Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 357594,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/357594/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 207,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. Sakaja",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13131,
        "legal_name": "Johnson Arthur Sakaja",
        "slug": "johnson-arthur-sakaja"
    },
    "content": "Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, I think what the hon. Member is alluding to is the issue of Article 206 where once the Division of Revenue Bill is tabled in Parliament--- When the CRA also needs to give their considerations. However, what I was pointing out is the process that is in the Constitution. I think Articles 216, 217, and 218 give the process that must be followed by the CRA and the Treasury such that by the time the Division of Revenue Bill gets to the House, Treasury has already received recommendations by CRA. In the Schedule of this Bill, we are told why they may have deviated. They give reasons. That is as per Article 218(2)(c) which states that there should be a summary of any significant deviation from CRA recommendations with explanation for such deviations. That is what I was explaining. I think that is what I was explaining. The amounts given by the CRA were estimates. The Treasury allocates the percentage that goes to the counties based on the last audited revenue. At the time the CRA was making recommendations they were using audited revenue for a different year. So, this is the most recent audited revenue, and really 32 per cent is much higher than the 15 per cent we were all expecting. When we started proceedings in this House we said that we would not oppose for the sake of opposing and support for the sake of supporting. However, in the first year of devolution going beyond 15 per cent is acceptable, I think the Government must really be applauded. Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, devolution is anchored on the principle of subsidiarity. The subsidiarity principle is very simple. It states that if a matter can be handled by a lower level of Government it then should be handled by the lowest level possible. If there is something that the national Government wants to handle but it can be handled by the county Government, the county government should take charge of it. The Fourth Schedule of our Constitution is clear on this. We must, however, insist that the principle of subsidiarity be followed even at the county. We know that the basic unit of devolution is the ward. We must ensure that even at the county level there is public participation for Governors to put in their budgets and conduct public hearings; that is really the essence of devolution. Unless we insist on that we will not get the full benefits of devolution. This is something that the hopes of millions of Kenya are pegged on. With those remarks, I beg to support the Bill."
}