Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 909860,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/909860/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 627,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Garissa Township, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Aden Duale",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 15,
        "legal_name": "Aden Bare Duale",
        "slug": "aden-duale"
    },
    "content": "Before I thank the Budget and Appropriations Committee and its Chair, this goes to the National Treasury. It is not good practice to submit two Supplementary Estimates in a single financial year. But this has happened due to unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the Executive. I want to urge the National Treasury and the Executive that in as much as they can, they should avoid bringing two Supplementary Estimates in one financial year. I have been around for some time since the period of the former Ministers for Finance, Hon. Amos Kimunya, Hon. Michuki, Hon. Githae and many others. It is not best practice to have two Supplementary Estimates in one financial year. We will only agree where it is beyond the control of the Executive due to emergencies which may happen. As also indicated, the submission of the second Supplementary Estimate is to address the issues that I mentioned earlier in support of food security initiatives, the manufacturing sector, provision of critical infrastructure in our country and the scaling down of expenditure in order to achieve certain target overall deficit level within the economy. Most of the reductions in the development budget are for agencies, departments and ministries. The scaling down is due to the same scaling down by the donor funding communities to projects. Once the donors scale down their budgets, then the national Government does the same because it is proportionate in terms of percentage. There are few cuts as a result of budget rationalisation due to poor absorption level. For some agencies, departments and ministries, when we appropriate money to them, their absorption level is below 40 per cent. This must be an area of concern to the Executive, and more so the National Treasury. If you cannot absorb the money we give you as a House, in the next financial year, we should not add money to that agency. Why do we give you money and you stay with it? This is a result of corruption. They do a procurement process and the person does not get it? They cancel it and in the next six months, they keep on canceling. So, if an agency has a low absorption level, the Budget and Appropriations Committee and other departmental committees must not increase their money. We must give more money to departments and agencies that absorb their money 90 per cent in a more efficient and accountable manner. This is the same way that we deal with county governments. In the parameter of allocation to county governments under the County Revenue Allocation Bill, there is one per cent for fiscal discipline; that county X that does very well in terms of resource management and fiscal discipline gets more money in the next financial year. We must apply this to the national Government. The Committee raised their concern in the Report on the poor absorption of the development budget, which may affect the policy implementation and subsequent economic performance. When you do not absorb or use development money, the people that we represent are the ones that suffer. It has never been adequately explained to this House why development budget is rarely well absorbed. This is the question we must ask ourselves across the board. The development budget absorption level is always below 33 per cent. This House, that has the 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."
}