Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 814929,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/814929/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 74,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "think it is because of lack of foresight by this Government that some counties do not have headquarters. We are all Kenyans and we know development in this country has never been equal. There are parts that are more developed than others. Therefore, instead of setting aside Kshs500 million or Kshs600 million for Nyandarua County to build their county headquarters, it will be more prudent if we give them Kshs2 billion or Kshs3 billion to build a proper county government building that can serve as their county headquarters as well as accommodate some of these authorities. That will be prudent use of financial resources. Why do we want to fund a single project? We know the driving force of that line of thinking. I have spoken about this issue many times on other Bills that have been brought before this House and no one appears to be listening. I want to promise that if this Bill comes back before this House with this specific challenge, I will not support it. We have to be serious. Other people are planning their countries properly. When you visit other countries, you will see how urban regeneration as a modern concept that is being adopted world over yet we want to continue to squeeze Nairobi County. A county that was meant for four million people is now housing close to 10 million people because of lack of foresight in some of the Bills. Mr. Speaker, Sir, as we establish an authority, we need to ask ourselves what the National Irrigation Board (NIB) failed to achieve and why. Will we achieve it by renaming the NIB? Clause 8(2) talks about the Authority which shall be responsible for development of irrigation infrastructure. This is not clear to me. How does that sit with the existing water services board, for example, the Tana Water Services Board (TWSB), the Athi Water Services Board (AWSB) or the Lake Victoria Water Services Board (LVWSB)? These are existing water services boards. Over the years, they have gathered institutional capacity to be able to carry out irrigation programmes. Now that the Bill is setting up another Authority, what will be the collaboration? What is the cost implication to the taxpayers? We have moribund parastatals and yet we are proposing to create a new Authority. If the two authorities are merged together and form one authority, it will be more effective. The committee should report back to this House. We would like to listen to their recommendations so that when we pass this Bill and establish another authority, it will not render the existing water services boards useless. We want to see it collaborating with the existing boards to carry out irrigation development projects. I also take great exception with this sort of thinking - I do not want to call it “stone age”, but why should there be a representative in each and every authority set up by this House from the National Treasury, Irrigation Department and so on? What specific skills do these representatives bring on the table? Are there angels in the National Treasury who must sit in every Government Department for us to feel we are properly represented? They will only earn allowances and they will not add any value to us. Therefore, it is time, we, as legislators, took a radical shift in terms of how we consider Bills that are brought to this House. Otherwise, the drafters of the Bills that are brought before this House will know that there are 67 rubberstamps in the Senate that will pass them. 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."
}