Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 1474420,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1474420/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 322,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Oketch Gicheru",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "“The desirability of stable and predictable allocations of revenue” must be considered when equitable share and other financial laws come to do.” Why am I referring to these two fundamental Articles? It is because despite recognizing that we are in hard financial times as the Senator for Kericho has indicated well; despite recognizing that we are facing some serious economic hardships as a country that have necessitated this conversation around fiscal consolidation, the money that was given to counties should remain as it was. I want to put it directly as such. Yes, I support this Bill because there are some subsequent clauses and a number of figures that I will touch on. If you look critically at what the Bill is proposing, the number one issue that we need to address fast, the Senate Majority Leader will perhaps agree with some of my observations, which also reflect the observation of the committee. The Bill under Clause 3 proposes that we delete Section 5 of DORA, which is being amended. Deleting Section 5 basically means that whenever we have shortfalls within this year, the National Treasury can choose to arbitrarily look at whatever figures they revise with regard to county governments without coming to Parliament. If you read Article 94 of the Constitution, all legislative powers lie with Parliament. If we allow Clause 3 to pass on this Bill as is, it has two parts. Number one, it requires that in case of a shortfall in revenue, the national and county governments will bear the shortfall. That is the first faction of the clause. I will dispute this clause as a Member of the Committee and as a Senator for Migori County. If we do not dispute that clause, then it would mean that at any given time when there is a shortfall, we do not have our hand in looking at that shortfall as Parliament, specifically as Senate. Part (b) of that clause also proposes that the county governments bear no more than 15 per cent in case of that shortfall. This is dangerous. With that calculus, you can easily go ahead and deny counties so much money. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only.A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Director, Hansard and Audio Services,Senate."
}