Hon Mbadi came with a bill which gives H.E. Raila and H.E. Kalonzo very akward choice. That they must accept to retire from active to get the retirement benefits. From this bill the folowing are the implications; 1. Even if Mbadi was acting on behalf of others, he shouldnt have allowed a bill which doesnt serve the interest H.E. Raila to reach the presentation stage. 2. This bill seeks to eliminate HE Raila from the political arena. This is unacceptible both to his supporters and CORD legislators unless Mbadi has jumped ship to Jubelee. 3. At the moment HE. Raila is actively involved in politics and he wont accept to resign from it therefore he cannot receive the benefit. which means the bill is a clever scheme to deny the duo their deserved benefits. Is it not right to say Mbadi was used either knowingly or unknowingly to serve the intrest of his opponents? 4. MPs normaly gets the retirement benefits at the end of 5years term, why is this standard now not used in this bill? For instance in Moodys case.
Posted on: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:24:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015