Budget wars between governors, MCAs appalling
Despite separation of powers and responsibilities between the executive and county assemblies, there seems to be no end to the bickering between Governors and Members of County Assembly (MCAs).
At the heart of this is who between the two should have the final say on the county budget.
The devolution and public finance management acts vest the responsibility of county planning and budgeting on the executive.
However, the authority to spend can only be granted by an appropriation bill, legislated by county assemblies.
But appropriation is more than ‘authority to spend’; it allows setting aside money for ‘specific spending’ by means of amendments.
So, depending on your interpretation, both the executive and the assembly are responsible for preparing the budget at different levels.
Governors and MCAs understand county development priorities differently. The county chiefs feel it is their responsibility to lead strategic development priorities and programmes.
As politicians, they also see in the budget an opportunity to fulfill pledges they made in their manifestos that got them elected in the first place.
Due to their ‘wide’ constituencies, governors tend to prioritise countywide projects over ward-based projects.
On the other hand, MCAs see in the budget a chance to do something for their wards because they too made promises that must be fulfilled.
This conflict of interest manifests most devastatingly on the budget estimates document.
To justify their development priorities, governors cite the county fiscal strategy paper, the county integrated development plan, the annual development plan and their manifesto.
Unfortunately, MCAs will be more than willing to reject budget estimates when they realise there is nothing for their wards in it.
The other contentious issue between the two is public participation, where development projects are identified and ratified.
Section 91 of County Governments Act outlines modalities and platforms for public participation within counties and vests that responsibility on the county executive.
In establishing structures for citizen participation, the executive often relies on its planning and communication departments with the help of sub county or ward administrators or village councils.
Though the law obliges the governor to ensure participation of people’s representatives in such fora, the token depends on the relationship between the governor and MCAs.
If the two do not collaborate well like we have seen with Kirinyaga, Kitui or Embu counties, there is little chance MCAs will be invited to citizen participation forums.
In extreme cases, conniving MCAs resort to shock tactics ranging from mutilation of budgets to impeachment of governor.
Problems between MCAs and governors also revolve around budget implementation.
Though this is an executive function, some MCAs understand their oversight role differently from what the law envisages.
There are many reported cases where MCAs intimidate, extort or harass contractors implementing projects in their wards in the pretext of oversight.
We are also familiar with MCAs who do business with their county governments directly or by proxy in blatant breach of the law.
These illegalities are not limited to MCAs as governors have likewise been accused of conflict of interest in awarding contracts.
But there are far more problems bedeviling county budgeting than have been brought to public attention given that expectations on the budget are always higher than the resource envelop can accommodate.
In fact, most county governments are struggling to deliver development projects because they already blew the permitted personnel emoluments levels.
With over 40 per cent of the allocation going into salaries, and with poor collections from own source revenue, there is no money left for development.
Then there is the never-ending cycle of pending bills! Almost all counties of Kenya begin a new budget cycle with a huge negative deficit for an opening balance.
With that handicap, it is unconceivable how the budget can be implemented in full. — The writer comments on topical issues
