HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 437185,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/437185/?format=api",
"text_counter": 419,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "the national Treasury and IBEC to initiate a public dialogue on the most appropriate and practical approach to use in costing of the devolved functions. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the other issue that we ought to pick and ask as a question is the unexplained hike in the cost of running the new county structures. There is a considerable variance between the CRA’s estimation of remuneration in administrative cost of running the new county structures. At Kshs43.3 billion compared with the national Treasury’s figure of Kshs30.2 billion, that is a whole Kshs18.1 billion difference, which the national Treasury claims is overstated. That should also bring to thoughts and recommendations as a House. One, Parliament should seek an explanation for this hike in the cost of running the county structures. As such, we should also request the national Treasury to furnish us with detailed information on the staffing at the county, including those seconded from the national level. We should also examine whether the new administrative structures are well aligned to the assigned county functions. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the bulging wage bill, at about 13 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2013, against a target of 8 per cent by the national Treasury, is a cause of concern. Thus, as Parliament, we will need to interrogate the case where the national Government is busy hiring staff for already transferred functions. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the interest of time, the observations that I would quickly make around the issue of conditional transfers is that while we may agree with the national Treasury on the stated reasons for maintaining donor-financed projects in the interim at the national level, the issues raised must bring to us budget transparency questions, which we would need to interrogate as a House. There are issues that we, as a House, would need to pick out and remain vigilant about in this financial year, to ensure that this is not repeated in the next year. In summary, there is a need to have a near consensus in the approach of costing county functions with regard to the baseline used in estimation of county sharable revenue. The lack of information on the staffing and remuneration at the county government level makes it difficult to explain the justification of hikes in the cost of running the new structures. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the addition and two new unjustified items, that is, strategic interventions and the costings of the office of the Presidency, as part of the national interesting, comprising criteria for evaluating revenue sharing between the national Government and county governments, has the implication of reducing the amount of funds that remain as sharable revenue to county governments. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in summary, we, as a House, look forward to the day when the national level of Government and the counties will work and have a symbiotic relationship, anchored on the pedestal of the interest of the common person in this country. If we adopt that as our driving force, I am sure that next year, when we sit here to discuss the division of revenue, we will be speaking about a win-win situation for both the counties and the national Government. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with those remarks, I beg to support the Bill."
}