Orders.

Thank you.

Hon. Nyikal, do you want to comment?

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I now support. I want to appreciate the fact that we have put a committee because the issues that have always dogged us are that we do not have time to consider. With the joint committee, those issues can be solved before they go to the Senate.

Standing Order No.155

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.155. The amendment seeks to realign Standing Order No.155 with the amendment on Standing Order No.154.

Standing Order No.171

THAT, Standing Order No.171 be amended by—

THAT, Standing Order No.172 be amended by deleting paragraph (1) and substituting therefor the following new paragraph— “ (1) There shall be a select committee, to be designated Committee on Selection, consisting of—

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order No. 174 be amended by deleting paragraph (1) and substituting therefore the following paragraph—

“ (1) In nominating Members to serve on a select Committee, the Committee on Selection shall ensure that—

Committee on Implementation and the Special Fund Accounts Committee are drawn from

I see no request for contribution.

Standing Order No. 176

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 176 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order— “Discharge of a Member from a Committee

I see Hon. Aghostinho Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I think this is a very good inclusion and an important improvement on the current Standing Orders. I can see that there is a provision for the Member who is going to be suspended to be heard. However, it is not very clear who hears that particular member, whether it is the Speaker or the parliamentary party that nominated the particular member. If it is a parliamentary party, then that also already creates a rut within it because if it is the party that is discharging me and they have already made a decision, then it is more of fait compli in terms of that particular hearing. So, I am wondering.

It is a good provision, but I think it might really not take sufficient effect, if at all it is a political party that suspends the Member that is the one that is according the hearing. I thank you.

I may explain this that the expectation is that the party, before writing to the Speaker to have the Member discharged, will show evidence of the due process that has happened before the decision to discharge the Member was arrived at. That is the proposition. Hon. Keynan, I can see you want to say something.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. Your considered ruling on the same has assisted so many Members from randy and other parties that are not run according to their own rules. So, this Standing Order is properly done and has taken into account your ruling, I think Members will have a proper avenue in ensuring that whatever grievances they have are properly addressed. So, this is a good proposal.

Hon. Alois Lentoimaga.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I support this amendment. I think it will need to be a bit expounded the way my colleagues have said. This is because in the Parliament that we are concluding now, especially in the Departmental Committee on Administration and National Security, we had several Members who were removed from the Committee without being given the opportunity to be heard, against our Constitution. The Constitution says that when you are accused, natural justice requires that you must be heard. So, I think we need to expound and make sure that the issue of hearing is upheld so that Members can be heard. They can exhaust their reasons or even the accusing party must explain exhaustively why they are removing the Members. Many of them have really suffered and they have not been able to discharge their duties in those particular Committees because of being removed unfairly.

Hon. Dennitah Ghati.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I also have a problem with the issue of “heard”. I think this is a little vague. For me, I do not understand who hears the Member. Is it the party or the Committee? Maybe, more information would have been sufficient for me.

Hon. Dennitah Ghati, a Member is nominated to serve in a Committee by a party. What this proposal is suggesting is that you cannot also take away the right of a party to do internal party re-organisation and discipline. Nevertheless, for the Member to be de-whipped – which is what this really means – he needs to have been given an opportunity to be heard. The Member needs to be told: “You have transgressed in this and the other way. Can you appear before whatever…?” We expect some due process to be followed so that a Member is not just disadvantaged. The party also should appreciate that any member is here to perform the three roles of a legislator. It could have been minor disagreements with, maybe, some senior party honchos in the village or all manner of places. What this is trying to provide is that process. Even when the party writes to have a Member de-whipped, there should be evidence of being heard and whoever it is that will be chairing or the Speaker will demand to be given evidence of that process. That is what this amendment seeks to achieve.

Hon. Nyikal.

I know you have explained, but I am still concerned about the words “to be heard”. It gives so much leeway than, probably, where we were before. I would have thought that this would call for knowing the procedures that the parties lay down and whether that would go into the Political Parties Act. It would have been important. I would have proposed that it reads: “be heard according to the party’s laid down procedure”. You would expect that a party has that procedure. Then the party can be put to task for not following its own procedure. I am not a lawyer, but I know in law that is a very important principle.

The evidence that, obviously, the Speaker will be requiring is, among other things, the process so that if, indeed, the hearing is not shown to have been there in accordance with the party’s rules, there must be some rule on that. The party must have its own rules that when a Member is seen in some funeral dancing in a particular way, that could be a reprimand. I am just giving examples. Of course, more particularly in this one, the Speaker would be interested to know what it is, in the context of the Member’s duties as a parliamentarian. The Member has been taken through that process to explain himself or herself that: “Although you may have seen me laughing, I was actually crying in my heart. So, do not punish me.” Something like that, Hon. Nyikal.

Standing Order No. 178

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 178 and substituting therefor the following Standing Order—

“Chairing of select committees and quorum

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I think this is a progressive amendment. This is a good one. Having been the Chair of PIC for the last four years, it is has been very difficult. Like in the Coalition Government, the Majority comes from one party and the Chairman comes from the other party, the Vice Chairman--- It is extremely difficult and you do not have a synergy. This is a good proposal and I thank the Committee Members for suggesting this. I am sure this will add a lot of value to those who will be appointed. It is also good to give the minority party an opportunity to chair the Committee on Implementation so that this issue of blame-games does not arise. This is a good one and I support.

