Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 396423,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/396423/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 156,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "from the beginning. If it was an oversight, then that is an area where the relevant authority must come up with very clear, easily understandable guidelines for the county governments to follow next time round. The issue of publishing and publicizing the budget as required by law through the Public Finance Management Act (PFM) should be followed. We expect the Controller of Budget to assist us by informing the county governments to publicize these budgets before they take it to her because they could sneak in something which is not known by the public on the ground. There is another issue which has come out in this Report which should be publicized for the county governments to know. This is the issue of the Vote on Account and the Appropriations Bill. The Report indicates that the county assembly actually had a Vote on Account approved before the Appropriations Bill and that is wrong. So, what is the way forward? Can they go ahead or repeat the process again? This is as indicated on page 11 (6) which states: “However, the approval of the Vote Account was not procedural since it was approved before the Appropriations Bill”. I guess this is something that could be happening across the other counties. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, the Senate should come up with ways of being proactive and engaging the county governments at an earlier stage but not to wait until one of them raises this issue. A lot of these mistakes could have been committed and by passed us. So, if they continue doing this quietly, then we will end up with a situation where we are not performing our oversight responsibility effectively. We should come up with some pro-active ways of engaging the county governments right from the budgeting stage so that we can correct these kinds of mistakes or develop a better working relationship between the two arms of Government at the county level. This Report is not clear. Other than just addressing that case, it does not tell us how we can avoid this situation in future as much as there is also the issue of who should take responsibility; I would rather that this is a learning process rather than a punitive process. We should concentrate on how we can streamline the budgeting process at the county level instead of concentrating on who should be punished because maybe the procedure is not clear. The Governor might have thought that the county assembly was apportioning to itself more than it deserved and so he decided to reduce their allocations and silently submit it. If many have done that, then it should clearly come out that that is not the procedure."
}