Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 699541,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/699541/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 278,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "ICT should also be a priority, but when you go to the counties, you find that those particular departments that ought to receive the lion share of the county budget receive very little. Our counties have specialized in embracing projects and programmes that are not very useful. To develop a small ICT centre in a constituency will not cost the county more than Kshs3.5 million, but you will find a county government expending Kshs3.5 million to build a pit latrine. In Koyo shopping Centre, the county government built four pit latrines and the residents of Koyo are aware of this. You are left wondering why a county government should be building a pit latrine. If that is not shocking enough, the cost of Kshs3.5million will even shock you more. To build a four bedroomed house complete with four en suite bedrooms, a sitting room and a kitchen will cost you slightly less than kshs3.5 million yet you get a county that can expend Kshs3.5million to build four pit latrines. This is complete abuse of the county resources. Why should a county that has not attempted to even build some small ICT centres for its young people spend resources to do such kind of funny things? My county decided to expend their resources to fence markets which have been used for the last 50 years without the need of a fence, but because this is an opportunity to make a kill, it gave a tender of over Kshs30 million for fencing the markets in the county. Unfortunately, the greatest consideration in the programmes and projects that are being funded in the counties is whether it will provide the opportunity to get a kickback or the opportunity to fund a project that can generate some side revenue for the county officials. It is no longer being driven by necessity and the needs of the residents of those counties. That is why the particular component of public participation that ensures that the members of the public are able to contribute to what is of priority to them is important. In the spirit of public participation, you would expect the county government to have gone to the market and asked its people what is of priority to them. They would have asked them whether they wanted a toilet built for them when they already have over ten toilets in the same market or get them clean piped water instead of fencing a half an acre of a market. Is it not more reasonable to give them shades to protect themselves from the sun and the rain? I am happy because we will be presenting a Bill in this house as a committee in a short while on the principle of public participation and how that should be done. This will mainstream the participation of communities and various sectors in decision making. If you ask the millions of young people in our counties what is it that they see as the priority in their counties, I am sure ICT would fall within that particular bracket. This will enable us to take advantage of the numerous opportunities that come with ICT in ensuring that we are able to meet the needs of our young people. I urge other Committees, including my Committee, that sometimes it makes more sense when a committee of this House travels around the counties so that we can face and deal with issues in the counties, first hand. As we finalise processes in this Senate, we should be alive to the needs of our people so that we do not again find ourselves in the same situation that counties are finding themselves; where two or three individuals sit down and imagine that they understand the needs of their people, then they start drawing 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"
}