(Question, that the words to be inserted in place thereof be inserted, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.178 as amended agreed to) Standing Order No. I79

THAT, Standing Order 179 be amended by inserting the following new paragraphs immediately after paragraph (2) —

“ (3) A candidate for election as Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson of a committee shall submit his or her nomination paper, in writing, to the Clerk by 5.00 pm on the day before the election.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I think this is an important amendment and it is a very good inclusion. My only worry is that however good it is, given that the members of the various parliamentary committee are going to be fairly new and not knowing each other’s competencies--- If, for example, you are two or three days old, I am wondering how

the process is going to be effected so that, at least, you know you are voting for Hon. Gikaria or Hon. Neto to be the chair of a committee and yet, they are people you might not have had an engagement with. I really think it is a good provision. I am just wondering about the efficacy of this provision.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I also want to support this amendment. I think it will be the most appropriate way to elect Chairs and Vice-Chairs. When we were appointing Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen, we were told those are the people nominated by the party leaders. This is the most democratic way and I support it.

Thank you very much, Hon. Deputy Chairman, whereas I agree with this amendment, the current Standing Order talks about wherever a vacancy occurs in the office of the Chairperson or the Vice-Chairperson of a select committee. I do not know whether that has been taken care of.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I am happy with the amendment. I am keen on seeing if the amendment can include Chairperson or Vice- Chairperson and the issue of gender.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, issues that we have been canvassing through constitutional amendments cannot be cured through the Standing Orders. Therefore, I think as much as I respect Hon. Dennitah Ghati, it will not be fair at this late stage to have the same canvassed. Let us sort it our constitutionally and I am sure the other bit will be sorted out naturally after that is done. Therefore, I oppose that vehemently

Standing Order No. 183

THAT, Standing Order 183 be amended by inserting the words “and prescribe the quorum applicable to the sub-committees” immediately after the word “functions”. The justification is that the amendment seeks to provide for quorum for some committees

(Question, that the words to be inserted be inserted,

put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 184

THAT, Standing Orders 184 be amended by inserting the words “in person or through a legal representative” immediately after the word “appear”. The justification is that the Standing Order was amended to provide for legal representation for a Member adversely mentioned during an appearance before a committee.

(Question of the amendment proposed) Question, that the words to be inserted be inserted, put and agreed to)

THAT, Standing Order 187 be amended by inserting the following new paragraph immediately after paragraph (1) — “ (1A) a notification under paragraph (1) shall be made through the Clerk and recorded in the minutes of the committee.

This is very important regarding any Member not attending meetings. It is proposed that Standing Order No.187 be amended to have written notification to the Chairperson or the Speaker done through the Office of the Clerk who will keep such records of notification and/or the Speakers’ approval. It is very important because it has happened in the past. It has been improved now.

(Question, that the words to be inserted

be inserted, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 188

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order 188 be amended by deleting the words “a Member designated by the Chairperson shall take the chair, and in the absence of such designated Member,” This is to allow Members to determine their leadership and enhance democracy at committee level by deciding on the temporary chairperson.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.188 as amended agreed to) Standing Order No. 189

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order No. 189 be amended by inserting the words “absent with apologies or absent” immediately after the word “present”. The amendment provides for recording of Members present, absent with apologies and those who are completely absent.

(Question, that the words to be inserted

be inserted, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 191

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 191 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

Hon. Gikaria, there are two proposed amendments. There is one by the committee and one by Hon. Cheboi himself. If you look at the Order Paper, you will see the proposal by Hon. Cheboi is quite an elaborate amendment. The one you have moved is by Hon. Cheboi which, if carried, then we do not need to move the amendment by the committee. Look at page 710 of the Order Paper.

Sorry Hon. Deputy Chairman. I have just seen it. It is elaborate, deleting Standing Order 191 and substituting thereof with a new one.

Hon. Nyikal.

I stand to support. It is a fairly detailed amendment. However, I need some clarification under paragraph (j) :

“Issue a commission or request to examine witnesses abroad.” That has got very far reaching consequences, at least in terms of expenses. Can we get more explanation as to what paragraph (j) means.

It is not unusual. Remember in the 10th Parliament, when there was an interesting investigation where people had to travel to London to go and take evidence from some fellow called John Githongo. Whenever there is need for this, Parliament will always

facilitate. Even during the inquiry on the death of the late Dr. Ouko. So it is possible. Parliament can always facilitate, of course in consultation with other agencies of the Government.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Question, that the words to be inserted in place thereof be inserted, put and agreed to)

That means the proposed amendment by the committee falls.

Standing Order No. 193

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order 193 be amended by deleting paragraph (2) and substituting therefor the following paragraph—

Hon. Agostinho Neto.

Thank you, Hon Deputy Chairman. This is a very good amendment. It is going to subject Chairpersons and Vice-Chairpersons to due process as opposed to them just hearing word in the corridors that a vote of no confidence is being passed. It is a good improvement on how committees deal with the Chairpersons and the overall leadership.

I support.

I see two amendments: one by the Committee and the other one by Hon. Keynan. We will begin with Hon. Gikaria’s.

THAT, Standing Order 205 be amended—

Hon. (Eng.) Gumbo, because you have an amendment that is different from his, let us first dispose of his, that is, 205

(a)

and

(b)

.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. The proposed amendments in

Hon. Keynan, do you want to contribute to this or you want to move yours?

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. The proposals by the Committee are good and fundamental. Oversight committees are just like other committees. Therefore, I am moving an amendment on the appointment of Members and the terms.

“The Members of the Committee shall be nominated and approved by the House at the commencement of every Session.”

I find that a bit repugnant. It kills every aspect of institutional memory.

We have not done (c) and (d) because of the amendments. (Question, that the words to be left out be left out,

put and agreed to) (Question, that the words to be inserted in place thereof be inserted, put and agreed to)

We will go to paragraph 5. Hon. Gikaria!

THAT, Standing Order 205 be amended—

Hon. Gikaria, your amendment suggests that the Members shall be approved once every 12 months.

