Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 960977,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/960977/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 117,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Sen. Sakaja",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 13131,
        "legal_name": "Johnson Arthur Sakaja",
        "slug": "johnson-arthur-sakaja"
    },
    "content": "It has been eloquently prosecuted in this House that the frame of mind that the money that goes to the counties is money that comes from the national Government is debunked. In true essence of Chapter Twelve, the Division of Revenue Bill is what sets aside some money to go to the national level and some to the counties. It should not be the national Government giving the counties money. With that in mind and knowing very well that the matter is in the court because of the County Appropriation Act, which many of us feel it was not founded in law, if county governments cannot legislate and appropriate money because the Division of Revenue Bill has not been passed, then similarly, it follows that the national Government should not have been allowed to legislate on the Appropriation Bill. This is because the same Bill that gives each level of government its money has not been passed. What can be done in the intervening situation? I am glad that yesterday this Senate took a mature demeanor and disposition. As the “upper House” and protectors of devolution, we said that we will not take the approach of an eye for an eye and all lose our sight or get ahead and get even, but find the most pragmatic way of resolving the issue when the legislation is still going on, and the matters are also before the court. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this House needs to resolve as follows, and this is my humble submission. This House, through the Committee on Finance and Budget, can--- If you look at the spirit behind vote on account, it is usually 50 per cent of the last amounts that had been appropriated. We already know that Kshs316 billion is what the other House is proposing, but we proposed Kshs335 billion. It should be based on the amount that was appropriated last year because we are a zero-based budgeting regime and must start from there. If we take 25 per cent of it, we can authorise the National Treasury to allow counties to withdraw the percentage based on the same allocation of revenue which gave each county a formula to budget on the amount. For instance, out of the sharable revenue of Kshs314 billion allocated in the previous financial year, Nairobi City County had 15 per cent of it. If you take a percentage of the sharable revenue that we will agree, such as 25 or 50 per cent, then Nairobi City County should be allowed to draw the same percentage it had in the previous financial year, just to take care of the costs. This will ensure that when the Division of Revenue Bill is eventually passed, Nairobi City County will not have exceeded what it will eventually get. As the Senator for Nairobi City County, my county can pay salaries because we collect revenue close to Kshs1 billion every month. However, all other counties could 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."
}