Mt. Kenya should set aside entitlement in the revenue sharing impasse


Revenue Sharing Formula/CRA

There are two arguments that dilute Mt. Kenya’s position on the ‘One-man, shilling, one-vote’ revenue-sharing angle.

One, our small landmass simply means that we’ll keep on emigrating to other counties. As it stands, there are so many central people settled in Kajiado, Machakos counties et al. This trend is not about to stop. So, is the argument on population-based funding long-term or even sustainable?

The immigration to other counties will simply justify the demand for a similar system by the host counties. We must drive an argument that can make sense 15 years from now.

Two, it’s logically factual to confirm that counties such as found in the Northern Corridor lag behind in terms of development. From another way, we would not be carrying this argument of our counties are the least developed at all. Let’s not hold the country at ransom.

Additionally, our counties have not in any way, excelled in financial management and accountability on the funds received, so far. As a voter, do you think any addition will make any impact on you?

Citizens should not get involved in the political process but firmly push for prudent financial management. We must lead in agitating for a holistic approach that collectively addresses macro-economic goals, unemployment, and inflation.

Antagonizing all the other counties in dynamics that can change against us is a short-sighted approach!

Gibson Wambugu is a trained economist and governance commentator

You have successfully subscribed to the newsletter

There was an error while trying to send your request. Please try again.

The Brief will use the information you provide on this form to be in touch with you and to provide updates and marketing.