Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 513293,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/513293/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 294,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "There is a lot of damage to infrastructure and the environment in that town considering the amount of investments people have to put in to carry out port activities, yet that county does not stand to benefit from a single penny when revenue is allocated. In my view, that is why the definition of resources here needs to be expanded to consider that kind of a natural harbour that provides opportunity for a port, which should also benefit those two counties. The income and proceeds from that port be shared in the same way. Those are just examples. When I saw fisheries, I almost said--- Well, anyway, people export fish. But in some of the pastoralist communities, you might start thinking of other things. The Bill provides for an opportunity to add more because natural resources are not specified in that clause. Mr. Speaker, Sir, on Clause 7 of the Bill on the structure of the Authority that will manage the resources, I am glad that the Bill includes the community. It states that we have three persons nominated by the Council of Governors (COGs) and three persons nominated by the Forum for the County Assembly Speakers representing communities; then, of course we have the representatives from the national Government. The fact that we have included these people is very important because without representation on the ground; without representation of communities, then, in fact, the whole meaning of benefits sharing will be lost. As we get to the Third Reading of the Bill, we might consider the possibility of adjusting numbers so that we have adequate representation by the communities and the counties to determine what actually happens in the Authority so that we do not lose the opportunity at the outset. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the other clause I found to be of significant interest is Clause 26 of the Bill, which talks about the revenue sharing ratio. The proposal that 20 per cent of the revenue collected from these natural resources be set aside and paid into a sovereign wealth fund established by the national Government is a brilliant idea because we have to talk about the future. We have to think about our children and the generations to come. We cannot collect and spend everything today. This is why even in fiscal responsibility when you are determining tax, you have to look at the burden on the future. The fact that the future generations carry the debt burden of today is because the infrastructure we are enjoying today is based on the debt that will be paid by people who will come tomorrow and it is important that we invest for them. The creation of that sovereign wealth fund is a very important provision in the Bill. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the proposal to share the remaining 80 per cent on the ration of 60:40 between the national and county Governments is also significant. That pay off of 40 per cent to a county government where that resource have been discovered could not have been a better gift to the people of that county. Here they are with resources in their area and you might, in fact, displace them in order to exploit these resources, like we have seen in the titanium mines in Kwale. So, the fact that people will be displaced, their livelihoods may be disrupted and the fact that these resources are found in their areas; for them to benefit at least from 40 per cent of the proceeds from these resources is a very good thing. 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."
}