That is the Committee’s amendment.

The proposal by Hon. Keynan runs counter to that because it says: “Members who will be nominated to serve in the Public Accounts Committee at the commencement of any Parliament shall serve for the term of that Parliament.”

So, I need to explain that to Members. At times, I have had Members use the word “Session” when they mean “Sitting”. I have had it used interchangeably. However, a Session is 12 months. What Hon. Gikaria is suggesting is a situation that used to obtain in the 7th, 8th and 9th Parliaments. Allow me to give you this information because I chaired the Committee you are now chairing. So, I know it was the position in the 7th, 8th and 9th but that has since changed. We need to be clear when we are debating this particular standing order. The proposal by Hon. Gikaria, which is the proposal from the Committee is about one Session, which is 12 months. We need to debate that and if it is defeated, we will move to Hon. Keynan’s proposal.

It may not be fair for Hon. Keynan to contribute because he has an amendment. Let us hear from Hon. Aghostinho Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I would like to support the Committee’s amendment. Given the nature of the Public Accounts Committee - and we have seen what happens with every successive Public Accounts Committee - we are not trying to say that all of us are beyond reproach. It is only fair that in every particular Session, we give the Public Accounts Committee a fresh start. It will be very dangerous to have a Public Accounts Committee sit for the entire term of Parliament. That will be precarious and the most dangerous thing you can ever do to any Parliament.

I support the Committee’s amendment.

Let us have Hon. Rasso.

Thank you very much, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I oppose the proposition by the Committee because the nature of the Public Accounts Committee is such that they follow issues that run for years and years. They need institutional memory and individuals who can sit

on that Committee and weigh issues. We want to correct issues in our country. If we will have a new Committee every Session then it means that that Committee will not be able to function seriously. For that reason, we can look at the halfway point of the mid-term of Parliament. We can change the membership of the Committee then. Otherwise, the proposition by the Committee is very dangerous and will kill that Committee.

Let us have Hon. Cornelly Serem.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I stand here to oppose the proposal. My approach is that it is very difficult to have a Committee that sits to investigate a matter in this country and before they even end the investigation, their term expires. Knowing that in most cases we tend to train Members, there is no need to train them and then before they utilise the skills they have been trained for, membership is changed. It is always better to have them serve for the entire term of Parliament.

Order, Members. Members are clear on this. Maybe you can make a decision very quickly. It looks like Members are quite clear.

Let us have Hon. Keynan.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I am glad that you are here as a former Chair of one of those Committees. It is extremely difficult to have new Members at the end of every Session. Actually, it is illogical. I do not understand. Whoever brought this takes us back to where we were---

Hon. Keynan, move your proposed amendment. You now want to give us another story. Remember Hon. Keynan, we are considering paragraph (5) . You have a very important point.

THAT, the proposed Standing Orders be amended by:

Hon. Keynan you have hit the nail on the head. That was the missing explanation. It is not being proposed that Members will be permanent. Should a party feel that for one reason there is need to make changes, going through the due process, they can do so. You have made your point. Can I propose the Question?

Let us have Hon. Rasso. I am trying to look around here to see whether---

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I want to thank Hon. Keynan for his foresight.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, as you may be well aware, the Public Accounts Committee is also a Member of the Public Accounts Committees of other international bodies. One of the frustrations that we have had in the African Organisation of Public Accounts Committees (AFROPAC) is that when the Sudanese were appointed to chair - and their committees change every year - we could not move. We are privileged to host the secretariat of the East African Association of Public Accounts Committees in Kenya. We also host the AFROPAC so continuity is important. The rider that the parties can still change its Members is good. Let us allow it to exist for the full term of Parliament.

I support the amendment.

The amendment is just to put the Public Accounts Committee and the Public Investments Committee and other funds committees at the same level as other Departmental Committees. This is so that there should not be one particular Committee where people can be thrown out every time they go for Christmas holidays. You never know what happens and who celebrates in which manner. Why do I not put the Question?

Hon. Gikaria, I am told that you have an amendment to paragraph

(6)

.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I had a proposal to delete. I need your guidance because if Hon. Keynan’s proposal carries the day--- If you look at paragraph (6) it says that the Public Accounts Committee constituted immediately following the general elections shall serve for a period of three calendar years. I need to propose to delete this so that his amendment can be retained.

Standing Order No.205 (6) provides that the Public Accounts Committee shall elect a Vice-Chairperson from amongst its members. I thought that the earlier agreement was that the Vice-Chairperson should come from the same party as the Chairperson? Is that not the case?

That was the position.

You are withdrawing your amendment. You should withdraw your proposal.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I beg to withdraw the proposed amendment to Standing Order No.205 (6) .

Hon. Keynan, you wanted to delete.

Let us have Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order No.205 be amended-

THAT, Standing Order 206 be amended—

Maybe, Hon. Gikaria, since it looks like we have agreed on how Public Accounts Committee should be, the best thing is for you to withdraw your amendment so that Hon. Keynan can move his amendment. That is a neater way. You can go on record as withdrawing paragraph (6) .

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I withdraw my proposed amendment to Standing Order No.206, paragraph

(6)

.

Hon. Keynan, move part three of your amendment.

THAT, Standing Order No.206 be amended by deleting paragraph (6) and substituting therefor the following new paragraph–

THAT, Standing Order 207 be amended by inserting the following new paragraph immediately after paragraph (5) —

“ (6) The Committee may establish such subcommittees as it may consider necessary for the discharge of its functions including a subcommittee on legislative review.”

The amendment seeks to allow the Budget and Appropriations Committee to establish such sub-committees that it may consider necessary for the discharge of its functions, including sub-committee on legislative review.

