Raila caves in to GEMA demands

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

To me, it seems fair to share revenue according to population size.  Sure, some counties are worse of than others, but I don't believe Kenya has reached that point where affirmative action is required to straighten out regional differences.  People are struggling everywhere.  What would make it even fairer is if the counties get a bigger share of the pie than the central government.

Economic output should be the primary criteria for redistributing funds not population size of county. Perverse incentives should be avoided. Otherwise we will have population explosion. If GEMA and RV contribute more to the national kitty per capita no one should begrudge them.

There is really not much anyone can do about corruption if a significant portion of the population no longer buys into the system.  We can see that right here in the US under Trump.

Assuming you are saying GEMA and RV should get more or less resources, there has to be mechanism to determine that.  I don't believe there is one in place.  So population makes sense in the meantime.  Still, even in a Federal system like the US, some states(mostly Blue) are net losers subsidizing others like (Kentucky) to enjoy living standards that their own contributions cannot sustain.

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

There is really not much anyone can do about corruption if a significant portion of the population no longer buys into the system.  We can see that right here in the US under Trump.

Assuming you are saying GEMA and RV should get more or less resources, there has to be mechanism to determine that.  I don't believe there is one in place.  So population makes sense in the meantime.  Still, even in a Federal system like the US, some states(mostly Blue) are net losers subsidizing others like (Kentucky) to enjoy living standards that their own contributions cannot sustain.

Not correct.

The overarching principle to be used as a basis for revenue allocation is spelled out in the Principles of Public Finance (Article 201), specifically 201(b) which states that “the public finance system shall promote an equitable society” and 201(b) (iii) which says that “expenditure shall promote the equitable development of the country, including by making special provisions for marginalised groups and areas”. (emphasis mine).

Equitable society” and “equitable development” are defined by outcomes such as income per person, life expectancy, school enrollment and education outcomes, access to healthcare, etc. Put differently, this part of the “social contract” that we entered into in August 2010 obliges the state to redress the legacy of inequitable development, marginalisation and exclusion, and to pursue development convergence across the country. While development disparities may persist for different reasons, no community or part of Kenya is entitled to more development than the other using public money. Any distribution of public resources which portends reinforcing these disparities, or creating new ones, is unconstitutional.

We have seen the National Government spend over Sh30b on a transmission line to evacuate wind power from Marsabit to serve these so-called “high potential areas and people”. The people of Marsabit get nothing for their wind resources, and when it comes to sharing revenue, the contribution of the wind resource to the revenue counts for nothing. We have seen the national government rush to Turkana to develop infrastructure to exploit oil, but when it comes to revenue allocation, the investment the oil has brought into the country counts for nothing for the people of Turkana. We have seen the national government pour billions into the Galana-Kulalu Irrigation scheme—notwithstanding the fact agriculture is a devolved function—to meet the food deficit of the high potential areas, yet when it comes to revenue, the envisaged contribution of Tana River people’s land and water resources to national food security counts for nothing. This model of controlling and exploiting the resources in the periphery for the benefit of the centre is called colonialism.

If Kenyatta and his Kikuyu supremacist cabal feel it is intolerable, there is always the alternative of a full federal system. Mombasa and Lamu get to keep their ports. Turkana gets to develop its oil resources. Marsabit gets to charge for its wind resources. The Tsavo National Park reverts to Taita-Taveta County.

Tyranny of numbers, domination of the weak by the strong, and ethnic superiority complexes, this is not an option. Without a commitment to equitable development, there is no social contract, which is to say that, sooner or later, there will be no Kenya.

Divorce is also an option.

Many people are not aware this issues were tackled in 2010 constitution.

https://www.theelephant.info/op-eds/2020/07/28/one-man-one-shilling-politics-a-return-to-inequitable-development-marginalisation-and-exclusion/

 

[Nefertiti]

This should be left mostly to economists. CRA for example stuffed by Micah Serems. That said I disagree with one vote-one shilling. National government still has 70% of the revenue to focus on ROI and high potential sectors or regions. Devolution is about equitable development so the present formula should continue.

Raila and Uhuru interest is to seduce GEMA and Ruto is taking the bait. Seem Ruto has given up on GEMA and is targeting Coast? This may also undermine him in Luhya. Senators obviously care more about their county share than orders from above. The only surprise vote was Sakaja.