doubletap wrote:tycho wrote:We could also ask whether the thinking behind the bill is progressive enough to be part of Kenya's political agenda. At least under ideal conditions.
In my opinion, the thinking is retrogressive and perhaps too much pro status quo, when we clearly need more distribution of power and resources.
The ward is ideally the basic unit of a democracy and if we are talking about reducing distribution of power to the individual citizen regardless of social class, then the bill isn't democratic.
Think distribution of power and resources has already been achieved to a greater sense, think it's the cost to the people for the right to decide how and where they want to spend there resources that is the issue at hand.
It costs too much in recurrent expenditure at the detriment of development agendas. Reduce them all.
Firstly, the question of even distribution of power and resources has not been addressed. At least there is hardly any evidence that the distribution has ever tried to happen.
When power and resources are evenly distributed then it is reasonable to expect productivity. So if the assumption is power is more distributed then the correct bill should be for increase in productivity and probably definition of property and property values.
But in our case, we deem resources as scarce and costs being met from a central entity. This betrays the absence of even capacities across the country.
Finally, what is the marginal difference of this bill to Wanjiku? Wanjiku remains economically unsustainable even if the costs were to reduce.
We may need a rethink of our assumptions.