Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1239251,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1239251/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 230,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Ali Roba",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "that led to the lack of implementation of the fund. While the first policy was not fully implemented, CRA went ahead to develop what they called the second policy. It was largely a result of political pressure on CRA. However, it misunderstood the perception of what the equalization fund was meant to cure. The discussion around the time of the second policy was that there should be consideration of pockets of marginalized areas in other counties. Madam Temporary Speaker, the leaders from the ASAL region tried to counter that frantically. However, the top leadership supported that and we did not make any progress, and such, the second policy of marginalization came into being. It considered marginalized areas instead of marginalized counties and that it now extended to considering other pockets of poverty in the country and brought the beneficiary counties from 14 to 34. The focus of the second policy shifted from historical resource denial to considering pockets of poverty within counties, thereby diluting the original intent of the drafters of the Constitution. Madam Temporary Speaker, why am I sharing this as the Chair of this Committee? It is because I have listened to many of my colleagues saying their counties have not been considered and counties are getting less money. From the foregoing, it is worth to note that the Committee on Finance and Budget did not develop the formulae, neither did it develop the beneficiary areas. but that came from the CRA in the second policy. An amendment can only come into being through the development of a third policy. It is extremely unfair and unjustified to deny the original counties the equalization fund who before the advent of devolution were denied resources for over 50 years. The Government of today ought to come up with another 0.5 per cent to take care of the urban-poor within the 47 counties, but leave the equalization fund to benefit the intended beneficiary 14 counties initially identified by the CRA. Madam Temporary Speaker, the equalization fund was operationalized in 2011/2012 and it is worthwhile to share with this House that the implementation has not taken shape as envisaged. Where we stand with the passage of this Bill is that it is only Kshs12 billion that has been appropriated to marginalized counties, out of Kshs54 billion that was supposed to be appropriated to benefit marginalized counties. The Committee has processed the equalization fund in order to make sure that from where it Committee sits; it is the first time this equalization fund has found traction. For the first time, going forward, this fund will flow properly. The Bill that is before the Senate has brought funds from 2021/2022 and 2022/2023, for purposes of appropriation, so that it is released to beneficiary counties. Madam Temporary Speaker, these funds are not going to lapse. Once they are appropriated through this Bill, the funds will be released to the equalization fund and will remain there to be utilized by beneficiary counties. I would like to share that in the wisdom of the Committee, and in order to make sure that the equalization fund works flawlessly well; we have drafted the Equalization"
}