Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 852265,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/852265/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 456,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Cheruiyot",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13165,
        "legal_name": "Aaron Kipkirui Cheruiyot",
        "slug": "aaron-cheruiyot"
    },
    "content": "The truth of the matter is that, in future, residents of our counties will pay and want to know the person who was supposed to look and ensure that the residents got value for money. Are we not abdicating our responsibility when we allow ourselves to just come and issue statements, feel nice about it and then call it a day? Why is it that we do not get the kind of interest that we got a few minutes ago when we were discussing a matter like the report on Ruaraka, when reports of CPAIC are tabled? It should be the duty and concern of each and every of our colleague to debate the Auditor General’s reports about our counties and raise specific tangent issues. After the passage of this Bill, can the Senate Business Committee retreat and devise a better formula than what is currently being used? We have tasted this method for the last six years and the truth of the matter is that it is not working. We need to find a better formula for holding our governors to account for them to know that, when they appear before the Senate, they are appearing before a very informed Committee that will put them to task. Once we are done with the paperwork, a Senator can then retreat to their counties to go and see what has been done. When a governor says that they did water reticulation projects of up to “X” amount of money, the Senator can physically go to inspect those projects and see if there was value for money. If we have not done the simple oversight that can be done with pen and paper in the Senate, can we claim any form of responsibility that needs physical inspection? I, therefore, challenge us, as a House, to pay great attention and focus to the oversight role that is expected of us, so as to ensure that funds – like these ones that we are passing for our county governments – are put into proper use. That way, our future generations can know that the Senate made a pronouncement; that they took the governors to task during the time they were in office and stood their ground when issues did not go right. That way, we, as the Senate, can finally assert ourselves and ensure that Kenyans get value for money. Finally, Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I look at the Senate as the last wall of defence for devolution. The minute the Senate crumbles and the citizens give up on us, it will be the end of devolution. This is because when you engage many members of the public on the fruits and benefits of devolution, they generally share with you their feelings of frustration about the huge amounts that they hear counties receive. For instance, when they hear that Kericho County received Kshs6.2 billion in last financial year, they ask: “Can you physically point out where this money went to by way of specific projects that affect our daily lives?” If we, as Senators, lack answers to such questions, then we are not doing justice to the people we represent in this House. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, with those many remarks, I beg to second."
}