The Public Accounts Committee has questioned Principal Secretary for Industry Dr. Juma Mukhwana over the spending of public funds in the State Department for Industry, with members seeking clarification on whether some expenditure was made without the required approval or budget authority.
Dr. Mukhwana is the accounting officer in charge of the State Department for Industry, which operates under the Ministry of Investments, Trade and Industry.
The department oversees several government programmes, including the County Aggregation and Industrial Parks, commonly known as CAIPs.
The CAIPs programme is one of the government’s key initiatives aimed at supporting agriculture and industrial development at the county level. The programme seeks to provide farmers with facilities where agricultural products can be collected, stored and processed. It is also intended to encourage investment and create opportunities for industries to operate closer to areas where raw materials are produced.
The amount of money involved in the programme has made financial accountability an important issue. The government has already allocated KSh4.052 billion to CAIPs, while a further KSh4.448 billion was set aside for the 2025/26 financial year.
With billions of shillings being committed to the programme, Parliament has a responsibility to establish how the funds have been used and whether the spending followed the law.
It was against this background that the committee questioned Dr. Mukhwana during its oversight proceedings. The members focused on expenditure that may not have gone through the proper approval process. Such questions are part of Parliament’s responsibility to examine how government departments use money allocated to them through the national budget.
Public funds are expected to be spent within approved budgets and according to established financial procedures. Where an accounting officer authorises or oversees expenditure, the officer is expected to provide supporting information showing why the money was spent, what it was used for and whether the necessary approvals were obtained.
The questions directed at Dr. Mukhwana therefore go beyond the individual transactions being examined. They touch on the wider issue of how government institutions manage public resources and whether financial controls are being followed.
The CAIPs programme has attracted attention because of its potential impact on farmers, traders and local industries.
If properly implemented, the programme could provide better facilities for handling agricultural produce while helping reduce losses and supporting value addition. County-based industrial parks could also create opportunities for businesses and contribute to employment in different parts of the country.
However, achieving those objectives requires proper management of the funds allocated to the programme. Parliament’s oversight role is meant to ensure that money approved for development programmes is not diverted or spent outside the authorised framework.
The Public Accounts Committee’s questioning is therefore part of the normal process through which government spending is examined.
The committee listens to explanations from accounting officers and reviews available financial records before making its findings and recommendations.
For Dr. Mukhwana, the proceedings provide an opportunity to explain the expenditure questioned by the committee and demonstrate whether the department followed the required financial procedures.
The committee, on the other hand, will have to consider the explanations and supporting documents before determining whether any rules were breached.
The final report from the committee will be important in establishing whether the concerns raised during the hearing require further action. Until that process is completed, the questions surrounding the expenditure remain matters for parliamentary examination.
The proceedings highlight the importance of accountability when large amounts of public money are allocated to government programmes.
For the CAIPs programme, proper financial management will be essential if the billions allocated are to translate into useful facilities, support for farmers and new industrial opportunities across the counties.
The broader issue remains whether every shilling allocated to the State Department for Industry has been spent within the approved financial framework. The committee’s continued examination of the department is intended to provide that answer and strengthen accountability in the management of public resources.
Add Comment