Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1216846,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1216846/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 127,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Ugunja, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Opiyo Wandayi",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "Article 223 is quite explicit. It provides circumstances under which you can spend public money without an Appropriation Act to support it. I do not need to belabour that. However, if you go to Regulation 40(3) of the Public Finance Management (National Government) Regulations of 2015, and further down to Regulation 40(4) of the same Regulations, it is even clearer. The Public Finance Management (National Government) Regulations have even made it clear under what circumstances you can spend money under Article 223 of the Constitution. What it calls for is just discipline, not a further tinkering with the regulations or the Constitution, if you ask me. But then, the Committee is recommending something at Page 18 of the Report, which is queer. You know I take my time to read these things. It is on Page 18 of the Report, on non-financial recommendations and expenditure under Article 223 of the Constitution, recommendations (iii) and (iv). It is perfect when you say that payment of those monies, Ksh6.09 billion and Ksh4 billion respectively, be rejected as per the recommendations of the mother committees. However, you should go further. You should go further and say what you want us to do. I am saying it is queer because in the history of this Parliament under the new Constitution, this House has never taken that route. You will agree with me. It was only once on the matter of the Ruaraka Land. Even with that, we should go further and say what we want to do. That is my beef with this recommendation. For a Principal Secretary or an accounting officer to spend money under Article 223, there are elaborate processes that must take place, and the Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury must provide an approval. He must copy that approval to the Controller of Budget, who has further veto power to reject that approval or to refuse to comply with that approval. We must be very clear about what we want done. Under Article 226 of the Constitution, if you cause loss of public funds, you can be compelled to make good the loss. That is fine. In this case, who are we going to compel to make good any possible loss? Is it the Cabinet, because the Cabinet Memo must first be 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."
}