MaichBlack wrote:Queen wrote:MaichBlack wrote:FUNKY wrote:https://www.businessdailyafrica.com/news/Interest-on-risky-loans-forecast-at-16pc/539546-5339802-ks7r6az/index.html ^
"The MPs shielded the people with existing loans from higher rates...".
Where did this writer get this from?? Is there something I am missing? I am not aware of such an amendment going through.
The Finance committee tabled their report which contained an amendment on existing loans. There was lack of quorum in the house and therefore the report, together with the amendment therein, was never debated.
The pertinent question should now be:- is it these committee's report that was passed in lieu of quorum or was it the President's memo to the house that was passed as it were without any amendment.
My understanding is that the house was meant to debate and pass the Finance committee's report and not the president's memo directly. Am however not a lawyer.
They were to accept or reject the president's memorandum. To reject, they needed 2/3 majority which they did not get. So the "accepted" it (by default).
Judging from today's advert in the papers, Joshua Oigara (Chairman, Kenya Bankers' Association) is categorical that the amendment to the presidential memo sailed through by default and therefore existing Contracts for old loans will remain unchanged.
It would appear, therefore, that what was passed by default was the Report of the Finance Committee and not the president's memo per se, unless of course Oigara himself is also confused.