HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 986924,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/986924/?format=api",
"text_counter": 178,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Suba South, ODM",
"speaker_title": "Hon. John Mbadi",
"speaker": {
"id": 110,
"legal_name": "John Mbadi Ng'ong'o",
"slug": "john-mbadi"
},
"content": " Thank you, Hon. Speaker. As I support, I just want to make this matter clear. First, it should be understood that we only disagree with the Senate when there is a reason to. It should come out clearly that this House is not at war with the Senate. When the Senate comes up with a matter that makes sense or reasonable, we consider it. However, for Members to understand what exactly happened, I want to remind them that after some key functions of the County Government of Nairobi were transferred to the national Government, the costs for those functions were calculated and the National Treasury made a proposal that the amounts relating to those functions should be retained at the national Government level. The national Government revenue to be given to the Nairobi Metropolitan Committee that has been formed is to be spent on these functions. It made a lot of sense, and this House passed it. The Senate has, however, brought an amendment. The reason given by the Senate is that that amount earmarked for those functions shall be spent by this body that has been created. The amount of money must, however, first go to the County Revenue Fund before being given to this particular body. That is where the problem is as the reasoning of the Senate is, however, backed by law to some extent. One, if you read Article 219 of the Constitution, it is clear that a county’s share of revenue raised by the national Government shall be transferred to the county without undue delay and without deduction. However, one may reason that that only relates to the amount of money that has explicitly been appropriated to the county. That is if the Division of Revenue Bill is amended by Parliament and the money is taken off the county, then you cannot apply that Article. I agree with that, and it is at that point that I disagree with the Senate’s position. What is supporting the Senate’s position, however, are two things: One, in the Deed, there is the transfer of functions from the county to the national Government organ. Those who prepared the Deed gave the responsibility of funding these functions to the county government. Therefore, when it reached that, we looked at it as the Budget and Appropriations Committee, and we were between a rock and a hard place. The Constitution, to a large extent - and that is where I want to stop... However, that also makes a provision, which if you read, clearly and keenly gives the responsibility. I want to read Article 187(2)(a) which says that arrangements shall be put in place to ensure that the resources necessary for the performance of the function or exercise of the power are transferred. However, Article 187(2)(b) says that the constitutional responsibility for the performance of the functions or the exercise of that power shall remain with the Government, which is assigned by the Fourth Schedule. These functions which were transferred from the County Government of Nairobi to the national Government are listed in the Fourth Schedule as functions of the county. Therefore, the provision of this Article gives the responsibility of ensuring that these functions are performed to the county. One would, therefore, interpret that to mean it is the The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}