Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 683489,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/683489/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 189,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Dr.) Nyikal",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "Thank you, Hon. Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to contribute. First of all, let me appreciate the work that has been done by the PAC. We are now only two years behind. This is unprecedented. Previously, we were many years behind. What comes out of this Report, which is what I want to comment on, is leaving out the details of the monies that are lost and so on. The most disheartening thing is that there are many systemic problems. If those systemic problems are not addressed in the manner that the Committee has indicated, then all the monies being catalogued will never get there. What is important is for the system to work. Hon. Members have talked about the IFMIS. The purpose of that system is to improve financial management, not only in terms of financial accounting but also in procurement. I do not think it has been extended that far. So far, according to this Report, Kshs5.5 billion has been used. According to this Report, the Accounting Officers have indicated that they have not found the IFMIS useful in terms of improving their financial management. It, therefore, follows that we have to look at this system seriously with a view to overhauling it because the Accounting Officers say that it is not useful. Hopefully, that case was unique to the 2013/2014 Financial Year and things have since changed. It has been said that as at that time, the certificate of the software was still with the supplier, which means that the Government did not have control over the system. This is the case and yet that is the system we have been using. We are now exporting it to the counties. We really have to look at it. There has been the issue of delayed release of Exchequer Issues. We often get reports indicating that there is poor absorption of funds voted to ministries and other Government spending agencies. If there is no Exchequer Issue, or the release of Exchequer Issues is delayed, obviously there will be no absorption of funds. Therefore, we are also looking at the point and asking: How do we estimate or calculate the absorption rates of the various Government spending entities? This is because if we calculate absorption of funds using the itemised budgets, that will not work. The actual issue is delayed release of Exchequer Issues. How much money went to the ministries, departments and agencies, so that work can be done? If money is not released in good time, projects will not be implemented on time. Worse still, if there is delay in releasing Exchequer Issues, it means that we will sign contracts with suppliers and contractors assuming that we have the money and have the projects started. Delays in release of Exchequer Issues mean lack of actual money to pay suppliers and contractors. Obviously, we are opening ourselves to serious litigation. We are aware that many times the Government has paid heavily after losing cases in court. Government entities start projects on the assumption that there is money but they eventually find that there is no money, or Exchequer Issues are delayed."
}