Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 609776,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/609776/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 207,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. (Prof.) Lonyangapuo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 447,
        "legal_name": "John Krop Lonyangapuo",
        "slug": "john-lonyangapuo"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I want to join my colleagues in supporting this Motion. On the outset, we need to correct the impression that the Kshs1 billion which was given to the Judiciary was floating; money which was an after-thought. That money had been budgeted for and was not an additional fund that was generated this financial year so that, suddenly, the National Assembly chopped off that money which was erroneously added so that they had to find other use for it. This was money which was budgeted for. Even in the previous year, this money had been allocated to the Judiciary. We have affected very many things in the process of removing the Kshs1 billion from the Judiciary. We have affected development which had been going on in every county because the Judiciary had gone into rehabilitating and building new law courts in most of the counties. If there was work that was ongoing, it stalls. The Judiciary was doing recruitment. Recently they put up an advert to recruit more staff so that their work could go on. The National Assembly Members never looked at these facts. They just thought of an imaginary enemy to them and it came out of what was overruled by the Judiciary when they said that the Constituencies Development Fund (CDF) is unconstitutional. It is written in the Constitution; Chapter 1, Article 2(4) that any law, including customary law that is inconsistent with this Constitution of 2010 is void to the extent of the inconsistency and any Act – and that includes the CDF Act - or omission in contravention of this Constitution is invalid. The courts did not just wake up one morning and attack the CDF because it was only constitutional prior to August 2010 and it is extremely unconstitutional. A proviso was given to remove it with time. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, CDF was mooted to assist development at the grassroots level that time because there was no other channel. But with the arrival of the new Constitution, it came with money called devolved funds going to one particular point called the county where constituencies are subsets of the county. Therefore, every development that was being purported to be done by the CDF like roads was ceded to the counties. Nursery schools are now being done by the counties. It is a devolved function in Schedule Four. Dispensaries and hospitals have also been devolved. That is why the wisdom of this House as indicated in Article 96 states that “We the Senate participates in the law making functions of Parliament by considering, debating and approving Bills concerning counties, including money Bills that touch on counties”. That is why we deal with the Division of Revenue Bill as provided for in Article 103 to 113. The Senate also determines allocation of national revenue among counties which is our prime duty. This is provided for in Article 217 and exercises oversight over national revenue allocated to the county government. Just as the National Assembly has erroneously been entertaining CDF for three years after 2010, it does not mean that the Constitution does not declare it illegal. Therefore, it must be ratified. After 2013 money for oversight was supposed to be set aside in 2013 and 2014, but it was not done. We are"
}