Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 736918,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/736918/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 103,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Hon. (Dr.) Nyikal",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "that we now need to look at the Constitution and identify areas that are giving us problems and think of re-doing it. When we get at the Budget Policy Statement, we get an extremely clear indication of what the national Government needs, in detail. There is no process that gives that mandate to the Senate or the county governments structures. Of course, there is the Inter-governmental Budget and Economic Council (IBEC). This is the stage at which we should be harmonising this situation, so that when the Division of Revenue Bill goes to the Senate, they can have an input in it. The IBEC comprises of the Minister for Finance, governors, ECEs from the counties, the Commissions on Revenue Allocation as well as this House’s Budget and Appropriations Committee. Is there an equal representation from the Senate in the IBED or anybody representing the county governments? We go on to pass the Division of Revenue Bill and when it gets to the Senate, it becomes a whole new process without any basis on which even the Senate itself makes decisions. My proposal is that we need to review the Constitution and decide that this becomes a function of the national Government totally or we review the Budget Policy Statement process and ensure that a similar process takes place in the county structures, including the Senate. Article 121 of the Constitution is clear as to what should come to the National Assembly. I am not sure whether there is any information that goes to the Senate. We should, therefore, amend the Constitution so that we totally leave it to the national Government or we put in place structures to provide for consultations much earlier before the Division of Revenue Bill comes up for debate. That is what is facing us. Otherwise, we will keep on discussing this same matter from time to time. Once we pass the Division of Revenue Bill, the national Government, the Parliamentary Service Commission and the Judicial Service Commission can run quite well while county governments cannot move on. Do we, therefore, provide for a Vote on Account arrangement to enable county governments get some funding – at least a half of their budgets – before the process is completed or how do we go about it? I see this not as a discussion on the details of the Bill, but rather on the process that brings us to the Bill. I know the hardworking Chair of the Budget and Appropriations Committee would help us in this and bring out the areas that we need to change in the processes, so that we do not have a repetition of this year in, year out. We need to bring a lot of arguments between us and the Senate. With those remarks, I support."
}