Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 474057,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/474057/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 272,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "seen as an organ which tries to give guidance in accordance with its mandate. I know that counties are not currently getting adequate funds. By setting certain ceilings, our purpose is not to cripple the counties. The national Government and the county governments should work towards the goal of ensuring that there is a balance between what is spent on recurrent expenditure and development. The level of 60 per cent as earlier proposed has been seen to be rather high. I support the idea of consultation so that we look at what is feasible. If the Controller of Budget has already seen that our current level is at 40 per cent, then that is a good beginning. We should benchmark there so that we do not have a worse performance. If we do not control that perhaps next year, the money for development may move to 30 per cent and even the following year to 20 per cent. We are trying to put a ceiling of how low we can come in terms of development. When we talk about spending more in terms of development, we are not underestimating the role of recurrent expenditure in the overall development of a county. We know that it costs more to run an institution more than setting up the initial construction. If we are talking about a health centre which was constructed using money from the CDF, this is a one off thing that may cost a lot initially. However, manning it and equipping it in all the years that may come will certainly cost more. So, we should not worry very much if there is slightly more being spent on recurrent than on development. It would serve no purpose to construct a county hospital and yet we do not have drugs and doctors. Most of the functions that are going on in the counties are under recurrent expenditure. If you construct a tarmac road or even a murram road, whatever follows in the year after until reconstruction falls under recurrent expenditure. Recurrent expenditure is not only about salaries or personal emoluments. This is anything that goes into running an institution that the Government has put in place. This brings me to the point of costing functions which is long overdue. Functions that have been devolved should be costed. Someone should answer why that costing has not been done. If it is the Ministry of Health or a health function that has been devolved to Trans Nzoia County, we should know how much it costs to run that function. As we set up ceilings, we should know what it means to construct a new hospital and to run it. This is just the beginning. We are trying to set ceilings or parameters on how to spend on recurrent and how much to be spend on development. However, even within the recurrent expenditure, there will be need to give guidance. How do we spend on personal emoluments to service other issues like procurement, stationery, running of motor vehicles and so forth? Currently, the level we are running our departments; both the national and at the county level, the item on personal emoluments is taking a lot of resources. We hear of rationalization which does not end. We should bite the bullet and decide how many people we should retain in every unit so as to run effectively. We do not want to restructure and to retrench people for the purpose of retrenching. That way, 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."
}