Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1427266,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1427266/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 344,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Mumma",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "need to revisit those issues. So, even as we are thinking of “integrated system”- a good- sounding word--- We need to ask ourselves what it means. I will go back to those principles being put in this Bill that say to what extent we are putting in place a system, whether in the national or county Government. That it will ensure every contribution by a citizen be it in a market, will go where it is supposed to go, and that money will contribute to the service delivery of this nation. So, I want us to be careful not to send the message that accountability is required at the counties and not at the national Government. We need to move in that level. As we do so, I also request Sen. Hamida to relook at a few of those clauses. When you look at Clause 191(f), it is talking about funding relating to transferred functions while Clause 191(f)(1) suggests that where the national Government has transferred a function to a county government pursuant to Article 187 of the Constitution, the Cabinet Secretary shall determine the cost of the transferred function. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, in a similar Clause in 191(g)(4), you say that where the function is being transferred by the county government to the national Government, the cost shall be determined by both the national and county governments. Sen. Hamida, I hope I can persuade you that it takes the two to determine that cost. You cannot make it the business of only the national Government to decide. For example, if the national Government were to momentarily decide that we are transferring our security function at the village to county X and we think it will cost so much, then, it turns out to be only half the cost, you are going to cause an issue. So, that decision of determining cost must be a consultative process that should involve both the national and the county governments. You might want to do this through the relevant CoG committee. So, I urge that you relook at that and see how to move that issue. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, even as we are thinking through this, I believe that if this law were to be passed as is, it would not necessarily bring a new accountability requirement that is not in the Constitution. We need to ask ourselves why we have both the national and county governments defying the Constitution and the law. What other laws can we bring to complement this law and ensure that we achieve what we hope to achieve with this law? I, therefore, urge Sen. Hamida to speak to Sen. Chute who is trying to bring a Bill to strengthen the role of Controller of Budget (CoB), so that beyond the CoB just clearing the appropriation or the requisition by county governments, he has the powers to further find out if the monies are going to where they are supposed to. Today we sat as the Committee on Devolution and Intergovernmental Relations. One of the things we found out is that counties are requisitioning money for pending bills that are expected to go--- For example, they submit papers indicating that money is going to be paid to “X” but in the actual fact they pay “Y”. We were told how some counties have up to 300 commercial bank accounts that are illegal. If we use the generality of principles of transparency and accountability and do not visit bits that facilitated fraud, we will not get far. I urge that Sen. Hamida finds a way in which we can complement this, so that the laws of other oversight bodies like the CoB are also strengthened. If we have a CoB with The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and AudioServices, Senate."
}