The Uzalendo team went to the streets to ask of the opinion of Kenyans concerning Ruto’s allegations that Raila approached him for handshake
Involve all stakeholders in wildlife conservation, First Lady Margaret Kenyatta says
First Lady Margaret Kenyatta has called for a shift in approach and tact in the protection of wildlife resources in the country.
She said a sustainable solution that effectively engages all key stakeholders including local communities as equal partners is crucial in bolstering wildlife conservation efforts in the country.
“The subject of conservation continues to be a delicate and complex one that calls for complimentary capabilities of diverse groups including policy makers, philanthropists, conservationists, the civil society, the media and local communities,” she said.
The First Lady was speaking on Thursday evening when she presided over the main screening of a documentary titled ‘Ivory Belongs to Elephants Walk’. The 25-minute documentary covers the experiences of Mr Jim Justus Nyamu, the Executive Director of Elephant Neighbours Centre, who has so far walked 15,411 kilometres in eight countries to raise awareness on the need to protect the African elephant.
The First Lady termed the documentary a significant milestone that will raise global awareness on the plight of the African elephant.
“I congratulate the Elephant Neighbor’s Centre, led by Jim Nyamu, for the tireless effort, the energy and the courage. The advocacy walks of thousands of miles across Africa, Europe and America to educate and inform the world about our responsibility to nurture nature has been a true demonstration of the campaign’s resilience,” First Lady Margaret Kenyatta said.
She expressed optimism that the documentary will help draw the world’s attention to the campaign to save elephants and other iconic species for future generations as well as cultivate hope that the ongoing conservation efforts are not in vain.
The First Lady, who is also the Patron of the ‘Hand off our Elephants’ Campaign that was launched in July 2013, noted that Kenya’s elephant population of approximately 34,000 is the 4th largest in the world after Botswana, South Africa and Zimbabwe and regretted that illegal trade in ivory and rhino horns has resulted in the loss of elephants and rhino species at an alarming rate.
She emphasized the need for increased efforts to protect the declining elephant population in Kenya and across Africa even as she applauded the collaboration of wildlife stakeholders and development partners.
“The elephant is listed globally as critically endangered, and the threat of extinction demands concerted efforts by all of us to ensure that we protect the declining populations of these precious species,” the First Lady said.
“As citizens of this country, we are responsible for our national heritage, our environment and our wildlife. It is our obligation to conserve nature for our future, and for our children’s future,” she added.
First Lady Margaret Kenyatta underscored the critical role played by wildlife in the Kenyan economy especially the contribution of tourism sector as one of the country’s key foreign exchange earner and a source of employment.
“Our wildlife is the cornerstone of the nature-based tourism industry in Kenya. It operates as part of our economy and generates over 10 percent of Kenya’s GDP. The sector also directly employs over 11 percent of the total formal workforce,” she said.
Mr Nyamu echoed the First Lady’s sentiments, saying local communities should not be ignored in wildlife conservation.
“We cannot continue ignoring the native communities in the process of developing a sustainable and practical conservation model. The promotion of indigenous community roles in conservation is a key game changer in sustainable conservation models,” he said.
Other speakers included the Chairman of the National Museums of Kenya David Musila and Ecotourism Kenya Chief Executive Officer Grace Nderitu.
President Kenyatta: Utilize your positions for the prosperity of their people
President Uhuru Kenyatta has said the current crop of leaders have the the founding fathers of African states.
The President who is on a four-day State visit of Mauritius said political leaders have the fundamental obligation to ensure that the heritage bequeathed upon them by the freedom fighters is nurtured for the benefit of all citizens.
“We have found you very welcoming, we have managed to visit a number of places and have seen our shared history of struggle which is very similar to our own,” President Kenyatta said.
“It is our own generation whose responsibility it is, to protect those hard won freedoms to ensure those liberties are used for the betterment of our people and our continent,” he continued.
President Kenyatta was speaking today during a state luncheon hosted in his honour by the Acting President of Mauritius Paramasivum Pillay Vyapoory at the State House, Le Reduit.
