Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 385274,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/385274/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 23,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "actualized. According to Article 202, the revenue raised nationally has to be shared equally. The Commission for Revenue Authority (CRA) has actually given various proportions of the way that allocation can be made. For example, that not less than 15 per cent should go to the counties, and at least 85 per cent, should be shared at the national Government. That “not less than 15 per cent” suggests that it can be more. In the last allocation, for example, that went up to about 33 per cent of revenue. This allocation will be channeled to the county governments. That left about 67.5 per cent to the national Government and about 0.5 per cent to the Equalisation Fund. Now, as much as that revenue is generated and shared at one point from a common pot, there are certain counties, for example, which have been able to exploit their natural resources more than others. Therefore, they would expect higher levels of compensation. There are other counties that have not had a chance to exploit those resources. There is a possibility that they might not even have those resources to begin with. We agreed that we cannot have those counties that are not able to raise such national revenue through their resources being kept aside. This is because that will result in skewed development in the country. The provision that has been given under Article 202 is a constitutional provision over which we cannot really do much to change, but we can cast our lens and move towards the argument of looking at the counties and what they are able to generate. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this morning, we have been talking about counties and the possibilities of them generating more income. For example, it is very clear that the budgetary allocations that have been given at county level are not going to be sufficient for the development agenda of those particular counties. Those counties need to look backward and identify what they have within them and how they can actually use the provisions that are God-given to make a change. The approach of consolidating resources nationally and then sharing is also a practice in Nigeria, South Africa and Indonesia. This is agreeable and, to a large extent, it enhances unity among the various counties. In fact, it helps to hold them together. But there could be simmering issues and also a notion that there is much more that can be done by the counties to actually enhance their resources. The Equalisation Fund under Article 204(1) tries to address the discrepancies that might be there and targets the marginalized specific counties. According to the CRA, these are the 14 counties that have already been identified. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this figure is very low. Even with the equal share that tries to raise the revenue allocation per county, it is no enough. It is still true that in many counties, especially marginalized counties, the level of revenue received is very low. With county allocations from revenue and the allocation from the Equalisation Fund, there is still a big gap that has to be addressed at the county level. Therefore, the next step is really to begin to interrogate how best to actualize and think about how counties can generate their own revenues. Counties need to think of how they can begin to tap into their various natural resources so that they can make a difference. In the process of exploitation these natural resources, a county may end up losing part of its land through forcible acquisition. It might be that there will be environmental degradation. Sometimes natural resources have been a big source of conflict at various The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}