Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1106602,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1106602/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 229,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Mutula Kilonzo Jnr",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13156,
        "legal_name": "Mutula Kilonzo Jnr",
        "slug": "mutula-kilonzo-jnr"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir. I rise to give my contribution. Before I say whether I support the recommendations or otherwise, I would like to disclose that the Committee on Finance and Budget that I have been serving since 2013 had the opportunity of dealing with these regulations; the ones that were nullified by the court and the Bill proposed by a private member. I am uncomfortable that we did not consolidate the work of the Finance and Budget Committee and that of the Committee on Delegated Legislation. We had gone into great detail on what the court was talking about in relation to equalisation. I want to bring that point in relation to the County Executive Committee that has been raised by several Members here. The court was of the view that primarily the projects that are identified under Article 204 are devolved functions and, therefore, the theatre of the devolved functions is the counties. It becomes a big contradiction to have a top-level national Government County Executive Committee. This is the problem I have. You have the County Commissioner and the national Government Constituency Development Fund (NG-CDF) represented in the Committee. Then you have national Government officials chairing on matters that ideally should be under the purview of county governments. What we are attempting to achieve in the marginalised areas will be taken away by the County Commissioners because they are operating under instructions at the national level. That itself is a contradiction and what the court was trying to run away from. The regulations that were nullified had the provision that the Principal Secretary from every Ministry that concerns water, electricity, roads et cetera be included. They said it means nothing. What it means is to get the county involved. The reason why we have the county framework as the bottom-top-heavy county was the purposes of the identification of projects. If you mix the County Commissioner, NG-CDF chair, CDF Committee and the County Executive Member, he or she will be outnumbered, outgunned and the process will just lead to an absurdity. To that extent I do not agree. The Committee of Finance and Budget had gone into great detail about why we should not do this this way. Sen. Farhiya can confirm. This is the problem of not collaborating in what we are doing because we would have changed this framework. The framework will contradict the work we have done for so long. The contradiction is that we have a report tabled by the Committee of Finance and Budget and a Bill which is not in tandem with this. What do you do when you have regulations like these ones? Secondly, we had problems with Committee on Finance and Budget on regulations under Public Finance Management (PFM) Act. The regulations are dated 23rd April. Under PFM, the minute regulations are gazetted in the format they are, PFM has a contradiction that is not in any other law. The minute you have a gazette notice published by the Cabinet Secretary, in the format, and you do not pass or approve within a certain period of time, they become law. These regulations are now law without our input. What"
}