Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1077427,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1077427/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 139,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Bondo, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Gideon Ochanda",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 1264,
        "legal_name": "Gideon Ochanda Ogolla",
        "slug": "gideon-ochanda-ogolla"
    },
    "content": " Maybe and maybe not. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, on this, I have only two or three reasons why I support the Bill. One, it has caused unnecessary noise in the country. It has brought a lot of delays in terms of how counties are supposed to get their funds. That is why I want to support it. Secondly, I am supporting it because it is domiciled in the Senate. It is not necessarily our Bill. If I were to look at this critically, the parameters that have been brought around for purposes of horizontal distribution of county resources need to be looked into very seriously. The Senate was disregarding very many other things that the Constitution has. The Constitution is very clear in terms of how extra resources are given out to many other parts of the country. I know that there is a problem in terms of, for example, how equalisation funds have been utilised or are used. There is a big problem. There are billions of monies that have been placed each year but hardly get transferred to those specific places. So, when we get to parameters where we are using health, we get to parameters where we are using roads or infrastructure, there is a problem. Our Constitution has acknowledged very seriously that we have developed over a period of time in a skewed manner. There are areas that have benefitted historically. There are areas that have not benefitted historically and they have been marginalised over a period of time, sometimes by virtue or dint of their distances from the centre or by nature of their cultures. So, there have been those kinds of problems. The Constitution recognised that there are those historical injustices that have been meted out on a number of communities before. It is because of that, that specific funds were created to sort out those kinds of things. For the Senate to now come up and agree on a parameter that is going to be using services as a measure or as a yardstick for placing resources to various counties, there is a problem. There is a very big problem. You cannot use health. Historically, there are places where they have had health infrastructure properly placed for a very long period of time. There are areas where the health infrastructure has historically not been there. Using county allocations to address that this time round is like trying to double-allocate resources to those kinds of areas. Those areas are properly recognised under the Equalisation Fund arrangement. It is upon this House to make sure that the Equalisation Fund works. When equalisation works, it is supposed to address those historical issues such as water, electricity and the infrastructure that we are now trying to use as parameters for purposes of distributing money across counties. That is where there is a big anomaly. When we start using parameters like health to give money that is a big problem. That is the area where we needed to be very clear. Whom are those services for? That is why I was closer to those who were saying that we should allocate money based on the number of people. It is people who are supposed to be given services. We should count and get to know the number of people and the kind of services required. We would then allocate money based on the needs of the people. That is the exact purpose of the Constitution. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}