Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 800734,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/800734/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 294,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "percentage of this country. That is a conditional grant that I would like to see coming up in the Division of Revenue Bill. Another conditional grant would be a grant to county governments to develop education infrastructure in primary and secondary schools and that would effectively help us deal with this issue called the national Government Constituency Development Fund (CDF) because the so-called CDF is right now being used to build classrooms in primary and secondary schools, police stations and also to give bursaries. Instead of sending that money through a different fund, this money should be going to counties as conditional grants. The other conditional grant that I would like to see coming up in future would be the national Government ceding money to counties, particularly counties in fish production zones, for establishment of fish processing plants. We can set up one in Lake Victoria, Lake Turkana, the Indian Ocean and even have one in Central Kenya where a lot of aquaculture is taking place. That will have the effect of giving us a very lengthy Division of Revenue Bill. Therefore, the solution, as per the provisions of Article 187, would be sitting with the COG at the Intergovernmental Budget and Economic (IBEC) Summit or whatever level and coming up with an agreement. It is that agreement that can be captured in the Division of Revenue Bill. It does not have to be itemized but the terms and conditions can be made very explicit. We can then have the national Government using county governments to execute, rather than the national Government trying to create alternative avenues like CDF and the Ward Development Fund that we are now talking about or even the alternative avenues like the provincial administration. I want to make the final point. The seconder of the Bill has talked about the basis of revenue allocation being the last audited accounts and, in our case, it being the 2013/2014 audited and approved accounts. I want to sympathize with the National Assembly, particularly its Public Accounts Committee. If you look at the number of accounts and entities that the National Assembly is expected to scrutinize and report on for them to certify the audits of a financial year, they are just too many. If you are to even divide them by the number of Members of the National Assembly, you might find that the 300 plus Members of the National Assembly might be required to look at the accounts of at least two or three national entities. It has been my view that the manner in which we conduct our hearings or our considerations as Public Accounts Committees (PAC), be it in the Senate or National Assembly is wrong. We need to sit down and come up with a better framework for review of the Auditor-General’s findings. The society has gotten to a level where the work of the Public Accounts Committee is now reduced to fighting corruption when we have bodies like the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and multiplicity of laws to deal with the scourge of corruption. Everyone is looking at CPAIC in the Senate and PAC, Public Investments Committee (PIC) and Special Funds Account Committee in the National Assembly to help them fight the scourge of corruption. Audit review is not just an issue about corruption; it is an issue of effectiveness and efficiency. We are talking about wisdom, probity and usefulness of decisions that public officials have taken. 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."
}