He challenged African leaders to grow stable and prosperous economies capable of helping their citizens to create wealth and fight poverty.
President Kenyatta expressed hope that Kenya and Mauritius will continue with the exchange visits at the highest levels of leadership with the aim of improving the welfare of the citizens of the two nations.
“I believe there are great opportunities that exist to deepen our cooperation in a number of fields and I believe as we move forward we will continue to strongly work together to ensure that we achieve and reach those objectives,” he said.
Terming his visit to Mauritius as historic, President Kenyatta said there is need for the two countries to foster closer working relations for the sake of development and prosperity.
President Paramasivum Vyapoory said African liberation heroes paid the ultimate price adding that it is now the duty of the current crop of leaders to make their contribution by bettering the welfare of their people.
At the ceremony also attended by Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth, the Acting President commended President Kenyatta for his commitment to the economic empowerment of Africans, describing him as ‘a symbol of freedom’.
Earlier, President Kenyatta toured Natec Medical Limited, a company that manufactures medical devices, in Port Louis.
The facility uses latest technology to manufacture, package and export cutting edge devices to over 35 countries across the globe.
The devices manufactured by the company include angioplasty balloon catheters intended for interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, gastroenterology and urology.
President Kenyatta extended his request to the company to consider setting up a similar facility in Kenya to help the government achieve its objective of offering affordable quality healthcare.
How Sudan’s protesters upped the ante, and forced al-Bashir from power
Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir has resigned after three decades in power.
AHMED YOSRI/EPA
Andrew Edward Tchie, University of Essex
Following months of protests, and a prolonged sit-in outside the military headquarters in Khartoum, Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir was placed under house arrest on April 11 as the country’s military prepared for a transitional government.
Many have described the Sudanese uprising as a “bread protest” against a rise in inflation. In fact the Sudanese people took to the streets for much more than a struggling economy, or the price of bread. They have been calling for freedom, peace, justice and the downfall of the regime.
And they have finally won.
The generation leading the uprising was born and raised during al-Bashir’s 30-year rule. The protesters are mostly young professionals who have been directly affected by the regime’s Islamisation and Arabisation policies.
These policies have been particularly harsh against women’s freedoms and rights, which explains why young Sudanese women are at the heart of the uprising. The policies have also resulted in multiple years of conflict and insecurity in Darfur, South Kordofan, and the Blue Nile.
Sudan’s governing system has already deteriorated because of years of state autocracy, nepotism, corruption and violent conflict.
Al-Bashir’s removal may bring down the state if a strong successor isn’t positioned to replace him. But in my view, given how Sudan has historically been run, the democratic preferences of many young protesters is unlikely to come to fruition. Their expectations for a functioning democracy, with free and fair elections, and constitutional freedoms will not be met unless the next leader of Sudan is a reformist.
Al-Bashir’s first responses
The regime responded to the protests in three ways.
First, al-Bashir tried to quickly reconsolidate his power by proposing constitutional changes that would have allowed him to stand for reelection in 2020. That was quickly taken off the table.
He then declared a year-long nationwide state of emergency. The emergency state prohibited “unauthorised” gatherings and movements. Violence followed as the state deployed heavy-handed tactics to break up the protests.
Al-Bashir also dissolved federal and state governments, replacing almost all of Sudan’s 18 state governors with army officers. And he ordered parliament to delay deliberations over proposed constitutional amendments that would allow him to run for an extra-constitutional term in next year’s elections.
When the protests didn’t subside he called for broad-based dialogue.
In a bid to stay in power, al-Bashir also reached out to those who had backed him financially on previous occasions. These included the Persian Gulf states as well as Egypt and Russia. However, these allies have done little more than offer him vague statements of support.
Read more: How foreign backing is keeping Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir in power
He also began to lose the support of Western backers. Once warm to al-Bashir, they recently began to issue stern reprimands.
The protests
By the time al-Bashir stepped down protests had taken hold in more than 35 cities across the country. People took to the streets in more and more places following the first demonstration in the northern Nile-side town of Atbara.
