Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 798409,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/798409/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 291,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "I know this is a popular Bill with MCAs. That is an area we can tinker with and maybe give 20 per cent of the development budget, instead of 8 per cent. MCAs will ensure the development budget is expanded and more money goes towards projects. I have no problem with the argument of equal share that was raised by the Treasury. I have no problem with us changing this clause and probably taking into account: one, population, poverty rate and geographical coverage of a ward. There is a problem at times of using this formula; that once we bring these parameters, disputes can easily arise because some of these parameters are quite old. When was the last time we did a census in this country? It was in the year 2009. To me, it is unfair to use that one to allocate resources now that it is almost ten years old. It does not take into account demographic movements and shifts that have occurred for those last ten years. There are some wards that are now highly populated. There are even contentions as to whether the poverty rate, as mentioned now is objective or subjective. To get out of all those arguments, we can just say equal share but if there are discrepancies, that can be addressed by the balance that is going to be left with the governors, because this money is only a small share of the total revenues of our counties. I, however, do not hold a strong position on this. Contrary to the submission of the Treasury, we can sit and see whether to adopt that method, or retain what is proposed in this Bill. There are also typographical, grammatical errors and incoherence which were flagged out by the Commission for Revenue Allocation (CRA). I agree that we can also take that into account. We are waiting for the report by the Senate Committee on Finance, Commerce and Budget to see what we can incorporate from those views that were raised during public participation. Madam Temporary Speaker, finally, as I sit, the Council of Governors (CoG) did not make a presentation during the public participation meeting that was held by the Senate. They, therefore, did not oppose this Bill, unless they possibly did that through a written memorandum. However, going by the information that I have so far, I am not aware of any objection by the CoG against this Bill. I say that because I have heard rumours that they are doing their very best effort to scuttle this Bill. I do not see how it is against their interests. There is a principle in law call enstoppel which means you are stopped from denying that which you originally supported. Therefore, the CoG did not object to this Bill, did not participate in the public participation unless they did so through written memorandum. I would therefore, urge them not to oppose this Bill in the event it becomes law. I have also heard that they fear competition from Members of County Assembly (MCAs). There is a misconception that the MCAs may use this Bill as a platform for higher positions either to kick out Members of Parliament and Senators. One, we must embrace competition. We must be ready to compete with others and win or not. That argument, to me, is neither here nor there. This Bill is good for the country and not Sen. Kang'ata’s per se . if once passed it is going to ensure that money percolates to the grassroots. By doing that, we shall 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."
}