Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 704372,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/704372/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 270,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "about population, area and so forth and not poverty index Equalisation is supposed to address that. This amendment is, indeed, unconstitutional. If we are to look at the functions or areas that the Constitution envisaged such as water, roads, health and electricity, are devolved according to the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution. These are devolved functions of counties. These functions have been specifically mentioned in the Constitution as the destination of these funds. We are denying counties those funds and giving them a structure which does not exist. Constituencies exist for political reasons. Ideally, they do not have administrative structures capable of even implementing those projects. They do not have engineers, architects or planners. They will rely on the capacity of the county government. If the persuasion was that of the Equalisation Fund going down to the grassroots, then I would say it should not stop even at the constituency level. In fact, it should have gone to the ward level. When we talk of the ward level, we are talking of counties. The county assemblies should determine how much will be allocate to each ward. This Bill devolves functions and county governments must be involved. The Senate, being the representative and protector of counties, should be involved. In fact, I do not expect that any Senator would support anything in this Bill that seeks to remove the function from the county government to other institutions. I hope the intention of this Bill is not to take this amount or the equalisation fund to be part of the CDF. It appears like it is going that direction which in itself is unconstitutional because CDF has historically seen funds managed, controlled or influenced by legislators at the level of the constituency. According to the Constitution, it is not their function. The function of any legislature, including the Senate and the National Assembly is to legislate and not administer or execute development. It is high time that the Senate started thinking of what to do with the CDF. It is true it has helped, but now that we have counties, there would be no need of having the CDF. There would be no need of CDF even on national projects and functions, if the counties were to be managed properly. This is because Article 187 of the Constitution says that even where a function belongs to one level of Government, by agreement, every level can effectively do it.The other level can still do it. Education and construction of classrooms are national functions. However, the Constitution recognises that, perhaps, counties could do better in the construction of classrooms because they have engineers on the ground, capacity, auditors and so forth. The national and county governments can agree to allocate that responsibility to the county government and vice versa . In effect, this Bill seeks to go around the constitutional requirements. How will public participation come in where the county government is not involved? At the county level, there are elected representatives of the people from the ward level. There are structures for public participation. When it comes to the national Government, these funds are sent to constituencies. I do not know why they did not say sub-counties since they exist as a structure of a devolved government. Why constituency? They do not have the structures or a way of ensuring public participation. I urge all Senators to ensure that this Bill does not see light of the day."
}