Babu, When people lose election they do not go demanding for dialogue with the winners to force advice down their throats on how to govern. They wait for the winners to make mistakes so they can capitalize on in the next election.

Dearest Baba, I agree that the cost of living is very high. You have threatened that you will ask your people to boycott products from companies that don't sell at reasonable prices.

One of my major expense is cooking gas.

I understand that you own a major company supplying gas.

Can you set an example by slashing the prices.

Thank you Bamba

C&P from RINK:

Second, Cord needs to narrow down its aims. Many of the issues listed in its thirteen point agenda are important, but I’d bet that even devoted Cord activists can’t remember all of them. The most effective issue Odinga has at his disposal is devolution.

This is a clear example of an area in which the government is attempting to re-centralise control in contravention of the spirit of the constitution. It also makes for very good politics: Odinga needs to attract county leaders to his side, and stem the steady trickle of local leaders to the ranks of Jubilee.

A campaign to ensure that 40 per cent of government revenue flows to counties would win the backing of Governors, who have consistently claimed that central government is denying them the resources they need to do their jobs.

To their credit, Cord leaders have realised this and seem to be moving in this direction. However, there is also a danger here. Many counties are not spending their resources effectively, and increasing the share of revenues that are devolved to them is unlikely to improve the quality of public services – at least in the short term.

So any move to hold a referendum on protecting/extending devolution would need to go hand in hand with a strong focus on ensuring that Cord-friendly counties perform better and start to deliver on their promises.

The other proposal that would seem reasonable to layman is the proposal to change from presidential to parliamentary system. However if you look critically, this would amount to major change or overhaul of the constitution, not amendment, which by definition is merely ‘a minor change or addition designed to improve a text, piece of legislation’.

Change of system of government as proposed would result in total overhaul of chapters 8 & 9, and total restructuring of two arms of government – legislature and executive. Such change can only be logically necessitated by catastrophic failure of current structure (which has not happened), followed by structured public consultations on the next course of action, of which parliamentary system may not necessarily arise as the logical alternative.

In case of overhaul of the current constitution, a legal framework would have to be developed by parliament on how to undertake the process, with all inclusive country wide public debate and consultation. Indeed there is a precedent – there was an act of parliament created to guide the process of reviewing and overhauling the previous constitution. I don’t see any justification for referendum, maybe it’s because am not a lawyer.

Mbona waogopoa referendum, a constituntional and legal means of getting the change you need, wait for the referendum questions folks!!!