Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 693223,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/693223/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 102,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "“When persons in charge of managing county finances are not held to account, the objectives of devolution as set out under Article 174, which includes promoting democratic and accountable exercise of power and to enhance checks and balances, will be defeated.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, when persons managing county finances are not held to account, the question is, who will hold them to account? Who is mandated to hold them to account? My suggestion is that it is the call of the honourable Senators. The duty to hold governors to account is constitutionally vested in this House. If you fail in that duty, devolution will fail on your account. The standard must be at all times, that even wastage or pilferage of even Kshs10 or a shilling must invite a sanction. We must resist the temptation as we shall be urged to do to set a high standard so unachievable that an executive or a governor has to waste Kshs1 billion, Kshs10 billion or Kshs50 billion for him to be accountable to this House under Article 181. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the standard must be so strict and the message must be strong that nobody will venture to try to interfere with the budget and the finances in the counties. I recall the recent happenings in the Senate of Brazil. The President was impeached. If you consider the reasons, they were - not word for word - in all material respects, similar to the reasons that are before you. The President of Brazil was impeached because of flouting budgetary law as provided under Article 85 of the Constitution of Brazil. That was the only charge under the Fiscal Responsibility law. That could be in our context the Public Finance Management Act. In my submission, in the opening statement, I urge you Senators not to give any leeway, latitude or opening where persons with ill intent within the counties can use to pilfer public funds or to refuse to adhere to the law set out. There is a popular defence that shall be promoted and urged before this House. That is the defence of “it was not my act.” Or “it was not me” or “it is not my personal responsibility.” we shall hear that a lot in the course of these proceedings. However, honourable Senators, consider this determination by this House in the matter that I set out where you rejected that defence in that Senate Report at Paragraph 150. I am sure that is a Report that is within your record because it is a document from the Senate. The Committee said:- “The Special Committee further observed that the standard response from the Governor to all the allegations set out by the county assembly has been “it was not me.” this response by the Governor does little to promote public confidence in the Office of the Governor as required under Article 73 of the Constitution. The Governor seems to have abdicated from taking any responsibility from the goings on in his office and in his county despite being elected the Chief Executive Officer of the county. This is in violation of Section 73 (2) (d) of the Constitution that requires state officers to be guided by the principle of accountability to the public for their decisions and actions.” Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is the standard that I commend to this House to apply in this matter. That, it shall never be a defence in the mouth of a Governor that “that was not my act.” If you allow and admit that defence, the risk that you run this country to is that the ingenious machinations shall be put in place where a governor will not have to sign anything or make any decision personally but can procure persons to disobey the law on his behalf. He can procure persons to perpetrate corruption on his behalf. He can also procure persons to commit all manner of illegalities and yet escape free from any interrogation; from any scrutiny by this House. 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."
}