By Kepher Otieno - Reporter
Kenya, 17 June 2026 - Vihiga Senator Godfrey Osotsi has issued a pointed warning to county governments benefiting from affirmative action allocations, urging them to ring-fence the KSh 4.46 billion package for development projects rather than recurrent expenditure and wage obligations.
Speaking during debate on the County Allocation of Revenue Bill, 2026/2027 in the Senate on Wednesday, Osotsi said the special funds were designed to correct historical inequalities in marginalised regions and must not be diluted by administrative spending pressures.
Each of the 12 designated counties is set to receive about Sh371 million under the affirmative action framework, a targeted intervention meant to accelerate infrastructure growth in areas that continue to lag behind national averages.
Osotsi cautioned that early indications show some counties are already drifting from the intended purpose, diverting allocations to settle pending bills and salaries—an approach he said risks undermining the entire rationale of the programme.
“The affirmative action funds were never meant for salaries or clearing pending bills. They were designed to close development gaps in marginalised counties,” Osotsi said on the Senate floor.
The Vihiga senator urged the Senate Finance and Budget Committee to tighten oversight mechanisms to ensure strict compliance, warning that weak accountability could turn a transformative intervention into another recurrent budget buffer.
He said the priority in beneficiary counties should be visible development outcomes, particularly in roads, health facilities and water infrastructure, rather than absorption into wage pressures that already strain devolved units.
More from Kenya
“If we allow this money to be eaten up by pending bills, then we will defeat the purpose of affirmative action. These counties need roads, hospitals and water—not more wage bills,” he added.
Osotsi also used the debate to renew calls for an increased share of national revenue to counties in future divisions, arguing that stronger fiscal devolution remains central to reducing regional disparities and improving service delivery.
The 12 counties classified under the marginalisation criteria rely on affirmative action funding to supplement their equitable share, which is often constrained by population-based allocation formulas.
While senators from beneficiary regions have consistently defended the funds as critical for catching up with better-resourced counties, audit reports have repeatedly flagged weaknesses in planning, procurement, and expenditure controls, with some allocations absorbed into non-development spending.
Osotsi’s intervention now adds fresh pressure on county governments to demonstrate fiscal discipline, as scrutiny intensifies over whether special allocations are achieving their intended developmental impact or being lost to recurrent financial pressures.