Devolution requires much more than funds to succeed

From the early days of devolution in 2013/2014, the problem of delays in disbursing funds to the county governments has become a recurrent one. County governments complain about funds being disbursed in an intermittent manner and/or receiving them late all the time.

They complain about not receiving enough funds to cover their recurrent and development expenditure. They are right and wrong at the same time. The idea is that the National Treasury should at the beginning of every month or not later than the 15th day from the first day of the month disburse funds to the county governments for the following month’s expenditure.

This means that the law provides for county governments to plan their expenditure but, arguably, delays in receipt of funds make it difficult to plan, implement projects and pay staff. 

Specifically, Section 17 of the Public Finance Management Act directs on when the National Treasury should disburse funds. This law provides for predictability in receiving funds. It makes it easy for county governments to plan on the use of funds, including planning several months in advance. 

But the law and reality are different. The ideal is different from reality. The National Treasury does not meet legal deadlines all the time. The National Treasury does not receive enough funds for monthly disbursements. The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) also does not receive enough funds to pass to the National Treasury.

The KRA also collects funds from taxpayers but some run away from the taxman, while others do not pay on time —sometimes waiting until May or June.

This means KRA does not collect sufficient funds until the last quarter of the financial year. The problem does not end here. There are many Kenyans who do not pay taxes. Pay As You Earn is one main source of tax but this accounts for only those who are employed. 

Many in self-employment or in small but unregistered businesses run away from taxes. Because of these factors, revenue collected every quarter may not be sufficient for disbursement to the county governments and other national obligations, including payment of debts.

Some county governments also constrain disbursements by failing to meet the requirements, leaving each of the actors pointing fingers at the other.

Nonetheless, the problem of delays in releasing funds to the counties and to ministries, departments and other agencies is becoming a major concern. It is leading to the view that counties are not performing well. Counties enjoy this discussion greatly, as it heaps the blame on the national government. 

The national government’s ministries too complain of delays and argue that they are not effective in implementing their plans due to such delays.

But there is a lot of work that the counties can carry out with or without the funds. The counties — both the county assemblies and the executive teams — should think ‘out of the box’.

In fact, the failures of devolution are attributable to, one, poor leadership on the part of some of the governors, two, clueless county assemblies, and finally disinterested citizens. These three combine to give devolution a bad name. Let me now turn to what the county governments can do with or without funds.

Empowering citizens

Devolution is not only about money. It is about empowering citizens and changing mindsets too.

Devolution has several objectives, which include addressing imbalances in development and the provision of development and services in all corners of Kenya. 

Devolution was introduced to promote democratic governance and lay a strong foundation for social and economic development. It is meant to promote equitable sharing of resources so that the majorities and minorities as well as the marginalised groups collectively establish ‘unity of purpose’ as one people or one Kenya. 

One Nation One People means that the pain of any one Kenyan is the pain of all Kenyans. The success of Kenya is the success of all. This is the goal of devolution: ensure a high level of national unity, especially after equitable sharing of resources and promotion of development in a manner that No One is Left Behind. Embedding this value does not require funds from the National Treasury.

These objects are easy to achieve if we reflect on the principles of devolution. The Constitution is explicit that the county governments are based on democratic principles and the separation of powers.

Democratic principles implied here include ensuring treating all people in the county equally. This means that in the county, all people are valued equally and that opportunities are extended to all in the same manner without discrimination on the basis of clan, ethnicity or even region.

Unfortunately, in some counties, some of the elected governors give opportunities on the basis of which region of the county voted for who, among others. 

There are instances where governors get into office and begin by rewarding those who supported and financed their electoral campaigns. This is discrimination. This practice is responsible for increased ‘pending bills’. The bills are inflated in order to reward friends and those who will support the next campaign. Using good faith and becoming honest in what we do does not require funds from the National Treasury.

But embedding the principles of equality and justice in the practices of the county government does not require funds from the National Treasury. It is about good practice and ensuring that the values of honesty, justice, and honour are the shield. This does not require funds from the National Treasury. 

Refusing to discriminate against the areas that did not vote for you is a sign of democracy and a sign of good hope. This does not require funds from the National Treasury.

Devolution also requires that the county governments should be based on the principle of separation of powers. 

This principle underlines the importance of checks and balances. It requires that the governor is checked and balanced by the county assemblies. The county assemblies are in turn checked and balanced by the county executive. But what we see is different. County executives have become rogue elephants.

They are brutish and bullish in their relationship with the executive. But mending this relationship requires a healthy dialogue on the responsibilities of organs. It does not require funds to carry out this dialogue unless you want funds to bribe them. This is a family conversation. It does not require National Treasury funds.

The Constitution also requires that the counties reflect the principle of no more than two-thirds of the members of representative bodies shall be of the same gender. The county executives flout this principle or attend to it as an end in itself. Ensuring that this principle is reflected and practised in all county organs does not require the National Treasury Funds.

Finally, having a dialogue with the private sector on policies and practices they require to engage in enterprise development does not require funds from the National Treasury. It requires the governor to pronounce himself as friendly to the business sector and to create free space for firms to thrive. Let me give an example.

Today, Makueni and Taita Taveta are producing some of the best citrus fruits in the region. Pixie orange farming is the new source of income in Makueni and Taita Taveta. Murang’a today is the home of the best avocados. It is the new cash crop.

All of these did not require funds from the National Treasury. These required birth to ideas before asking about funds. These required leaders with ideas.

These required leaders who gave the farmers the freedom, space, and policies required to do their best. These did not require funds from the National Treasury.

Funds are important but not all the time and always. We need ideas outside the box.

Prof Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi; [email protected]; @karutikk