Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 65079,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/65079/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 367,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Sambu",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 137,
        "legal_name": "Alfred B. Wekesa Sambu",
        "slug": "alfred-sambu"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak on the budgetary issues in this Constitution. The Constitution has provided for prudence in the use of the resources of this nation and, in particular, Article 201 has dwelt on principles of public finance. It provides that public money shall be used in a prudent and responsible way. Financial management shall be responsible and fiscal reporting shall be clear. It is in this light that I propose to make several changes to some of the clauses that pertain to Clause 4 on the financial provisions of this particular Bill. First of all, the appropriation is very clear. No funds should be appropriated from the Consolidated Fund without appropriation of the House. Kenyans should lose sight or easily forget the problems of yester years when funds were fanned out of the Consolidated Fund without any authority. When you look at this particular Bill and the Constitution, there exists a contradiction between the Bill and the Constitution. The Bill on one hand under Section 26(1) provides that the expenses of the Commission and the Judiciary incurred in the execution of their function under the Constitution and this Act, shall be charged and issued out of the Consolidated Fund “without” further appropriation than this Act. It also provides that the Commission shall be a separate Vote. But when you look at the Constitution, Section 221(6) provides that when the estimate of the National Government expenditure and estimates of expenditure of the Judiciary and Parliament have been approved by the National Assembly, they shall be included in an Appropriation Bill which shall be introduced in the National Assembly to authorize the withdrawal from the Consolidated Fund of the monies needed for the expenditure. So, one can see a contradiction between the Constitution and this particular Bill. I would like to say that I will make an amendment to that effect. The Commission and the Judiciary are one entity. Indeed, the Chief Registrar, as provided by the Constitution, is the Secretary of the Commission. Therefore, it follows that they are one and not separate votes. We must start looking at resources as an expensive item. We need to appreciate that, by giving a separate vote we will be automatically giving authority to increase expenditure. Article 114 of the Constitution provides that any Bill that relates to funding should get a nod from the Treasury and the relevant Committee of Parliament before it proceeds. I will, therefore, propose amendments to this clause to provide that the vote will only be one; that of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the Constitution, Article 173 (3) provides that each year, the Registrar will prepare estimates of expenditure for the following year and submit them to the National Assembly for approval. It is further amplified in Article 221(3) where it indicates that the relevant Committee of Parliament that consolidates the final Budget--- Thus in this Bill, Clause 29(2) and (3) are not in line with the Constitution. I will, thus, propose amendments to them to indicate that once the JSC is happy with the estimates, they should submit such estimates to the National Assembly and, in any case, two months before the end of the financial year. Lastly, it is important to note that funds from the Fund of the Judiciary should not be applied in any expenditure unless authority has been sought from Parliament. It is, therefore, important that a new clause be added to reflect that reality. With those few remarks, I beg to support."
}