The current uprising was triggered by a government decision to lift subsidies on essential commodities and to drastically increase bread prices. In a matter of weeks, the protest in Atbara would reach the capital Khartoum 349 kilometres away.
As protests erupted across the country agents of the powerful National Intelligence and Security Service and riot police began to crack down on demonstrators. Throughout, however, the army refrained from intervening. Rumours began to surface that al-Bashir was ready to hand over power to the armed force. But this was swiftly rejected by the Minister of Information and government spokesman of the government, Hassan Ismail.
In the final days before al-Bashir stepped down thousands of demonstrators reached the ministry compound in Khartoum. This also houses al-Bashir’s residence, the secret service headquarters and the defence ministry.
Protesters then upped the stakes by trying to gain support from the army. What began to emerge was that senior officers were possibly weakening, or that they were hoping to use the protests to pressure factions within the ruling elite.
Protesters used a number of tactics to keep the momentum going. These included using social media such as Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. All evolved during the uprising despite the government’s attempts to block the user, and Virtual Private Networks were used to access the women’s only Facebook group called “Minbar Chat”.
Videos recorded by the protesters became important in documenting the crimes perpetrated by the security forces during the peaceful protests. They also became the main means of informing the Sudanese people and the international community about the brutality of al-Bashir’s regime.
Now that al-Bashir has resigned he will probably be required to leave the country by agreeing to safe passage to a friendly state, possibly somewhere like Egypt, or Qatar. The only way he can remain in Sudan is if he had prior agreement with the military to ensure his safety. It’s possible that the new generals he appointed after the declaration of a state of emergency might side with him.
Their support could have been one of the reasons why he felt that he could step down. Looking ahead, with or without Bashir, there’s also a possibility that the protests could continue if the people of Sudan feel that the swamp has not been drained of all the regime’s oppressive leaders.
Andrew Edward Tchie, Editor, Armed Conflict Database; Research Fellow, Conflict, Security and Development at International Institute for Strategic Studies, University of Essex
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Woman charged for stealing property worth Sh. 330,000
BY PRUDENCE WANZA – A woman has been arraigned in court for stealing property worth Sh. 330,000 from one Ayub Munene.
She also faces a second charge of being found in possession of two national ID cards no. 34242400 and 28527835 which she allegedly stole.
The accused, Joyce Njoki Kang’ethe, denied the charges before Chief Magistrate, Martha Mutuku at the Milimani Law Courts.
However, it is suspected that she used the stolen IDs to transfer the money from the bank and mpesa accounts of the complainant.She faces similar charges at the Kiambu Courts but despite that she was granted bail.
She will be released upon payment of a bond of Sh. 200,000 and an alternative cash bail of Sh. 100,000.
The case has been set for a hearing on 10th May, 2019 and a mention on 25th April, 2019.
How far should Australia go for Julian Assange?
Is Julian Assange getting all he’s owed from the Australian government?
EPA/Facundo Arrizabalaga
Natalie Klein, Macquarie University
The drama surrounding Julian Assange continues to grow following Ecuador’s decision to grant him asylum.
He faces the threat of being seized in a raid by British authorities on the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, or the moment he steps out the Embassy door. The United Kingdom is compelled to act to fulfil its obligations to Sweden and extradite Assange to face possible charges of sexual assault. Assange doesn’t want to go to Sweden as he fears that he will be taken from there to the United States because of his involvement in the release of classified documents on Wikileaks. Ecuador, Britain, Sweden, the United States – all have an interest, and all have legal rights and obligations, in the treatment of Assange. And this all arises irrespective of the fact that he is an Australian national.
The international jostling around Assange may well raise questions as to the relevance of nationality in a globalised world. Instead, the fact that different countries have legal rights and obligations in relation to Assange has underlined the importance of territorial boundaries and state sovereignty.
