It’s time to take stock of devolution and then chart the way forward

Among the people who are considering running for the presidency in 2022 are current and former governors.

That is not surprising, for governors run counties; they are in charge of budgets; make policy, managerial and financial decisions that affect millions of Kenyans; and, often, their word is as final as the law.

Put another way, governors, sitting or past, have records and these are in the public domain. Therefore, it should be easy to judge candidates who have been governors when they seek the presidency.

Successful governors — that is, those who have made the lives of their constituents economically better than they found them — should be strong candidates for the presidency.

Per the Constitution, governors can only serve two five-year terms, which explains why some want to climb the political ladder while others, given their proximity to local electorate, are positioning themselves as point men, strategists and consultants for aspirants to the presidency and even gubernatorial seats.

DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES

Therefore, as sitting and past governors test the waters of presidential runs, it may be a good time to look at governorship afresh and ask whether the office and holders have been useful in driving the devolution agenda.

Devolution aims to empower the people to participate in making decisions about the management of their resources and to better their lives.

Previously all important decisions were made at the centre. The popular grouse was that these were skewed in favour of certain regions and, therefore, at the expense, and to the detriment, of others, chiefly in terms of allocation of resources and development of public institutions and infrastructure.

The result, so goes the argument, is that some regions have benefited more from State largesse or developed more, while others have lagged behind. And, the argument goes, those areas that have so developed have produced presidents.

Obviously, it has also been argued this is the main reason presidential contests are fiercely fought.

The Council of Governors has always painted devolution as successful and transforming the lives of Kenyans.

SOUR RELATIONS

The narrative that has dominated media from the counties has been about mismanagement of finances and downright theft and this has been grounded in, and been backed by the public auditors.

Governors have not had easy relations with county assemblies and have often scrambled to keep the members on their side lest they be impeached or have their legislative agenda or budgets shelved, delayed or shot down altogether.

Governors have not had a cosy relationship with senators, chiefly because the legislators seek to scrutinise their spending.

And governors have taken flak from President Uhuru Kenyatta who, in his 2016 State of the Nation address, said they had spent public money to build mansions and buy limousines and asked Kenyans to seriously ask themselves if they were feeling and seeing the benefits of devolution.

CORRUPTION

The media have popularised the claim that counties are proof corruption has been devolved.

Can the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), which is the second largest party in the land, boast of presiding over the best run counties?

Can the governing Jubilee Party make the same claim? It is a safe bet that counties are bedevilled by the same vices of corruption, mismanagement of public finances, profligate spending and wanton wastage that have run rampant in the national government.

Counties have not been successful in raising their own revenues and are therefore dependent on the national budget.

That means at a time such as this, when the national government is strapped for cash, county governments will be in dire straits or worse, because they too are saddled with debts.

AUDIT REPORT

The idea I espoused at the start that the only political thing about governorship is the appointment by vote because the office is purely administrative is, of course, long dead in the water.

Governors who thought the same soon learned that they must become politicians to deal with county assemblies, senators, MPs and, of course, local and national politics.

But there is no gainsaying the popularity of devolution. Local people point to elected representatives who live close to them, all weather or tarmacked roads, bridges, health centres, stalls at markets, sheds for motorcycle taxis, name it. But good things can be made better.

My observations here are not scientific, so as we head to a decade of devolution, we need an independent study to bring to our attention all the successes and failures of devolution and propose the pivots to ensure success in the future.

[email protected]