(Question, that the words to be inserted

be inserted, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No.209

THAT, Standing Order 209 be amended by inserting the following paragraphs immediately after paragraph (3) —

“ (4) The Committee on Implementation shall consist of a Chairperson and not more than sixteen other members.

Hon. Rasso.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I support this amendment but I want to pose the question particularly where it says “parties forming the national government or associated with the President shall have a majority of one”. When we say that parties forming the national government then it means they are already associated with the presidency. For that reason, the second part of that sentence needs to be expunged. Thank you.

As long as they are parties, maybe it does no harm. Let us have it in practice. In any event, Standing Orders are living so they can always be amended where they are found to be inappropriable. I think it is okay, Hon. Rasso.

Standing Order No.216

THAT, Standing Order No.216 be amended—

THAT, Standing Order No.230 be amended by—

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I would like to support this amendment.

Hon. Neto, you appear to have been tickled by Hon. Millie Odhiambo.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, Hon. Millie Odhiambo is my elder sister both by birth and in the House. In the next Parliament, I will be an independent and she will be in the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) . So, we are trying to work out an arrangement of how we are going to relate.

Having said that, this amendment is important. Clause 7 of this amendment is important. Consideration of a petition under this Standing Order shall not lapse at the expiry of a term of Parliament. What this does is that a member of an independent commission--- If there was a petition presented at the tail-end of a Parliament, it should stand because the reasons are still valid as to the removal of that commissioner.

I support.

Standing Order No.232

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 232 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order— Presentation of Budget Policy Statement and the Debt Management Strategy

Hon. Neto.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I would like to support this amendment. I like the fact that the Standing Orders are now anticipating a debt management strategy. We appreciate that no one has been able to conclusively look at the debt strategy for Kenya. Having such an inclusion to be part of the BPS is going to be a good way to move.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to) (Question, that the words to be inserted in place thereof be inserted, put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.232 as amended agreed to) Standing Order No.233

THAT, Standing Order No.233 be amended by deleting paragraph (3) and substituting therefor the following new paragraphs—

“ (3) The National Assembly shall proceed upon and conclude its consideration of a Division of Revenue Bill not later than ten sitting days after the Bill has been introduced with a view to passing it, with or without amendments.

(3A) In considering a Division of Revenue Bill, the House shall take into account any recommendation submitted by the Commission on Revenue Allocation, pursuant to provisions of Article 205 of the Constitution.”

The amendment seeks to provide that the House shall take into account any recommendations submitted by the Commission on Revenue Allocation pursuant to provisions of Article 205 of the Constitution in considering the Division of Revenue Bill.

(Question, that the words to be left out

be left out, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 234

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 234 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 235 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order— “Presentation of Budget Estimates and committal to Committees

Hon. Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I would like to support this particular amendment. I am not so sure it is because of the 21 days that Hon. Gikaria says. I think it is more to do with the budget-making process. Ordinarily, I think whenever the National Treasury has given us Budget Estimates; it almost comes to Parliament as fait compli. I really think this particular one gives Parliament the chance to look at the Budget Estimates with regard to the Committee input and, at least, the Budget and Appropriations Committee then now reassures or reworks the Budget Estimates with regard to the Committee proposals. I really think this is a good way and it gives Parliament teeth within the budget-making process. I support.

Standing Order No. 237

THAT, Standing Order 237 be amended by deleting the expression “7.00 p.m.” wherever it appears and substituting therefor the expression “7.30 p.m.”. It is just to redefine the term of the day from 7.00 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.

Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 238

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 238. We seek to delete these provisions on order of votes in order to simplify the process.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out, put and agreed to)

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 239 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 240 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

Committee on the Budget Estimates for the financial year…….and the Estimates of Expenditure

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 241. The justification is that the amendment is already provided for in the proposed New Standing Order No. 244

(c)

relating to pronouncement of Budget highlight and revenue raising measures.

(Question, that the words to be left out

be left out, put and agreed to)

Standing Order No. 242

THAT, Standing Order 242 be amended—

Hon. Harrison Kombe.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I am not on that one.

No problem. You are not on this one.

Just a moment, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I seem to be lost.

Okay. We will find you somewhere in some forest.

On a point of order, Hon. Deputy Chairman.

Hon. Kombe, what is your point of order?

On page 703 of the Order Paper, I have here New Standing Order 240A and 240B, but that has been skipped to where we are now.

Hon. Kombe, all I need to do is just to explain to you that where they say “New”, just like when we are doing a Bill, new clauses come after you have dealt with the old ones. So, you are not lost. You can see we have found you where you are okay. Standing Order No. 243

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order 243 and substituting therefor the following new Standing Order—

Hon. Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I would like to support this particular amendment. The reason I support this particular amendment is what is contained in Clause 243

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.244. The justification is that it is catered for in the new proposed Standing Order No.240A

It is a deletion.

Yes, it is a deletion.

Standing Order No.245

THAT, Standing Order No.245 be amended—

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by deleting Standing Order No.251.

The justification is that it has been taken care of in the new Standing Order No.212 A

Standing Order No.254

THAT, Standing Order 254 be amended—

THAT, Standing Order 256 be amended in paragraph

(2)

by deleting the words “Standing Order 124

” The effect of the amendment is to provide for a Motion of exemption of business from the Standing Orders in relation to Standing Order No.124, which provides that not more than one stage of a Bill to be taken at the same sitting can be made.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out,

put and agreed to) (Standing Order No.256 as amended agreed to)

THAT, Standing Order 259 be amended by inserting the following new paragraph immediately after paragraph (1) –

“ (1A) The Speaker may designate seats in the Chamber for Members of the Chairperson’s Panel, Deputy Leaders of Majority and Minority Parties, Chairpersons of Committees and Majority and Minority Party Whips.”