Ecuador is insisting on the inviolability of its embassy, as its sovereign representation within the United Kingdom. Sweden is concerned with the prosecution of offences allegedly committed on its soil. The United Kingdom is seeking to adhere to its international obligations when an alleged offender is found within its territory. The United States is concerned about the potential violation of its laws with the release of government documents onto Wikileaks.
Nationality remains important in some respects, but there is a limit to what actions Australia can take because Australian nationality doesn’t mean we can disregard the laws of another country when travelling overseas. Indeed, the Attorney General Nicola Roxon has stated, “What I like to remind the community though is being an Australian citizen doesn’t give your country legal rights to interfere in other processes.” Her comment highlights a fundamental mismatch between community expectations and the legal reality when it comes to the treatment of nationals abroad.
Australia has a right to take up the claim of its nationals when they are injured or mistreated abroad, but it does not have an obligation to do so.
In Hicks v Ruddock, Justice Tamberlin of the Federal Court indicated that Australia may have a duty to consider taking up the claim of one of its nationals. But having to consider whether to do something is still quite different to being required to do something.
It could even be argued under international law that Australia is not yet entitled to take up any claim on behalf of Julian Assange. This right arises when obligations owed to a national abroad have been breached, and it is not clear what rights Assange has had violated at this point in time.
Even if there had been a violation of rights, then Australia’s right to take up that claim may only be exercised when all national remedies have been exhausted. This requirement anticipates that an individual would pursue his or her rights through a country’s judicial system, providing that country with the opportunity to redress any wrong suffered by the foreign national. Assange did not wait for the final verdict before the British courts, or to pursue his rights further before the European Court of Human Rights.
Both Australia and Assange have some legal rights at present, which are based on consular assistance. Consular rights allow for communications between a national and his or her government. The government can take steps to assist a national detained overseas by, for example, providing advice on gaining legal assistance and serving as a conduit of information to the individual’s family. The Foreign Minister, Senator Bob Carr, has indicated that Assange is receiving the same assistance that any other Australian would receive.
What Australia could do politically is quite a different question from what Australia must do legally to assist a national abroad. These points seem to be conflated when criticisms are directed at the government for perceived inaction. Jennifer Robinson, one of Assange’s legal advisors, clearly understands the difference, and has argued that Australia could do more diplomatically and should seek assurances from the United States about any actions it might take against Assange.
These diplomatic interventions are ultimately what might count the most for an Australian who is detained abroad. They appear to have made a difference for people like the “Bali Boy” and Harry Nicolaides who was convicted of insulting the Thai monarchy and, eventually, David Hicks.
But Assange is not the only national in trouble abroad. Members of the Bali Nine, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are now dependent on clemency appeals to the Indonesian President to avoid death sentences for drug trafficking; Jock Palfreeman continues to languish in a Bulgarian prison on a conviction of murder with hooliganism despite glaring issues of due process in his trial.
Australians are constantly finding themselves in trouble overseas and turning to their government for assistance. But there is a limit to what Australia is legally required to do.
Ultimately, the diplomatic negotiations that assist Australian nationals happen outside of the media glare, and it cannot always be clear what steps the government takes or what it is prepared to do – until the details are released on Wikileaks.
Natalie Klein, Professor & Dean of Macquarie Law School , Macquarie University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
First Lady Margaret Kenyatta : Kenya has made huge strides in the provision of affordable healthcare
First Lady Margaret Kenyatta today commended the progress being made by the government and its partners to ensure that Kenyans have access to affordable Healthcare services.
She said the reduction and in some cases total removal of fees in public health facilities, the ongoing infrastructural expansion, the government-sponsored National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF), the free maternity cover and other interventions are all aimed at protecting Kenyans especially women, children and vulnerable communities.
The First Lady spoke at a Nairobi hotel when she presided over the launch of the Lancet Global Health Commission on High Quality Health Systems Report in the Sustainable Development Goals Era. First Lady Margaret Kenyatta is a member of the commission.
She expressed concern over the disparities in the quality of healthcare services offered between public and private facilities and across regions saying the huge differences present a major challenge facing the country’s healthcare system.
