SAM’S SENSE: Parliament - Oversight or overwhelmed?

Days later, Parliament's Public Accounts committee embarked on hearings to establish expenditure by certain offices including the office of the Deputy President, and we saw Members of Parliament wonder how the office spent up to Ksh.8 million to hire a chopper in a day. And the committee was divided.

Often times when Members of Parliament are put to task over their role in oversighting the national Executive, they tend to turn defensive.

Some of them question the authenticity of reports that the media relies on in publishing stories of possible misuse of public funds.

And they make a case that whatever media outlets publish should not be believed as it is likely one-sided; one sided to mean, the opinion of the Controller of Budget or the Auditor General as the case may be. MPs say this even when that information originates from Parliament, in committees that MPs themselves sit in.

Even when the public accounts committee questioned the expenditure of the Office of the Deputy President, some of the legislators were appalled, others had excuses for the high office. And so, why spend time to express shock before the cameras? Or is it just for show?

You see, at the end of every quarter, the Controller of Budget must file a report with Parliament on the state of budget implementation. And those reports are usually rich with information.

They explain how State and public offices are using money allocated to them and whether they are keeping with the expected flow.

When the Controller of Budget reports that State House spent 91 per cent of its annual budget in just six months, or that the office of the Deputy President spent 89 per cent of its budget in the first six months of the year, you'd expect parliament to be concerned.

For MPs to sound indifferent and state that they will have to wait for the auditor to establish if there was value for money, why then have Controller of Budget reports filed with Parliament?

You see, the Controller’s report is a compilation of information as reported by the respective accounting officers. For clarity, the State House expenditure report is based on what the Comptroller of State House reported.

And that is crucial information because it shows you that State House does not have money to run the remainder of the financial year. And that is why they went back to Parliament for a supplementary budget – which they were given: doubling state house allocation to Ksh.17 billion. 

How easy it is for MPs to allocate more money but appear not interested in monitoring the expenditure, even if just to echo what the Controller said?

You know why MPs must now pay attention? Last week, the government subsidized petroleum prices while also foregoing half of VAT on fuel. This means that we are already staring at revenue shortfall in this final quarter of the financial year.

And when that happens, there may be no choice but to consider another supplementary budget. Only that this time, it may have to reduce allocations. What will MPs do?

Will they say they will have to wait for the auditor general to determine if there was value for money in the fuel subsidies or tax cuts?

Yet, even those reports of the auditor general receive similar contempt as those of the Controller of Budget.

Have you not heard MPs criticize the auditor for “leaking” reports to the media? Reports, which are already filed with parliament, and therefore are public documents. What an inconvenience!

And so, how exactly do departmental budgets pass in Parliament when there is litany of questions raised about expenditure? What’s the incentive? Would you mind asking your MP?

That’s my sense tonight.