This is a justification where the Speaker will designate seats in the Chamber for Members of the Chairpersons Panel, Deputy Leader of Majority and Minority Parties chairpersons and chairpersons of committees. This will ensure easy access to the leaders in the Chamber.

(Question, that the words to be inserted be inserted,

put and agreed to)

Standing Order No.264

THAT, Standing Order 264 be amended in paragraph (1) by deleting the words “not later than six months to the end of the term”.

The amendment seeks to remove the timeliness and provide that, at least, once in every term of Parliament, the Procedure and House Rules Committee shall review the Standing Orders and make a report to the House.

(Question, that the words to be left out be left out,

put and agreed to)

New Part IIA

THAT, the Standing Order be amended by inserting the following new Part immediately after Standing Order 12 —

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order 12- 12A. (1) A Speaker or Deputy Speaker who intends to resign from office shall submit a letter of resignation addressed to the House.

(Question, that the new Standing Orders be added to the Standing Orders, put and agreed to) New Standing Order No. 25A

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 25— Designation of a place in the Chamber for Cabinet Secretaries and other persons.

25A. The Speaker may designate a suitable place in the Chamber or at the bar of the House for—

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order 82— Member who has spoken to question may speak to amendment 82A. Where an amendment has been moved, and if necessary seconded, any Member who has already spoken to the main question may speak to the amendment, and any Member who has not spoken to the main question but speaks to the amendment does not thereby forfeit the right to speak to the main question. Debate on amendment confined to amendment 82B. (1) Where an amendment has been moved, and if necessary seconded, debate shall be confined to the amendment.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 107 – Gross disorderly conduct

107A. (1) A Member commits an act of gross disorderly conduct if the Member-

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. Even though I support, I wish they included sexual violence before the House, which is never treated very seriously. I have been sexually violated in this House and no action was taken. When somebody undresses me in this House, that is sexual violence. You do not touch my panty. You are not Mr. Mabona. That is sexual violence. Those are the things we hope to be provided in the Standing Orders.

It all depends on which one would be better dealt with. Who would be better able to deal with that aspect of what you have just said? Did you say addressed or undressed?

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I am not talking about post office box. You know that I already addressed a letter to you, complaining that when I was in this House, there are male Members who tried to remove my dress. One pulled and tore my panty, which I have kept for historical reasons because it was an embarrassing moment for this House. It is fortunate that it happened to me who does not give a damn. If it was another Member, they may have left. Because Millie Odhiambo is fearfully and wonderfully made, I do not fear my thighs or any other private part of my body. If the men did that, it does not bother me. It is embarrassing and should be provided for in the Standing Orders that when you come here as a man, you pass legislation. You have not come to pass my underpants.

Hon. Millie Odhiambo, I am sure you are more than abundantly aware that that is a matter not for the Standing Orders, but for the Powers and Privileges Act. Sorry Members. I think Hon. Millie Odhiambo realised that some Members were getting drowsy and wanted them to wake up. It is always good to have this kind of situation in the House, otherwise, making Standing Orders can be very boring.

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order 110— Effect of suspension 110A.

(1)

A Member who is ordered to withdraw from the precincts of Assembly under Standing Order 108

and Standing Order 111

shall during the period of such withdrawal or suspension forfeit the right of access to the precincts of the Assembly.

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 112— “Definition of a day 112A. For the purposes of this Part, a “day” means a calendar day.”

This has something to do with the definition of a day.

New Standing Order No. 114A

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 114— “Speaker to exempt certain legislative proposals

114A. (1) The Speaker may exempt a legislative proposal which originates from the Party forming the National Government from the provisions of Standing Order 114 (pre- publication scrutiny).

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 136— Re-commital Procedure

136A.

(1)

A Member who desires to amend or delete a provision contained in a Bill reported from Committee of the whole House or introduce a new provision in the Bill, may propose an amendment to add, at the end of the Motion for agreement with the Committee of the whole House, the words “subject to the re-committal of the Bill

to a Committee of the whole House.”

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 191—

“Procedure if witness fails to appear

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 200—

“Exit Reports

200A. (1) A Committee which is unable to complete its work before the expiry of its term shall table an exit report to the Assembly detailing reasons for such inability.

Hon. Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. The New Standing Order 200A is a good improvement. Some of our Committees have pending issues which need to be tackled by the succeeding Parliament and if there is no hand-over or exit report it becomes very difficult to proceed. It is a great inclusion. I support.

New Standing Order No. 202A

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order Immediately after Standing Order 202—

“Approval of joint sittings with a Senate Committee 202A. (1) A Committee may, with the written permission of the Speaker, hold joint sittings with a Committee of the Senate to consider a matter related to their respective mandates.

a Second Time, put and agreed to)

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 205— “Special Fund Accounts Committee 205A. (1) There shall be a select committee to be designated the Special Fund Accounts Committee.

Hon. Keynan, we will give you the first chance because you are proposing an amendment to this. You are adding something to this new Standing Order 205A.

I will withdraw New Standing Order 205A (5) . It will be amended by Hon. Keynan.

Hon. Gikaria, we have already approved that the Public Accounts Committee, Public Investments Committee and the Committee on Implementation should serve for five years. This amendment reads thus:

“The Members of the Committee shall be nominated and approved by the House at the commencement of every Session” Now, that appears to go against what would be happening to the other three.

(Inaudible)

Okay. So, you have withdrawn

(e)

of paragraph 5. So, we are left with 1, 2, 3, and 4. Very well.