The First Lady said there is need to focus attention on quality healthcare that all Kenyans can trust irrespective of the provider and their regions.
“We must begin to pay closer attention to quality care, and build resilient health systems that Kenyan’s can trust and have confidence, irrespective of the facility they visit,” she said.
She said poor health systems pose an impediment to the growing demands and expectations by Kenyans on their health needs.
According to the Lancet report, 52,000 deaths occurred in Kenya in 2016 due to poor quality health systems. Out of these deaths, 32,000 were attributed to lack of access to healthcare while the rest were occasioned by poor quality care.
The First Lady said recommendations by the the Lancet report are bound to accelerate the gains made by Kenya in achieving health related SDG 2030 targets because they emphasize on quality health services as a “big win” strategy.
“We as a country have taken some steps towards enshrining the principle of patient-centred service in our healthcare systems through the Kenya Quality Models for Health guidelines developed in 2012, alongside the Joint Health Inspection Report both developed by the Ministry of Health,” the First Lady said.
Besides enhanced governance and re-organization of health services, the Lancet report calls for a people-centred modernized curricula for pre-service and in-service training of healthcare providers, system-wide actions and a system that listens and cares more.
The report also calls for a system that is more concerned with excellence and is responsive to the needs of the people it serves.
First Lady Margaret Kenyatta said quality healthcare is a right for every citizen and should not be perceived as a preserve of the rich and privileged Kenyans.
She said the recommendations by the Lancet report however require strategic investment from all health partners.
The First lady said the Lancet proposals resonate well with initiatives under her Beyond Zero Strategic Framework which lay emphasis on wellness and a people-centred approach in healthcare provision.
She congratulated the Lancet global Health Commission team of experts including those from the Harvard Medical School, the World Health Organization, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) and the Ministry of Health represented at the two-day conference by Cabinet Secretary Sicily Kariuki.
Others who spoke at the high level event included the chair of the Lancet Global Health Commission of High Quality Health System Prof. Margaret Kruk, WHO representative in Kenya Dr Rudi Eggers, the Chief Executive Officer of the Council of Governors Mrs Jacqueline Mogeni and the Ag. Director General of Health Dr John Wekesa.
You are the architect of a new Kenya, Mauritius Prime Minister tells President Kenyatta
President Uhuru Kenyatta has been lauded for his transformative
leadership which has continued to change Kenya for the prosperity of her
people.
Speaking last night when he hosted a State Banquet in honour of
President Kenyatta who is in Mauritius on a four-day state visit, Prime
Minister Pravind Jugnauth termed the Kenyan leader as the ‘architect of a
new Kenya’.
The Mauritius Prime Minister said President Kenyatta’s Big 4 development
agenda is in many ways similar to the development goals being pursued
by his government in order to achieve economic growth, shared prosperity
and improved quality of life for Mauritians.
“I’m pleased to note the convergence of our vision and the Big 4 agenda
in particular as it focuses on innovation, accelerating growth of the
service sector, creating affordable housing and addressing
infrastructural deficits” said PM Jugnauth.
He said President Kenyatta’s zeal to transform the lives of Kenyans and
Africans as a whole is an inheritance from his father, Mzee Jomo
Kenyatta who cherished and was at the forefront in the struggle for the
freedom and liberty of Africans.
“Excellency, I would like from the very onset to pay homage to the
founder of the Kenyan nation, Jomo Kenyatta, your father. He was the
living embodiment of African nationalism and his love for freedom
inspired many to take up arms against colonialism,” the Prime Minister
said.
Prime Minister Jugnauth thanked President Kenyatta for coming out
strongly to support Mauritius in its efforts to decolonize the Changos
Archipelango from the British.
“I wish to recall here Kenya’s prompt acceptance to participate in the
public hearings before the International Court of Justice in September
2018 on the request for an advisory opening regarding the legal
consequences of the separation of Changos Archipelango from Mauritius in
1965,” he said.
He pointed out that the Mauritius-Kenya relationship is sustained by a
common interest of entrenching the rule of law and a deep desire to
transform the two countries into engines of growth in Africa.
