There may be merit in reducing size of government

Nairobi; Kenya: Whatever else we may make of Eric Orina’s petition to Parliament to review several provisions of the new Constitution, one that must be worthy of our engagement is the proposal to reduce the size of government. This debate is as old as the review process itself, from when the first draft was released by Prof Yash Pal Ghai in 2002. On the one side were the political and social activists who extoled the proposed structure as the only way for Wanjiku to have a taste of the national cake. High optimists on this side did not want any questions asked. An article on the ICJ website just prior to the referendum declared boldly, “We are not likely to come up with a new Constitution that will cost less than the current one. Clearly, the argument should not be whether the new Constitution will be more expensive. That it will be. The concern should be whether it is good value for money.” The spirit of this argument appears to have been that Kenya has the money and our only problem should be getting good value for it, and at whatever cost.

On the other side were apparent pragmatists who wanted to know the shillings and cents it would require to effectively run the expanded two-tier parliament; the numerous commissions and constitutional offices; and most of all, the extensive devolved units and their attendant structures. Some pessimists on this side even predicted that the country would not run for even one year under the proposed new system.