The law and lack of funds frustrate my work, Controller of Budget Nyakang'o

She also told the Gathoni Wamuchomba-led committee that legislative gaps in the Controller of Budget Act had over the years made her mandate a herculean task and that there was need to amend it.

She singled out Section (4) of the Act which she noted fails to recognise that a vacancy may arise in the position of of the Controller of Budget when the CoB leaves office after lapse of the prescribed timeline of 8 years.

“Section 9 (4) of the Act should be amended to allow the CoB report on all facets of the budget implementation as envisaged in the Constitution. Under the current provisions, the CoB is barred from reporting on economic developments and outlook including revenue; grants, loans, forecasts and receipts,” said Nyakang’o.

She raised concern over a provision in the Act that prohibits voiding of payments after the approval for withdrawal of funds issued by the CoB. To this end, she added, responsibility should be placed on an accounting officer who should ensure the funds authorised for withdrawal by the Controller of Budget are aligned with the schedule of payments supporting the request.

“This will ensure payments mirror the approval, thus avoiding pending bills and misdirection of funds,” she said.

The House team further heard that a delay in development of CoB regulations following annulment by Senate, were a huge hindrance to the office of the CoB executing its mandate.

“The reasons advanced by the Senate for annulment were that the regulations had not fully captured the comments of the National Treasury received after publication of the regulations; the penalties proposed in the regulations were not deterent enough; the challenges currently being expressed, such as pending Bills were not addressed ; and investigative powers contained in part IV of the draft regulations were likely to overlap with investigative powers of other government agencies such as EACC,” noted Nyakang’o.

“The CoB has since developed draft regulations incorporating the Senate’s views. However, due to budgetary constraints, the CoB has been unable to undertake public participation,” she added.

On dealing with financial constraints, she said that the lack of a Sh20 million budget had impeded on the office’s ability to conduct public participation on the regulations and crippled its monitoring and evaluation roles.

The MPs consequently vowed to initiate a push for a law review to further empower the COB office.

“……you are not allowed to report on all facets? So it means that when we are building the Standard Gauge Railway you are not allowed to report that? Then why is this office there if it is not allowed to tell us how we spent money on economic development?” posed Wamuchomba.

To which Nyakangó replied in the affirmative.

Committee Vice Chair William Kamket said: “I see the office of the Controller of Budget being an institution that was set up to fail from the beginning. We need to give this office more powers to act as opposed to it making reports and waiting for us to adopt them.”