(Question, that the new Standing Order be read a Second Time, proposed)

Yes, Hon. Millie.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I know I am not the Mover, but could Hon. Gikaria consider doing an amendment because he has the ability to do it on the Floor and include the Affirmative Action Fund? I do not know why it is not included.

All of those are part of what is called “such other Funds”. It covers all of them. Let us have Hon. Lentoimaga.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, this is a very important amendment because at the beginning of this financial year, the Equalisation Fund has come to operation especially in the marginalised counties. So, this Committee will serve a good purpose because there is a lot of money being disbursed to the counties. In the recent past, we have realised that Ministries are supervising or rather allocating the money. It is necessary for those Funds to be supervised, audited and scrutinised by this House. This particular amendment has come at the right time.

I support the amendment.

Let us have Hon. Patrick Musimba.

Hon. Musimba, the point you are raising has been brought about through an oversight. It is an important point because we would have to recommit that bit. The National Government Constituencies Development Fund (NG-CDF) is established through a statute and, therefore, has its own committee. This has to be recommitted because this will mean that we have two Committees of the House. It should remain, but then we recommit it. It will address the issues which we are raising, so that we still leave it that an independent should be the one to chair.

I will put the Question with regard to the amendment by Hon. Gikaria.

Let us have Hon. Keynan.

THAT, the proposed Standing Orders be amended by:

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order No.212—

“Procedure for presentation of reports from the East African Legislative Assembly and the Pan-African Parliament.

212A. (1) the Committee on Regional Integration may, receive a report or consult with a committee or a Member of the East African Legislative Assembly or the Pan-African,

Parliament may present a report to or consult with the Committee for the time being responsible for matters relating to regional integration or any other committee of the House on any matter relating to the work of the East African Legislative Assembly or the Pan-African Parliament, respectively.

Let us have Hon. Millie.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I had actually put an intervention. If you look at the New Standing Order No.212A, there is something wrong with the way it is drafted. It does not make proper grammatical sense. Even though I appreciate the principle behind it, it does not make proper grammatical sense.

Secondly, I was hoping that they would have provided something about transition. The Pan-African Parliament will be sitting just immediately after the elections, but grammatically, there is a problem with the Mew Standing Order No.212A.

We agree, Hon. Millie Odhiambo. It will be cleaned up. It is the staff who did not get it correctly.

New Standing Order Nos. 240A and 240B

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order No.240—

Consideration of Supply Resolutions 240A. (1) The report or any resolution of the Committee of Supply shall be considered upon a Motion, “That, the House do agree with the Committee in the said resolution.”

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order No.244—

Approval of expenditure of more than ten percent 244A. (1) Pursuant to the provisions of Article 223 (5) , the House may, following a request by the National Treasury and upon recommendation of the Budget and Appropriations Committee, by resolution, approve spending of more than ten per cent above the sum appropriated in the Appropriations Act for that financial year.

Hon. Kombe, do you have an intervention on this?

No.

Let us have Hon. Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I am inclined to oppose this particular amendment. It might have knowledge on finance and issues budget although not very up to date, but I would like to be educated on the import of approving upfront a 10 per cent expenditure. What then is the role of a Supplementary Budget? We appreciate that each time you allow the Cabinet Secretaries to bring supplementary budgets, but allowing them to spend upfront 10 per cent above, in my view, goes contrary to the constitutional provisions in terms of how then, you appropriate money for the various functions. I am happy to be educated, but I feel inclined to oppose it.

I see no response.

New Standing Orders Nos.256A and 256B

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Orders immediately after Standing Order 256—

Extension of period prescribed 256A. (1) Despite the provisions of these Standing Orders prescribing a period for doing an act by the National Assembly or its Committee, the House may, upon a motion, resolve to extend that period.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order No.257–

Permission for absence 257A. (1) A Member seeking to be absent from sitting of the House shall seek the written permission of the Speaker in such form as the Speaker may determine stating the period of absence, the reasons and any other relevant information.

read a Second Time, proposed)

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chair, I am reluctant to support this Standing Order as crafted. Members are fairly responsible citizens. Why do you have to seek written permission from the Speaker? I opposed it even in the past. What should have been re-done is to provide that a Member should notify the speaker, not seek permission from the Speaker.

Unfortunately, Hon. Millie Odhiambo, even in as much you may not like the language used, just look at the language used in the Constitution. This has just been lifted from the Constitution.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, in that case we may need to do a constitutional amendment.

Having said that, I just want to indicate – because I know we are going very fast – that one of the reasons I sat here was to oppose a committee we have put in place whose work looks like that of the Parliamentary Service Commission, but we moved so fast and passed it. I let it go. I do not want it recommitted, but I do not see why we should be having a committee doing exactly the same work as the Parliamentary Service Commission. It means we are showing lack of faith in the Parliamentary Service Commission. When you seek to create so many institutions to perform similar functions, it means that you have lost faith in the existing institution. I do not think that is what Members are saying. We should let the Parliamentary Service Commission do its work. I am sorry, Hon. Deputy Chair, for taking you back, but we moved so quickly and passed it. I am not happy with the provision for that committee.

Since, I am sure you will still be the Member for Mbita---

Suba North.

Suba North. Hon. Neto.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, now you understand why Hon. Millie tickles me. Apart from being my neighbour, she has a way of going around many things.

She has spoken to something that, in my view, is important, that is the new Standing Order No.257A. That is the particular constitutional amendment which speaks to the number of times a Member of Parliament needs to be absent from of the Assembly. Remember Hon. Gumbo, in his wisdom, had proposed a constitutional amendment. As it is currently in the Constitution, it is impractical to give effect to that sitting. The constitutional provision says that a Member cannot miss eight sittings in a Session. That is an issue that needs to be looked at in terms of the wording and the tenor of the Constitution.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, regarding the provisions of the New Standing Order No.257A, you probably need to make an omnibus decision in terms of how you deal with Members’ requests of leave of absence without saying that you ought to write. This particular Standing Order needs to be thought through and re-crafted to align it with the constitutional provisions regarding leave of absence from Parliament.

