Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 946463,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/946463/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 149,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. M. Kajwang’",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13162,
        "legal_name": "Moses Otieno Kajwang'",
        "slug": "moses-otieno-kajwang"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the second county we have covered is Elgeyo- Marakwet. Some of the issues that are sticking out include the fact that the county Government did a tender for construction of an office block valued for Kshs19.9 million. In their wisdom, they split it into five. We can only deduce that splitting it into five was meant to beat procurement regulations, which makes that kind of practice illegal. Not to be outdone, they went ahead and varied the contract by 42.6 per cent. The Public Procurement and Disposal Act allows variation up to 25 per cent. However, on this project, the cost was varied from Kshs19.9 million to Kshs28.4 million, which is a 42.6 per cent variation. The project was at 90 per cent completion. If you are at 90 per cent and you have already varied by 42 per cent, there is another 10 per cent remaining. Chances are that this project would have gone beyond 50 per cent in terms of variation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are various items where the Elgeyo-Marakwet County spent without supplying supporting documents. There has been a habit where the governors would refuse to cooperate with auditors when they go to their counties, only for them to come with voluminous documents and records to present before the Senate. We have said it in the past that the Senate does not have investigators or skills in forensics. This is a people’s court; a court of pragmatists. We have held – we have put that in the Fiduciary Risk Report – that in cases where the counties could not justify expenditure when the auditors were on the ground, we propose that Section 62 of the Public Audit Act be applied. It states:- “(1) A person shall not— (a) Without reasonable cause or lawful excuse, obstruct or hinder, assault or threaten a member of staff of the Office of the Auditor-General or professional acting under this Act; (b) Without justification, fail to provide information required under this Act; (c) without justification, fail to provide information within reasonable time that is required under this Act; (d) submit false or misleading information; (e) misrepresent to or knowingly mislead a member of staff of the Office of the Auditor-General or professional acting under this Act; or (f) interfere with or exert undue influence on any staff of the Office of the Auditor-General or on any person authorized by the Auditor-General to perform functions under this Act. (2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding Kshs5 million or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or to both.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the next county there is Baringo County, and it is the same story of outstanding imprest. We have been sitting down and asking ourselves why counties will have huge outstanding imprest. In this Parliament, if you are given imprest, it will not take more than three or four days before a Member is required to account for it. Unless we have a perfect system here, but counties have been holding imprest for periods exceeding six months, and they feel nothing about it. That is a clear violation of the Public Finance Management Act. We have seen budget weaknesses in Baringo County, The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}