GET /api/v0.1/hansard/entries/992882/?format=api
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 992882,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/992882/?format=api",
"text_counter": 158,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Sen. M. Kajwang’",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 13162,
"legal_name": "Moses Otieno Kajwang'",
"slug": "moses-otieno-kajwang"
},
"content": "Madam Temporary Speaker, the issue of County Development Boards (CDBs) is a matter that the Senate seems to have lost. However, it should not be taken as a condemnation of the Judiciary. By and large, the Judiciary through the Supreme Court and the High Court has stood with the framers and the drafters of the Constitution in clarifying the intent and objective of devolution and the role of the Senate. This being a Statement, we probably might limit ourselves to congratulating the lawyers who went to court and the Senators who lent their support. However, there are few issues that we might not need the Judiciary to interpret for us. For instance, the problem with the division of revenue begins when we do not take seriously the Budget Policy Statement (BPS). The BPS is the original definition of the intention of Government as far as fiscal policy, micro and macroeconomic policies are concerned. Madam Temporary Speaker, we must get an answer to the question on the views of Parliament on the BPS. If they are not taken into account, what should happen? There must be consequences. The Division of Revenue Act is derived from the BPS. Every year, this Senate makes recommendations on the BPS, but those recommendations are never taken into account. There are usually sectorial commitments from committees such as the Committee on Health, Committee on Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, the Committee on Information Communication Technology (ICT), among others. We are always making proposals on realignment of Government budget and priorities. However, they never see the light of day. We need to fix that. The real mediation needs to happen between the BPS and the division of revenue. Mediation should not be happening between division of revenue and appropriations Bill or between division of revenue and the allocation of revenue. It needs to happen in between. Madam Temporary Speaker, the mistake we have made is that we have given the CoG and the Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council (IBEC) the power that Senate should have. Senate should intervene. In fact, the two Houses should agree after the BPS and DORA. Finally, is on the role of the Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA). It has been determined that the CRA has an advisory role and its recommendations are not binding fully on Parliament. We have seen in some jurisdictions, particularly in the United Kingdom (UK) where you have England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. They have devolution yet they do not have a body like the CRA. They agreed on a formula in 1970s called the Barnett formula. It is that formula that was looked at, agreed on, and is used annually. Madam Temporary Speaker, the question that many people might beg to ask then is what would be the role of CRA as a permanent commission? Should it be a permanent commission or a sessional body that comes after every three years to review the formula? Do we need a standing body to review the formula? Can we not have a Barnett formula similar to the UK that is fixed? It is upon the CRA to reinvent itself. It is a constitutional commission. I cannot dissolve it by my contribution on the Floor of this House, but they have a lot of thinking. 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."
}