Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 908707,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/908707/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 201,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Tigania West, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. John Mutunga",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13495,
        "legal_name": "John Kanyuithia Mutunga",
        "slug": "john-kanyuithia-mutunga"
    },
    "content": " Thank you, Hon. Temporary Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to the Report of the Budget and Appropriations Committee on the proposals for 2019/2020 Budget. Looking at the three documents that are normally presented to the Committees, that is the BPS, the estimates and the proposals that come after the committees have looked at the estimates, we realised that they are all on an incremental trend. The BPS is always lower than the estimates when the committees present their budgets to the Budget and Appropriations Committee, which I have had the privilege to be a member. You would realise that the proposals from the various committees are in most cases big. What does this tell us? We wonder whether there are serious and sufficient consultations between the cost centres or the different budget sources and the Treasury when they are preparing the BPS. This is because we see there is the inclination that more money is always needed. When you look at the actual casting, the list always increases. There is always a proposal to increase the budget. I would like to basically say that the Budget and Appropriations Committee has no locus standi to change any of those proportions or rather the proposals that are made. I am not defending the Committee. The Budget and Appropriations Committee did look at the logic of the allocation and also looked at the proposals that are made for new monies. Wherever there was a proposal for more money, the Budget and Appropriations Committee was not able to give that money, unless it was guided. Let me point out a few issues that came out even as we looked at the budget process this year. One of the things is that there is a natural trend to look for more money. In most cases where there is natural attrition, when people retire, it is expected that there is money left from the salaries those people were earning, but you realise that the MDAs are always looking for more money. We wonder where the dues accruing to those people who were being paid before went to. The other issue is the level of scrutiny of the departmental committees. Departmental committees took a lot of time to scrutinise their budgets from their departments. It is important for this House to respect the proposals of the departmental committees because they did a good job. That is why we have a more or less balanced Budget this time around. We have looked at the issue of the fiscal deficit. I would like to report that, that was a bone of contention because we wanted it to keep on reducing. We have seen a possibility of misuse of Article 223 of the Constitution where even after passing these budget proposals as they are, at the end of the day, we have a supplementary estimate which proposes alignments and proportions, especially when it comes to reallocating development money into recurrent. This country cannot develop if we only vote for recurrent. It is important for us to be very much alert when it comes to the issues of transferring money through supplementary estimates to recurrent. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposes only. Acertified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}