Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 917024,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/917024/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 204,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kipipiri, JP",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Amos Kimunya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": "this Senate do? The Senate is supposed to protect the counties. However, even as we created the Senate, we also created the county assemblies – to which governors account to and who approve the budgets of the counties. It is never the Senate! It is the county assemblies. So, I do not even know where they got the power to summon governors to account to them. If you are not responsible for approving the budget for somebody, how are you then going to tell them to render an account to yourself? They are extending their mandates because, obviously, they do not have enough work. Let me also add my voice on Article 96 of the Constitution. Our roles are very clear. Article 95(4)(a) of the Constitution basically says that the vertical division of revenue will be done by the National Assembly. It is very clear. It does not say ‘by Parliament’ but ‘by the National Assembly’. The horizontal allocation, which is done once in five years by determining that formula, will be determined by the Senate for approval by the National Assembly. They actually do not even approve that formula. They determine it and then bring it here for us to approve it. They now say that they have a role to play in the Division of Revenue Bill because it has not been done the way they want. They would want more than the 35 per cent that has been allocated to the counties and yet, the Constitution clearly states that revenue going to the counties shall be a minimum of 15 per cent. Currently, we are talking of 35 per cent, but Senators are still saying that it is not enough. Instead of the Senate working together with the county governments to generate more revenue at the county level, which they can do by increasing the revenue by another 10 per cent – which will be about Kshs31 billion – all they are after is trying to increase the taxation levels on every Kenyan. From where do we get the extra money? If we go the Senate way, we will be talking of increasing VAT and other taxes and telling Kenyans that they must pay more so that money can go to the governors. We do not know what the trillions that have already gone to the counties have done so far. It is very important that we relook at the whole architecture of our parliamentary system. I would not want to exactly state, as Hon. Junet would say, that we kill the Senate but, perhaps, we need to redefine their responsibilities. We need to redefine when they meet, including the quorum requirements. When they realised that they could not raise quorum in 2013, they changed their Standing Orders or their working mechanisms so that they could actually sit even if they do not meet the minimum threshold of 15 members. We need to relook at that kind of House. Perhaps, it has some relevance. Perhaps, it does not have. Perhaps, we should recreate the ALGAK. Perhaps, we should relocate the role of protecting the counties to the Council of Governors. Perhaps, we should even create a devolution committee in this House to oversee the counties and protect them because we all come from counties. None of us would want to see their county dying. I do not even know what the Senate protects that we cannot protect. I believe these are the kind of things we need to do to redefine those relationships. If there is ever to be a constitutional amendment, the first amendment should be on Articles 94, 95 and 96 of the Constitution to redefine these relationships and either give the Senate more tangible work to do or remove them altogether or establish a committee of this House and charge it with the responsibility of protecting devolution without necessarily having to duplicate the roles that we have. In the absence of time, I do not want to belabour the point. I urge that we pass this Motion so that the House Business Committee can go for public participation, invite all these experts and people who have something to say so that we enrich this debate and report back to this House in terms of a very tangible report on the relationship between these two Houses. If all else fails, I support that we go to court and get an interpretation. In the meantime, I am not 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."
}