When President Uhuru Kenyatta hosted Sagana-3 forum in Nyeri County recently, I noticed something that has been bugging my mind.
One, Wakahiu ran the meeting through a PowerPoint presentation on national government development projects within Mt Kenya region.
I dare say the number and magnitude of the trillion shillings projects was very impressive.
If there was any feeling that Uhuru’s regime has neglected Mt Kenya in terms of development as alleged by propagandists, the projects that were exposed at Sagana-3 forum should shame such people.
After debunking the abandonment myth at Sagana-3, Uhuru’s detractors have shifted attacks on lack of money in peoples’ pockets.
I don’t know how Uhuru’s or any other government for that matter can convince citizens not to worry about money when such is always in short supply.
In this case those bashing the government are spoilt for choice because even when it is not lack of money, there is always something bothering a country- currently being artificial shortage of fuel.
That as it may, Sagana-3 left me wondering whether county government projects are not Uhuru regime’s achievements as well.
I strongly believe Mr Wakahiu should have combined both national and county governments’ projects within Mt Kenya in one bundle.
Chapter 2 of our Constitution stipulates that both levels of government shall conduct their mutual relations based on consultation and cooperation.
In my view ‘mutual’ and ‘cooperation’ means consensus and in extension oneness.
In my understanding therefore, projects that are initiated and implemented by both the national and county governments are country projects in totality.
One might ask if the reverse applies and my answer is it does.
This is because it is risky if citizens are not sensitised to appreciate that all programmes and projects are due to the efforts of a regime in power.
Essentially, it is the ruling regime that is responsible in ensuring funds are available and disbursed to both levels of government.
Devolution shared development implementation but it didn’t divide nationhood.
I think in terms of administration and implementation of the constitution, a divisive development mentality crept in and if not nibbled in the bud, it might nurture separatist ideas that might not augur well for national cohesiveness.
The constitution was generous without being irresponsible and that is why it retained the National Anthem and permitted devolved units the latitude to tinker with symbols such the flag, Coat of Arms and Seal for identification and not usurpation of power.
It behoves both levels of governments to avoid the pitfalls of mental development divide and to educate citizens on the need to internalise statehood in spirit and deeds.
Even when certain regions have not voted for a regime in power, the Constitution has insulated such areas from funds and programmes discrimination.
My advice is that all projects should be portrayed as holistic achievements of the regime in power.
Short of this I don’t know what Constitution we are applying in this country.
Kaunda wa Muchunku
Do you have any commentary you would want published on thepresspoint.com? Share with us via thepresspoint07@gmail.com
