A toast to the new order, centrepiece of our Constitution

The devolved system of government is the centrepiece of Kenya’s Constitution.

Forty-seven county governments came into operation two-and-a-half years ago following the General Election of March 2013. This marked a complete departure from the centralised system of government that had been in operation since independence.

The centralised system was seen to be characterised by a myriad challenges that included marginalisation, vast inequalities, mismanagement of resources and exclusion of many communities from decision-making processes.

Article 174 of the Constitution enumerates several objectives of devolution, which include self-governance of the people. It further states that devolution will recognise the rights of communities to manage their affairs and to further their development.

Kenya is a land of great economic potential but, paradoxically, almost 50 per cent of the citizens live in poverty. The devolved system of government is seen to be key to unlocking Kenya’s economic potential.

How has devolution met the noble objectives of our new Constitution? The Commission on Revenue Allocation is one of the institutions established by the Constitution that has been involved closely in the roll-out of devolution.

For the first time since independence, a transparent and participatory framework for sharing revenues raised nationally is developed on a regular basis by this commission.

All counties now share Kenya’s resources equitably. They use these resources to finance the bulk of their recurrent and development expenditures.

County governments have registered several successes and challenges. Successes include renovation and, in some cases, expansion and equipping of health facilities; availability of medicine, removal of ghost workers, construction of early childhood development centres; provision of clean water; construction of roads; and introduction of improved agricultural practices.

Devolution has also created a sense of inclusion by communities that had been marginalised by the centralised system. But a new risk that is emerging is potential marginalisation of minority communities inside county governments. This new risk needs to be nipped in the bud.

Despite the many successes registered by county governments, many challenges remain, four of which are:

Inadequate funds: The allocated revenues have not been adequate to finance recurrent and development expenditures. The Constitution permits counties to raise their own revenues by imposing property rates, entertainment taxes and levies for services rendered.

The Commission on Revenue Allocation, Ministry of Information, ICT Authority and the National Treasury are assisting county governments to automate their revenue collection systems to increase compliance and reduce revenue leakages.

Counties that have so far automated their revenue collections have had impressive results.

Bloated workforce: This is yet another challenge that faces county governments. Counties inherited staff from the defunct local authorities and from the national government on functions that were devolved.

And several county governments employed new staff, which resulted in a huge wage bill, leaving minimal resources for development.

A staff rationalisation exercise will be necessary to achieve lean structures and release resources for essential services.

Inadequate capacity: Both personnel and systems face this challenge, constraining the performance of county governments. Despite the large workforce, staff capacity does not match the needs of counties. The levels of education and skills of many staff is below the requirements.

The national government and relevant institutions are working with counties to speed up staff capacity building and systems development.

Budget rows: Disputes over allocations between the county executive and county assemblies are yet another challenge. Both arms of county governments will need to cultivate the art of consultation and negotiation.

Excessive intolerance reported in several counties on money matters is a source of grave concern.

As a result of these disputes, development expenditures have stalled.

Both the Controller of Budget and the Auditor-General have reported massive misuse, and in some cases misappropriation, of public resources in the counties. These practices, if unchecked, will derail devolution.

Institutions charged with investigation and prosecution should move with speed to unearth the truth and bring to court those culpable.

Ultimately, we all need to restore public confidence in devolution, which holds so much promise for the nation.

The writer is the chairman of the Committee on Revenue Allocation