The Assembly Committee Working without executive reports.

By Luke Kapchanga.

The County Government of Bungoma in the last four years received a total allocation of Kshs 40,855,350,331, says  Committee on  Finance and Economic Planning  of Second Assembly Session.

 In the Report  on The Bungoma County Integrated  Development Plan(CIDP) 2018-2022, notes lack of sufficient information on implemented projects for the 2013-2017 CIDP.

The committee particularly relied on information from  the county treasury  summary review of the implementation of the first CIDP (2013- 2017),to make its recommendations on the projects and programmes to be planned and implemented in the second generation CIDP (2018-2022). 

There was insufficient information as to some of the achievements in Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries And Co-Operative Development and   department of Education, youth and sports, noting  that the information given on some of the achievements does not show the true position.

The committee raised concern whether the five year CIDP plan for project implementation will be effected.

 In this respect the committee was informed that there was need for a CIDP status evaluation to determine the extent of achievement of CIDP elements to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of planned development items.

 Bungoma County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) 2018- 2022  was tabled in the County Assembly of Bungoma during a special sitting held on 24th January, 2018 . 

The County Budget and Appropriations Committee while tabling the report on the first supplementary budget, note of  not receiving a  report from the County Treasury on the deviations from financial objectives despite the Committee’s attempts to have the reports submitted.

The  two cases in point, justifies the fact that, the assembly is working  with limited information, and this in the long run, impacts negatively on the electorates whom they represent.  

Provisions of Section 183 (3) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010  requires the County Executive Committee to submit to the County Assembly full and regular reports on matters relating to the county and as contemplated in Section 47 of the County Government Act, 2012 that provides for annual performance reports.

 Hon. Henry Majimbo’s raised the issue on the status of projects/programmes implemented FY 2013/2014 and 2014/15 respectively to  the implementation committee.

The committee in response , recommended to the  County Executive  to submit project details in  to include: Project title/description, vote code, specific project locations, Ward name(s), project tracking number, fiscal year, contract details, status of payment, level of project implementation and specific project challenges required to interrogate the status of project implementation for FY 2013/14 and 2014/15 by the end of the 1st Quarter of the 2015/16 financial year to facilitate ward visits by  committee members. The Committee  sanctioned  the CEC –Member, Finance and Economic Planning and the County Secretary , implement resolutions as they are put in budget appropriation Bills, Variations and virement decisions  be subjected to the approval of the County Assembly .

The county treasury is tasked to monitor and advise the county assembly on the implementation of the budget on a quarterly and annual basis, the compliance has been lacking.

A statement requested by Hon. Henry Majimbo on 25th June 2015 sought for the  issues relating to the position of development projects and programmes in Bungoma County from the Chairperson, Committee on Finance and Economic Planning:

1. Detail all the development projects in each sector that the County Government had initiated and completed in the FY 2013/14 and 2014/15. 

2. The chairperson to outline the projects that had not been completed ,stating the reasons why they have not done so and when they  were supposed to be completed. 

The County Budget and Appropriations Committee  in scrutiny of the first supplementary budget 2017/2018,  talks of  compelling  the executive to submit reports on the departments  that have deviated  from the approved CFSP 2017.. The Committee further, noted with  concern that despite  much effort being put in place in the preparation of Annual Budgets and the incorporation of public views, the Executive was not committed to implement the budget  fully,  thus requested implementation of approved programmes in the budget and quarterly financial reports be submitted to the House for interrogation and action.

The Committee On Implementation is among other is supposed to:- 

a) To detect and address abuse, illegal and unconstitutional conduct on the part of the County Executive.

b) To hold the County Executive to account in respect of how the taxpayers’ money is used.

c) To ensure that policies announced by the County Executive and authorised by County Assembly are actually delivered.

d) To improve the transparency of county government operations and enhance public trust

for effective policy delivery.

e) To generate  reports to be debated in the House with recommendations to determine whether the County Executive was effectively  implementing projects as provided for in the county budget cycles .

f) To recommend monitoring and evaluation strategies to assess compliance by the County Executive in implementing various resolutions passed in the House.

The scenario as it stands, shows that each house committee is finding it hard in making reports as executive  was not giving requisite information.

So if  by 2015, the house was looking into how best to improve on service delivery, and develop a working formula , by 2018 the problems of report submission still persists.

This gives  clear indicator, that public participation will not be meaningful  as long as, the public gives views  basing on limited information available , ant it may take much longer for the residents to reap improved service delivery.

END.