Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1442861,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1442861/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 57,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cheruiyot",
    "speaker_title": "The Senate Majority Leader",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13165,
        "legal_name": "Aaron Kipkirui Cheruiyot",
        "slug": "aaron-cheruiyot"
    },
    "content": "were just being told that we owe this company this much and the rate at which we borrowed, so on and so forth. That pointed out to a problem. In fact, on the day that I made my contribution and said that I rejected the approval of raising of the debt ceiling to Kshs10 trillion, that is one of the reasons that I raised that afternoon. I said that until Parliament has a counter copy of what the National Treasury is borrowing and we rearrange that whole space of our debt, we are not yet out of the woods. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I do not want to spend a lot of time on the issue of debt. However, we are being told that a public audit of our debt situation is mandatory at this particular point. I know the Executive will do theirs, but even as Parliament, since it is we who failed in that regard, we must carry out our own, so that we countercheck with what the Executive is doing. The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) can lead this exercise. Let us have that conversation even if they need the expertise of other audit firms that can help us. That can include international reputable established institutions who know about multilateral lending and financial markets because there are issues of Eurobond and other institutions that we have borrowed from therein. Mr. Speaker, Sir, let us have that conversation, so that we, first of all, know our debt exposure. Even the debt ceiling change of law that we did earlier makes sense. We argued that we want to change how we calculate our debt status as opposed to having it as a static number; we make it a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) because that is the more globally accepted standard. That is fine and I supported that Motion. We said that we want to bring our debt sustainability to 55 per cent of the GDP in three years' time; it is now at 61 per cent. We have three years, but what is the plan? What did we learn from the past? How comes we did not tie that particular legislation neatly when we were passing it? You know, bringing debt as a percentage to the GDP to 55 per cent is not an event, but a process. You have to grow down your fiscal deficit over the years and yet we did not put it in law. It is not just enough for us to be satisfied and promise that, that is where we will be in three years' time. At the time of exiting this conversation, we must tighten that law, so that even those that do our budget at the National Treasury know that this is the maximum fiscal deficit that we can get for this Financial Year 2024/2025, so that you leave them with no option. However, if we leave the law as it is, I tell you for a fact that we will get to 2027 when we are still at 60 per cent or even more. As we sit and reflect, we must make a decision because debt has featured prominently in this conversation. Mr. Speaker, Sir, as I conclude, the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) have been silent as this whole debate has been raging. Silence is not an option anymore. They have to speak to the country and tell us what we are going to do, so that we reduce our public expenditure on wages and salaries from 46 per cent to the mandatory 35 per cent. 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."
}