Posted Tuesday, May 31, 2011 | By JAINDI KISERO
I claim no authority in interpreting legal text. But as a seasoned journalist who has followed and covered the Budget-making process for more than 20 years, I have sufficient knowledge to appreciate when things are going wrong.
Unless we want the government to shut down, we must allow Mr Uhuru Kenyatta to present the Budget on June 8, as planned.
I am not prepared to argue with the Committee on the Implementation of the Constitution about the constitutionality or not of the issue.
Lawyers are trained to argue in circles and to perceive reality in absolutes.
The truth of the matter is that it is practically impossible to fully comply with Article 221 of the new Constitution before the first election under the new law.
We do not have a Cabinet secretary in charge of finance, as envisaged under the new Constitution. It is impossible to create a Consolidated Fund before the new devolved system of government is put in place.
And, because we do not have counties, it means that the Budget Mr Kenyatta wants to read is for the whole country.
Yet under the new Constitution, the only Budget that can be presented to the National Assembly is that of the Consolidated Fund for the national government.
What MPs are demanding to scrutinise is the Budget for the whole country. Does it not amount to an admission on their part that what is being prepared now is coming to the House under the old Constitution?
How can you operationalise the Consolidated Fund in the current circumstances? We still have assistant ministers, Cabinet ministers, the Vice-President, the Prime Minister, and the National Accord.
Indeed, occupants of these offices and institutions will stay in office until we have elections under the new Constitution, which makes no mention of the Constituency Development Fund.
Yet we still want the minister for Finance to cater for the fund in the June 8 Budget. Although the salaries of MPs will be taxed under the new Constitutional dispensation, they still enjoy tax-free salaries until after elections under the new Constitution.
The office of the Controller and Auditor General and his functions remain intact, performing the functions stipulated under the old Constitution.
We have appointed Mr Micah Cheserem as Controller of Revenue Allocation, but we all know that this office cannot function until the county government system is in place.
What is my point? I am trying to say is that if you attempt to effect Article 221, including the entire Chapter 12 of the new Constitution right now, you will create a big mess in the Budget-making process.
We will need to legislate how to synchronise the form, timing, and content of the budgets of the national and county governments. Timelines for national and country governments will need to be synchronised, too.
It is not clear why this standoff between Treasury and members of Parliament is being played out so late in the day. These issues should have been debated and settled long ago.
Whichever way one looks at it, a Budget statement or speech will still be critical. Whether the minister reads it or not is academic. He can table it, if that is what it will take for us to have a Budget before the new financial year.
A Budget speech is not just about expenditure and revenues. We will want to know the government’s economic programme for the next one year.
We want to know how it wants to reinvigorate growth and what it plans to do with the worsening balance of payments situation, the Budget deficit, and inflation.
In terms of Budget-making, we are in uncharted territory. The risks will be very huge. The counties are going to be popular.
There will political pressure to assign counties, even with low capacity to formulate, implement, and report on budgets for more money.
We are yet to determine whether the 15 per cent revenue assigned to counties will be enough to cover the devolved functions.
Budget makers must come up with a formula to show how to keep allocations to counties at a certain level to prevent loss of previously provided services.
The new Constitution says that borrowing by counties will have to be guaranteed by the national government. Why should counties like Nairobi, with strong cashflows, have to depend on national government guarantees?
The controversy over whether or not to present the Budget speech is just a red herring.
jkisero@ke.nationmedia.com.
Unless we want the government to shut down, we must allow Mr Uhuru Kenyatta to present the Budget on June 8, as planned.
I am not prepared to argue with the Committee on the Implementation of the Constitution about the constitutionality or not of the issue.
Lawyers are trained to argue in circles and to perceive reality in absolutes.
The truth of the matter is that it is practically impossible to fully comply with Article 221 of the new Constitution before the first election under the new law.
We do not have a Cabinet secretary in charge of finance, as envisaged under the new Constitution. It is impossible to create a Consolidated Fund before the new devolved system of government is put in place.
And, because we do not have counties, it means that the Budget Mr Kenyatta wants to read is for the whole country.
Yet under the new Constitution, the only Budget that can be presented to the National Assembly is that of the Consolidated Fund for the national government.
What MPs are demanding to scrutinise is the Budget for the whole country. Does it not amount to an admission on their part that what is being prepared now is coming to the House under the old Constitution?
How can you operationalise the Consolidated Fund in the current circumstances? We still have assistant ministers, Cabinet ministers, the Vice-President, the Prime Minister, and the National Accord.
Indeed, occupants of these offices and institutions will stay in office until we have elections under the new Constitution, which makes no mention of the Constituency Development Fund.
Yet we still want the minister for Finance to cater for the fund in the June 8 Budget. Although the salaries of MPs will be taxed under the new Constitutional dispensation, they still enjoy tax-free salaries until after elections under the new Constitution.
The office of the Controller and Auditor General and his functions remain intact, performing the functions stipulated under the old Constitution.
We have appointed Mr Micah Cheserem as Controller of Revenue Allocation, but we all know that this office cannot function until the county government system is in place.
What is my point? I am trying to say is that if you attempt to effect Article 221, including the entire Chapter 12 of the new Constitution right now, you will create a big mess in the Budget-making process.
We will need to legislate how to synchronise the form, timing, and content of the budgets of the national and county governments. Timelines for national and country governments will need to be synchronised, too.
It is not clear why this standoff between Treasury and members of Parliament is being played out so late in the day. These issues should have been debated and settled long ago.
Whichever way one looks at it, a Budget statement or speech will still be critical. Whether the minister reads it or not is academic. He can table it, if that is what it will take for us to have a Budget before the new financial year.
A Budget speech is not just about expenditure and revenues. We will want to know the government’s economic programme for the next one year.
We want to know how it wants to reinvigorate growth and what it plans to do with the worsening balance of payments situation, the Budget deficit, and inflation.
In terms of Budget-making, we are in uncharted territory. The risks will be very huge. The counties are going to be popular.
There will political pressure to assign counties, even with low capacity to formulate, implement, and report on budgets for more money.
We are yet to determine whether the 15 per cent revenue assigned to counties will be enough to cover the devolved functions.
Budget makers must come up with a formula to show how to keep allocations to counties at a certain level to prevent loss of previously provided services.
The new Constitution says that borrowing by counties will have to be guaranteed by the national government. Why should counties like Nairobi, with strong cashflows, have to depend on national government guarantees?
The controversy over whether or not to present the Budget speech is just a red herring.
jkisero@ke.nationmedia.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment