Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 648514,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/648514/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 240,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "With regard to Development Estimates, the Committee noted that the allocation have been revised downwards especially on items such as construction of buildings, refurbishment, works on buildings and the purchase of specialised equipment. Those reductions may lead to pending bills if commitments had already been done. For example, the allocation for the construction of Mitihani House by the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC) has been reduced and that project has been ongoing for the last 29 years. The Committee also noted the reallocation of funds across all the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) from specific votes such as construction of buildings to general items such as capital transfers to Government agencies, which will make it difficult to monitor the use of those allocations. The Committee, therefore, recommends that going forward, it is important for the various entities receiving resources in form of grants to other levels of Government to submit their detailed budgets for scrutiny to ensure that there is value for money. As earlier mentioned, the preparation and approval for the Supplementary Budget is provided for in Article 223 of the Constitution, Sections 43(2) and 44 of the PFM Act, 2012 and Section 40 of the PFM Regulations. The PFM Act, 2012 Section 43(2) states that the reallocation per programme should not exceed 10 per cent of the total approved budget of a programme. However, most of the supplementary allocations for the programmes have changes of more than 10 per cent which is an indication of poor planning and lack of programmatic approach to budgeting. The Committee notes that some of the programmes with changes in expenditure do not have reciprocating adjustments in key performance targets and indicators. There are also cases of transfer of programme from one Ministry to another in the course of the financial year as in the case of the State Department for Agriculture to Water and Irrigation and State Department for Education to Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology. In this year, movement of programmes distorts budget execution. The Committee observes that the National Treasury did not provide adequate information on budget performance in terms of actual expenditure and outstanding liabilities and commitments, especially of MDAs where there are reductions or increases. This highly limits the oversight role of Parliament especially in assessing the rationale behind budget cuts or increments. The Constitution provides that the National Treasury should seek approval from Parliament, within two months after the first withdrawal of money from the Consolidated Fund, for purposes of supplementary appropriation. The Committee observes that there is no evidence of whether withdrawals were reported within two months as stipulated by the Constitution and how much of the allocations have already been spent. The Committee also notes that there was no provision by the National Treasury on details of how the increments in external financing for the Supplementary Budget will impact on the public debt. The Committee observed that it has been the trend in Kenya to have optimistic economic growth projections, which often result to higher projections of revenue. When the projected revenues are not achieved, the Government is forced to reallocate, cut its budget or source for additional funds through borrowing. Had the growth rate projections been realistic in the beginning of the financial year, the revenue projections would have been firmed up and, perhaps, there would be no need to amend the expenditure estimates by large margins leading to poor budget implementation."
}