Let devolution meet not be a talking shop

The Sixth Annual Devolution Conference being held in Kirinyaga County comes at a time when the county system is under serious scrutiny. Questions are being asked about the viability of counties as independent entities and effectiveness in resource generation and utilisation. Six years since the introduction of county governments, many lessons have been learnt and we can now engage on informed discourse about devolution.

Devolved rule certainly revolutionised management of public affairs. Dispersal of resources to the grassroots and creation of local-based institutions — county assemblies and sub-county committees — to make decisions on behalf of the people on development matters empowered citizens and stimulated growth. Previously, all resources were kept at the national level and decisions made by a few for many — which was disenfranchising, patronising and, worse, led to skewed development where regions with powerful political leaders benefited at the expense of the rest.

The best illustration of devolution is the fact that some regions saw a tarmac road or medical surgery after the county system. Infrastructure development and economic growth expanded.

Even so, devolution has created a new of set of challenges. The first is over-reliance on the national government for financial upkeep. The National Treasury is constitutionally required to disburse at least 15 per cent of the incomes to the counties, based on audited annual financial reports. The Constitution also provides for the Equalisation Fund, to support marginalised regions. All these were intended to guarantee equitable resource distribution and inspire growth all round.

Whereas this marks a basis for substantive proportional development, it has engendered a culture of dependency. Counties literally depend on the subventions from the Treasury for sustenance, and when the funds delay, they are thrown into a crisis. Yet, the payouts from the Treasury were meant to augment and not necessarily provide the primary source for county survival. Put differently, counties were expected to create their own incomes.

However, reports show that, that is a mirage. Resource collection has dipped as contrasted to the defunct local authorities. Worse still, corruption has been ‘devolved’ with resources grossly misapplied. The Auditor-General’s reports perennially show massive looting and pilferage in the counties. Discrimination, nepotism and favouritism have taken centre stage.

The weeklong conference must go beyond being a talking shop to a serious platform that examines critical issues and provides solutions to the ills afflicting the counties. Devolved units should be supported to thrive but, on their own, they must eradicate graft, nepotism and other ills jeopardising their operations.