Leader of the Majority Party.

I support this amendment because we are here on behalf of the people of Kenya. Under the new transparent leadership, Kenyans want to know whether their Members of Parliament are in the House or not. That is why I agree that we must have custody of the request for permission kept somewhere. There are a number of times when people have written petitions asking their Members to be disqualified as Members of Parliament. Asking for written permission from the Speaker is not something that we cannot accept. This has been lifted from

the Constitution. Let us live with it for now. If we come back during the 12th Parliament, somebody can bring a constitutional amendment to change it. I am sure Hon. Gumbo’s amendment did not go through. We are, therefore, stuck with the current situation as it is in the Constitution.

(Question, that the new Standing Order be read a Second Time, put and agreed to)

This one was by Hon. Cheboi.

This is by Hon. Cheboi?

Do you not have it?

Are we on Standing Order No.259?

There is a new Standing Order proposed by Hon. Cheboi.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order No.259— Recognition of a Parliamentary Caucus

259A. (1) The Speaker may, upon the written request of at least ten Members, recognise a parliamentary caucus formed for the purpose of advancing a common legislative objective.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I wish to support the amendment. I belong to a few caucuses, and sometimes Members do not understand.

Having said that, I just wanted your direction on Standing Order No.259. It is appearing as a new amendment. I am referring to the one that has to do with the Speaker designating seats in the Chamber. Even though it is not indicated as a new Standing Order, ideally it is. I do not know how we are going to deal with it. With your indulgence, I would want to seek an amendment to Standing Order No.259. It is on Page 79 of the Supplementary Order Paper this afternoon.

This is New Standing Order No.259A.

Is it a new Standing Order? If it is a new Standing Order, could you just direct?

I am sorry, Hon. Millie Odhiambo. We have already dealt with what you are looking at. We finished with Standing Order No.259. We are now dealing with the new Standing Orders.

Yes, Hon. Deputy Chairman, I was just wondering because it appears as a new Standing Order even though it is not indicated as such.

On the Order Paper?

In terms of content, it looks like a new Standing Order even though the title has not indicated.

Which one are you reading?

I am reading Standing Order No.259.

We have already dealt with that one, have we not?

It says “Standing Order No.259 be amended by inserting the following new paragraph---”

That one was dealt with. We are now dealing with the new Standing Order No.259A.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, for that one, I have indicated that I support, but I stand guided on the one that I was speaking about on Page 709. I was saying it should come as a new Standing Order and I had wanted to push an amendment from “may” to “shall”.

You are speaking to something that is---

I stand guided.

Hon. Neto.

Thank you, Hon. Deputy Chairman. I rise to support this new Standing Order No.259A. I have been a Member of the Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights. We have done a couple of things as a caucus. I would be requesting the Mover, if at all he could be kind enough for the next caucus in the next Parliament, to amend Clause 259A (3) to delete the word “shall” and replace it with the word “may”. Parliament has been very magnanimous and supported the Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights with the few facilities which maybe were not anticipated, but if we have the words “shall not”--- Hon. Duale might be a Member of the pastoralists caucus in the next Parliament and I will be his chair. I am requesting the Mover to be magnanimous and replace the two words. I support the spirit. It is a good inclusion. I am hoping Hon. Gikaria agrees with me though the Leader of the Majority Party does not agree. He is not the Mover. I thank you.

If every caucus were given the same level as the committee, it would be very difficult even to provide a budget for them.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, from our current situation and with the mushrooming of caucuses, this is the best we can go. When we say “shall”, then we will even have breastfeeding caucuses and we will get some other caucuses that as a Muslim I cannot mention here. So, let us be very careful. This is okay. It is made at the discretion of the Speaker. You might come up and have a caucus of Mungiki. The Speaker must have some discretion. Let us have “may”.

The caucuses shall not enjoy the privileges accorded to a committee of the House.

On a point of order, Hon. Deputy Chairman.

What is out of order?

Hon. Deputy Chairman, with your permission, may I please move an amendment to say “a parliamentary caucus may enjoy” because it still leaves it at your discretion. You have been fairly kind enough. You have given us some discretion even for Global Action Parliamentary Caucus on Children, but you have not accorded us the full powers. So, if we say “may”, it is still gives you discretion, but when you say very expressly “shall not” it means that it shall only appear on paper. It limits you.

That is the practice the world over. Parliamentary caucuses are caucuses, they are not committees. They cannot and do not enjoy the privileges given to committees of the House.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, Members must also understand one thing; that if you give a lot of power and resources and other things to the caucuses, the effect is that we are going to stifle committees. When we stifle committees, then the core business of this House will be stifled. That is why many times, you find, for example, when NSSF does parking, committees of this House say that is not their core business. It is not the core business of this House to deal with caucuses and so forth. In any case, even the human rights one, which my good friend, Hon. Neto, is speaking about, can easily be captured in the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs which most likely he is going to be a Member when he comes back even as an independent Member.

I oppose.

It is good enough that we are putting it in our rules to recognise caucuses.

Second Schedule

THAT, the Second Schedule to the Standing Orders be amended by deleting the specified Committee and its respective subjects and substituting therefor the following new Committees and subjects—

(Question of the amendment proposed)

Hon. Deputy Chairman, again with your permission, could I please request that we amend the Agriculture Committee so that it reads Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries because we always forget fisheries. Its issues are never taken seriously. Would I request that it be named Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries instead of Agriculture and Livestock?

