Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 938020,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/938020/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 168,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Kilifi North, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Owen Baya",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13373,
        "legal_name": "Owen Yaa Baya",
        "slug": "owen-yaa-baya"
    },
    "content": "because we hoped the more developed areas would help the other areas to develop. That is what the Constitution and this Act need to cure. The policy that was done by the CRA has expanded from the original 14 to 34 counties. And then it has gone further to break it down to small wards. Doing that means that you will allocate Kshs1 million to a ward and go to another ward and allocate Kshs500,000. We are spreading the money too thinly and there will be no benefit to those areas. And those areas that were already developed continue to have money. The reason why certain projects were identified - water, electricity, roads and health, that is what the Constitution talks about - because in these places if you have water, development will come faster; if you have health services, you are helping the area more; if you have electricity… That is why these projects were put as the key drivers and why this money should go to support those areas. Today someone tells me Matsangoni is one of the areas that have been identified. You can imagine in my Kilifi Constituency, which has a lot of pockets of poor areas, only one ward has been identified. You have places here which are already developed in this country, if you look at the CRA policy. We have 20 areas. I want to say here that the CRA did this thing with bias, because many of the CRA commissioners come from areas that were not included in the original marginalisation policy. They came in to expand the list to include areas that are not marginalised. I am losing my voice on this because it is very hurting to see what we are doing. Some of the proposals that I want to suggest are that that list developed by CRA must come to this Parliament, we scrutinise it so that those areas that are actually marginalised get the funds and those areas that are not marginalised are kicked out of that list. The second thing we have in this Bill is the National Fund Board and many local committees. I will propose that we have committees at a second level: the national, the constituency and then the local areas for the purpose of coordination. You cannot take electricity from the main road to Matsangoni Village or Roka Village without passing through other areas which do not have electricity. How will the electricity get there if you do not consider the whole line? You are saying you want to take water to a village in Taita Taveta which does not have tapped water, but you have excluded a neighbouring village where the pipeline must pass through and then you give them Kshs500,000. How will the water get there? You are allocating Kshs1 million to build a school in an area where there is no school and yet the neighbouring area has no school. I want to emphasise that there has been a deliberate attempt, even in the policy by CRA to continue to marginalise already marginalised areas. I will move amendments to this and to the policy so that Kilifi as a county benefits because it was one of the areas that were marginalised in this country. It is in every record that is available on marginalisation. You cannot give Kilifi the amount of money that CRA has given and take all the money to areas that are already developed. I support."
}