“The Mauritius-Kenya partnership is premised on the common will of the
two countries to evolve rule based systems at national and international
levels, to reinforce the rule of law, fight corruption and make this
part of Africa an engine of growth for the continent,” the Mauritius
leader said.
The Prime Minister pledged his government’s support for Kenya in its bid
for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council for the
term 2021 to 2022 at the elections slated for this year.
He said the six trade agreements and MOU’s signed between the two
countries would facilitate economic cooperation, investments and trade,
and remove non-tariff barriers to trade.
“A number of Mauritius firms are already present in Nairobi and there is
a keen interest from manufacturers to establish joint partnerships or
pursue single investments in Kenya,” he said.
President Kenyatta welcomed Mauritian investors to take advantage of the
many opportunities in Kenya saying the newly signed bilateral
frameworks create an even better platform for trade and investment.
“I wish to take this opportunity to welcome Mauritian investors to
explore the numerous trade and investment opportunities in Kenya. I
assure you of Kenya’s full support, and give my guarantee that you will
find a conducive investment environment in Kenya,” President Kenyatta
said.
The Kenyan leader encouraged the Mauritius business community to take
advantage of his 2017 directive, which enables all Africans to receive
visas upon arrival in Kenya. Mauritius citizens don’t need visa to visit
Kenya.
President Kenyatta pointed out that his visit to Mauritius is an
excellent opportunity to expand the scope of the two countries bilateral
cooperation with a view of deepening the people-to-people interactions.
Housing with buyer protection and no serious faults – is that too much to ask of builders and regulators?
Regulation of the Australian building industry is broken, according to the Shergold-Weir report to the Building Ministers’ Forum (BMF).
[…] we have concluded that [the] nature and extent [of problems] are significant and concerning. The problems have led to diminishing public confidence that the building and construction industry can deliver compliant, safe buildings which will perform to the expected standards over the long term.
You can say that again.
Just one of the issues identified in the report, combustible cladding, could affect over 1,000 buildings across Australia. An unknown proportion of these are tall (four storey and above) residential strata buildings. Fears of rectification costs are starting to have severe impacts on the apartment market.
The cost of replacing combustible panels at the Lacrosse Apartments in Melbourne, which caught fire in 2014, will be at least A$5.7 million, plus A$6 million or so in consequential damages. The total cost of replacing combustible panels across Australia is unknown at this point, but is likely to run to billions of dollars.
Read more: Lacrosse fire ruling sends shudders through building industry consultants and governments
The Shergold-Weir report identifies a catalogue of other problems, including water leaks, structurally unsound roof construction and poorly constructed fire-resisting elements. Faults appear to be widespread.
A 2012 study by UNSW City Futures surveyed 1,020 strata owners across New South Wales and found 72% of respondents (85% in buildings built since 2000) knew of at least one significant defect in their complex. Fixing these problems will cost billions more.
Regulatory failures are not only “diminishing public confidence”, they have a direct impact on the hip pockets of many Australians who own a residential apartment. In short, building defects resulting from lax regulation are a multi-billion dollar disaster.
How could authorities let this happen?
A web of regulations and standards enacted by governments cover construction in Australia, but this regulation is centred on the National Construction Code (NCC). The Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB), a body controlled by the Building Ministers’ Forum, manages the NCC. The ABCB board comprises appointed representatives from the Commonwealth plus all the states and territories and a few industry groups.
It is such a complicated system that it is hard to identify any government, organisation or person that is directly responsible for its performance.
Read more: Australia has a new National Construction Code, but it’s still not good enough
The NCC is supposed to create “benefits to society that outweigh costs” but it appears the ABCB may have been more focused on the need to “consider the competitive effects of regulation” and “not be unnecessarily restrictive” (Introduction to NCC Volume 1).
The BMF’s February 8 communique, issued after the fire in the Neo200 building in Melbourne, is straight out of the Yes Minister playbook:
Ministers agreed in principle to a national ban on the unsafe use of combustible ACPs (aluminium composite panels) in new construction, subject to a cost/benefit analysis being undertaken on the proposed ban, including impacts on the supply chain, potential impacts on the building industry, any unintended consequences, and a proposed timeline for implementation. Ministers will further consider this at their next meeting [in May this year].
This suggests the ministers are more concerned about possible impacts on the panel suppliers and the building industry than the consumer. The earliest a ban can take effect is in May. In the meantime, anecdotal evidence suggests buildings are still being clad in combustible ACP.
Thanks to the journalist Michael Bleby, we know governments and the ABCB failed to act in 2010 when presented with evidence that combustible ACP was not only a danger, but was also being widely used on tall residential buildings.
Bleby quoted ABCB general manager Neil Savery as saying neither his organisation, nor any of the states, was aware that builders were using the product incorrectly.
We also know that panel manufacturers, including the Australian supplier of Alucobond, actively lobbied building ministers. At the July 2011 BMF meeting, the ACT representative effectively vetoed an ABCB proposal to issue an advisory note on the use of combustible ACP.
We are entitled to ask why the ABCB and its staff, or the downstream regulators and their staff, did not know about serious fire problems with ACP that the technical press identified as long ago as 2000. The answer will be of particular interest to residents of tall apartment buildings clad in these panels, all of whom are now living with an active threat to their safety.
Read more: Cladding fire risks have been known for years. Lives depend on acting now, with no more delays
Consumers are owed better protection
While both Labor and Coalition governments have worked to improve consumer protection for people buying consumer goods, their record on housing, particularly apartments, is awful. While a consumer can be reasonably sure of getting restitution if they buy a faulty fridge, no such certainty exists if they buy a faulty house or apartment.
At the moment, the NCC does not have any focus on providing protection for buyers of houses or apartments. There are few requirements for the durability of components and astonishingly weak requirements for waterproofing. Under the NCC and its attached Australian Standards, particularly AS 4654.1 and 2-2012, a waterproof membrane could last, in practice, five minutes or 50 years.
Given the magnitude of the economic loss, it would be appropriate for the BMF and ABCB board to publicly admit they have failed. Since their appointments in November 2017 and January 2013 respectively, neither ABCB chair John Fahey nor Savery as general manager has remedied the situation. The Shergold-Weir report has not been implemented and the combustible cladding issues remain unresolved. It would be reasonable for Fahey to step down and for Savery to consider his future.
The next federal government should consider what further action should be taken, particularly in relation to individuals on the BMF and within the ABCB involved in the 2010-2011 decision not to issue the proposed advisory note on the use of ACP. Since the ABCB does not publish minutes and none of its deliberations are in the public domain no one knows what actually happened or who did what.
The new board should consider moving residential apartment buildings (Class 2 buildings in the NCC classification) from Volume 1 of the NCC to Volume 2, which controls detached and semi-detached housing. Volume 2 should then have as its overriding objective the protection of consumers.
The downstream regulators should focus on requiring builders to deliver residential buildings with no serious faults and providing simple mechanisms for redress if they don’t.
Surely this is not too much to ask.
This article has been updated to correct a reference to NCC volumes 1 and 2 – the latter controls detached and semi-detached housing.
Geoff Hanmer, Adjunct Lecturer in Architecture, UNSW
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Police Officer charged of loosing a firearm
BY PRUDENCE WANZA – A police officer has been charged of loosing a firearm entrusted to him.
The particulars of his charge are that on diverse dates between 7th April, 2019 at an unknown place in Nairobi CBD, willfully lost a firearm make Jericho body no. 44338714.
He is also charged with a second count of willfully loosing ammunition of 15 rounds of 9mm calibre entrusted to him.
The accused Josphat Kahura Ndungu pleaded not guilty to the charges before Chief Magistrate, Martha Mutuku at the Milimani Law courts.
He will be released on a bond of Sh. 500K and an alternative Cash bail of Sh. 200,000.
The case will be heard on 14th May, 2019 and the mention on 24th April, 2019.