RULING BY THE HON MADAM SPEAKER ON A POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON WEDNESDAY, 4TH OCTOBER, 2023, BY MR M KAFWAYA, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR LUNTE CONSTITUENCY AGAINST HON R SIKUMBA, MP, MINISTER OF TOURISM, ON WHETHER THE HON MINISTER WAS IN ORDER TO STATE THAT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT HAD THE POWER TO DIRECT HOW THE CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUND WAS APPLIED WHEN, IN FACT, NOT 

Hon Members, the House will recall that on Wednesday, 4thOctober, 2023, when the House was considering matters of urgent public importance, and Hon R Sikumba, MP, Minister of Tourism, had just concluded responding to a matter of urgent public importance raised by Mr D Mung’andu, Member of Parliament for Chama South Constituency, Mr M Kafwaya, Member of Parliament for Lunte Constituency, raised a Point of Order against Hon R Sikumba, MP.  In his Point of Order, Mr M Kafwaya, MP, asked whether the Hon Minister was in order to pit the Members of Parliament against their constituents by making them believe that the Members had the power to direct how the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) was applied.  He further stated that the Hon Minister was aware that it was the Ward Development Committees (WDCs) that directed the application of the CDF.

In my immediate response, I reserved my ruling to enable me investigate the matter.  I have since studied the matter and will now render my ruling.

Hon Members, Mr M Kafwaya, MP’s Point of Order was based on a statement by the Hon Minister encouraging Hon Members to sink as many boreholes as they could, away from crocodile-infested rivers, using the CDF, to prevent their communities from going to the rivers and lakes.

In investigating this matter, I had recourse to the relevant verbatim record.  A review of the record revealed that Mr M Kafwaya, MP’s Point of Order was not based on any Standing Order, rule of procedure or privilege of the House that had been breached.

Hon Members, the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2021 are instructive on the procedure to be followed when raising a Point of Order.  In this regard, Standing Order 131(3) provides as follows: 
“(3) In raising a Point of Order, a member shall cite the Standing Order, law on privilege of members, rule of procedure or practice, which has been allegedly breached.”

Hon Members, from the foregoing, it is clear that the Point of Order breached the procedural requirement I have just referred to.  In view of this, the Point of Order is inadmissible.

I THANK YOU.
__________________________