Now, if we start looking for every eatery, some other people are now going to talk about other things. The subject deals with that, in fairness.

Committee

Subjects Agriculture and Livestock

Agriculture, livestock, irrigation, fisheries development, production and marketing.

Communication, Information and Innovation

Communication, information, media and broadcasting

, Information Communications Technology

(ICT)

, development and advancement of technology and modernisation of production strategies.

Energy

Fossil fuels exploration, Development, production, maintenance and regulation of energy. Finance and National Planning

Public finance, monetary policies, public debt, financial institutions, investment and divestiture policies, pricing policies, banking, insurance, population, revenue policies including taxation, national planning and development. Labour and Social Welfare

Labour, labour relations, manpower or human resource planning, gender, youth, social welfare and security, children’s welfare,, National Youth Service, the elderly and persons with disability. Sports, Tourism and Culture

Sports, culture, language, arts, national heritage, betting and lotteries, tourism promotion and management. Trade, Industry and Cooperatives

Trade, consumer protection, commerce, industrialisation including special economic zones, enterprise promotion and development including small and medium-size enterprises, intellectual property, industrial standards, anti-counterfeit policies and co-operatives development.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Schedule immediately after the Fourth Schedule—

Hon. Cheboi, I think this is your amendment to insert a New Fifth Schedule B.

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Schedule immediately after the Fifth Schedule—

New Schedule

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Schedule immediately after the Sixth Schedule—

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Schedule immediately after the Sixth Schedule—

(Question, that the new Schedule be added to the Standing Orders, put and agreed to) Standing Order No.2

Hon. Gikaria.

THAT, Standing Order 2 be amended by inserting the following new definition in its proper alphabetical sequence— “broadcast” includes the live transmission of the proceedings of the House by radio, television or webcast;

(Question, that the words to be inserted

be inserted, put and agreed to)

New Standing Order 2A

THAT, the Standing Orders be amended by inserting the following new Standing Order immediately after Standing Order 2— “2A. The Mace of the House embodies the authority of the Speaker and the House and shall be kept in safe custody by the Serjeant-at-Arms.

Let us have the Mover.

Hon. Deputy Chairman, I beg to move that the Committee doth report to the House its consideration of the National Assembly Standing Orders of 2017 and its approval thereof with amendments.

Hon. Speaker, I beg to Report that a Committee of the whole House has considered the proposed amendments to the National Assembly Standing Orders of 2017 and approved the same with amendments

Hon. Speaker, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Committee in the said Report.

I request Hon. Gaichuhie to second.

Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I second. I want to thank Hon. Gikaria because he has been very active this afternoon.

The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi): Now we are proceeding to the Committee of the whole House on the President’s Reservation to the Finance Bill. New Clause 26

Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I beg to move: THAT, a new clause be inserted in the Bill to read as follows:

THAT, a new clause be inserted in the Bill to read as follows—

This was a clause that was deleted by the House from the published Bill and sought to amend section 44A of the Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act. The reason for this amendment is specified above. Just like the previous one, it is just to make sure that we protect the young people of our country from directing their energy and focus on betting, lottery and gaming activities instead of productive economic engagement. That is what the President is saying.

Amendment of section 29A of Cap.

THAT, a new clause be inserted in the Bill to read as follows:

Amendment of section 55A of Cap.131.

28C. Section 55A of the Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act is amended in subsection (1) by deleting the word "twelve" and substituting therefor the words "thirty-five". The reasons given are the same as the ones I have given. There is a lot of focus on betting, lotteries and gaming instead of productive engagement, a vice that is likely to degenerate into a social disaster, according to His Excellency the President. So, he is agreeing with the deletion and the position as it was in the original Bill.

(Question, that the new clause be added to the Bill, put and agreed to) The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi): That marks the end of that Bill. Let us ask the Mover to move for reporting.

Do I move Clause 29? The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : Not Clause 29. We have considered the three clauses: Clauses 26, 27 and 28. So you are moving reporting.

Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I beg to move that the Committee do report to the House its consideration of the President’s Reservations to the Finance Bill, (National Assembly Bill No. 16 of 2017) and its approval thereof without amendment.

Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I beg to report that a Committee of the whole House has considered the Presidential Memorandum to the Finance Bill (National Assembly Bill No. 16 of 2017) and approved the same without amendment.

On a point of order. The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : Let us have the Hon. Leader of the Majority Party.

Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, there must be some mistake by the Clerks-at-the-Table. They have only dealt with Clauses 26, 27 and 28. There is Clause 29 which we have left out as per the Memorandum.

The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : Hon. Duale, are you okay?

Yes. The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : I have already proposed the Question. So, I will make it so clear that there are Members who want to contribute. I will give two Members then we can sort it out.

We may not put the Question for this one because we do not have the requisite numbers. So, we will leave it there. What is it Hon. Musimba, please proceed.

(Inaudible) The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : Just a minute as we consult. Yes Hon. Leader of the Majority Party.

Hon. Musimba. We were dealing with the original Memorandum of the President and instead of 29 it should be 28. It is a typographical error because there is nowhere we see 28 in the Memorandum and we cannot get out. We have to discuss what is in the Memorandum.

The Temporary Deputy Chairman (Hon. Cheboi) : Hon. Musimba. I have with me the Presidential Memorandum and it only refers to Clauses 26, 27 and 28. So, if there anything in the Order Paper that is outside this, then it is not from the Memorandum that is before us. So, if you have time you can come and have a look. We do not have that one.

We are adjourning. Hon. Members I was going to do that in the spirit of the Hon. Leader of the Majority Party and his Muslim brothers to go and open the fast but since they say they are willing to sacrifice some more, it means they will also get better blessings.