The constitution of Kenya 2010 ushered a new era in the way in which resources are shared across the country.
As opposed to the independence constitution where sharing of resources was entirely an executive function, the 2010 constitution took away such powesr from the executive and created new bodies, including the Commission on Revenue Allocation and the Senate.
This move was aimed at creating a more transparent and objective process of deciding how to share resources in Kenya.
Article 216(1) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 gives the Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA) the powers make recommendations concerning the basis for the equitable sharing of revenue.
The constitution in Article 217 (1) requires a revision to the way we share revenues across the 47 counties every five years.
However, for the first formula to guide revenue sharing in 2013 (the first year of devolution), the time period was shortened to three years.
The decision about how to share revenues across the counties begins with a recommendation by the Commission on Revenue Allocation.
The CRA forwards their recommendations to Parliament, which makes the final determination.
The parliamentary process begins in the Senate, which can accept or amend the CRA proposal.
Once they have approved it, it moves to the National Assembly, which can only amend it with a super-majority. If they do amend it, it must still go back to the Senate for review or mediation.
From the foregoing statement, it very clear that the Senate is the principal decision-maker on matters revenue.
It is your Senator who determine how much resources will be allocated to your county.
With this in mind and the ongoing discussion on the 3rd Revenue generation formula, let us focus how various counties have suffered and equally stand to gain should the revenue Bill sail through, such an approach will go a long way in helping us to hold our senators responsible.
Unlike the Second Basis County Revenue Allocation formula whose parameters has been favouring areas with huge Land mass, the Third Basis County Revenue Allocation formula proposes the parameters of population and basic revenue share be allocated 20%, agriculture 16%, poverty 14 %, access to roads 7%, landmass 5%, revenue collections efforts and fiscal prudence 1%.
The reality is that revenue is allocated to provide services to people. “Money is for services and services are for the people”. Areas with more people have a higher per capita demand for services therefore need for more funds.
Among the biggest losers in the new lineup is Wajir County whose allocation will be cut by Sh2 billion.
Marsabit and Mandera will see their revenues drop by Sh1.9 billion each, Garissa where the BBI chair senator Yusuf Haji comes from will lose Sh1.6 billion (I don’t expect him to support, it is a fight for individual survival). Tana River (Sh1.5 billion), Mombasa(Sh1.6 billion), Kwale (Sh1 billion) Narok (Sh981 million) and Isiolo (Sh869 million).
Other counties that could see their revenues reduced are Kilifi (Sh859 million), Turkana (Sh547 million), Kitui (Sh432 million), Makueni (Sh423 million), Samburu (Sh403 million), Taita Taveta (Sh399 million), Tharaka Nithi (Sh338 million), and Vihiga (Sh239 million).
The top gainers will be Nandi (Sh1.4 billion), Uasin Gishu (Sh1.2 billion), Nakuru (Sh1.2 billion), Kakamega (Sh997 million), Kiambu (Sh986 million) and Bungoma (Sh837 million), Kirinyaga (Sh779 million), West Pokot (Sh777 million), Baringo (Sh722 million), Bomet (Sh673 million) and Siaya (Sh642 million)
Others gainers are Migori (Sh574 Million), Kericho (Sh556 Million), Busia (Sh559 Million), Machakos (Sh551 Million), Laikipia (Sh523 Million), Embu (Sh504 Million), Nyandarua (Sh401 Million), Nyeri (Sh277 million) and Murang’a (Sh92 million)
Under the arrangement, at least 29 counties will gain more revenue while 18 lose.
A focus on western Kenya region would give a factual analysis of the matters devolved resources. The gainers include the following:
Busia Ksh. 559m
That brings close to Ksh 2.4b to the region. Where the focus on delivery is on high gear, we can deduce that the money in question can actually deliver the following:
1. At Ksh.20m per kilometre of tarmac, this means 120km annually.
2. With an average of Ksh 300m hospital like the famous Tenwek hospital, 8 such facilities per year.
With the same amount in a region, irrigation projects for rice in Bunyala, sugarcane in other areas.
For a people with adversaries such as the famous Budalangi floods, these funds are as necessary as the sun to a growing plant.
Their senators such as Cleopas Malala, on political mode, however, think otherwise of the formula as it may expose their “disloyalty” to other quarters.
In Mount Kenya region several counties rag far much behind in terms of development;
Nyandarua is such county where the county has not done even a single inch of tarmac road, this one of the issues every Nyandarua resident would raise as their worst tribulation.
On this third basis county allocation formula, Nyandarua an extra fund of Ksh 401 Million, this can be deduced as follows;
At Ksh 20M per Kilometre of tarmac, this means 20km per year.
Laikipia continues to suffer on water availability, the county stand to gain up to Ksh 523Million this at Ksh 2M per borehole, means 262 boreholes per year- more than enough water supply.
All of the above lay in the hands of 29 senators whose counties and regions stand to gain.
Now here are the questions;
Will Cleophas Malala oppose the formula denying the western region 2.4 Billion?
Will Kipchumba Murkomen show defiance just to support Ruto’s ambitions at the expense of regional interest where they stand to gain a cumulative amount of 8.53B?
Will James Orengo deny his county an addition of 643M per year just to show allegiance his regional kingpin?
Will Migori’s Achillo Ayako follow Orengo and deny his county 569Million?
Kenyans stand watch.
The Opinion is compiled by Macharia Wa Mwihaki, Kiyo Nganga, Shikuh Njuguna, Samuel Mwangi and Wagunya Muriu. They all comment on Topical, political and current issues