By Martin Masai
Machakos County Assembly sittings were suspended yesterday after a bitter dispute over a proposed KSh 1 billion fund linked to Governor Wavinya Ndeti
A push to have it approved for debate in the plenary derailed agreement on House business.
An undated public notice circulated to Members of County Assembly (MCAs) confirmed the postponement of plenary sittings scheduled for April 28 and 29, citing the inability of the House Business Committee to agree on the agenda for balloting.
Speaker Anne Kiusya indicated in the notice that sittings are expected to resume on May 5, but insiders say the stalemate is far from resolved.
At the centre of the impasse is the controversial Wikwatyo Fund—an initiative being advanced by the county executive and aggressively pushed on the floor by the Majority Leader Nicholas Nzioka since late last year.
Estimated at about KSh 1 billion, the fund is publicly framed as an empowerment programme targeting youth and women groups across the county.
But behind that framing lies a deep and widening divide within the Assembly that sees it as public funds that is slated for campaigns.
A section of MCAs- mainly from Maendeleo Chap Chap and United Democratic Alliance has dug in against attempts to fast-track the fund’s passage, arguing that it is being introduced without a regulatory and governance framework.
The proposal, as presented, lacks provisions for an independent oversight board, operational guidelines, or clear accountability mechanisms governing how the money would be allocated and audited.
For these MCAs, the issue is not the principle of empowerment, but the architecture of control and clear thirst to raid public coffers.
“You cannot appropriate that kind of money on the basis of goodwill,” a source familiar with the committee deliberations said. “Public funds require structure, transparency, and safeguards.”
The standoff has precedent. The Majority Leader’s push to pass the Wikwatyo Fund has repeatedly disrupted House business over the past several months.
Earlier attempts last December collapsed, leading to postponements that ultimately saw the bill lapse—only for it to return in its current, equally contested form- yet its proponents do not want it run within the law.
Critics within the Assembly have also drawn parallels between the proposed fund and the Machakos Youth Service, which has operated without a comprehensive regulatory framework or an independent governing board.
When it was passed, the then Finance Minister Onesmus Kuyu promised to bring its rules for legislation but that has never happened.
That experience, they argue, has already exposed gaps in accountability—gaps they fear could be replicated, or even amplified, under a larger, less structured fund.
Beyond governance concerns, however, a more politically charged accusation has sharpened the conflict.
Now opponents of the Wikwatyo Fund allege that it is designed not just as an empowerment vehicle, but as a political instrument—one that could be used to channel resources toward activities associated with the Wiper Democratic Movement–Kenya within Machakos and potentially beyond.
The allegation, which supporters of the fund strongly dispute, has nonetheless hardened positions within the Assembly, turning what might have been a policy disagreement into a high-stakes political confrontation.
For those resisting the bill, the fear is that without clear legal guardrails, the fund could evolve into a discretionary pool of money vulnerable to patronage and partisan deployment—undermining both fiscal discipline and institutional integrity.
Supporters, on the other hand, maintain that the resistance is politically motivated and risks denying vulnerable groups access to much-needed financial support.
They argue that empowerment initiatives often require flexibility and that overregulation could stifle their effectiveness.
Caught between these positions is the House Business Committee, whose inability to broker a compromise has effectively shut down the Assembly.
As the body responsible for scheduling legislative business, its deadlock means no motions, bills, or oversight functions can proceed to the floor.
The consequences are immediate and far-reaching.
With plenary sittings suspended, critical legislative processes—including budget approvals, policy debates, and executive oversight—remain in limbo.
The Speaker’s notice, brief and procedural, offers little indication of how or when the underlying dispute will be resolved.
Yet its implications are clear: the Assembly is not merely postponing sittings—it is grappling with a crisis of consensus.
Political observers say the unfolding standoff reflects a broader struggle over control of public resources and the balance of power between the executive and the legislature.
“This is about more than one fund,” one analyst noted. “It is about the rules that govern how money is raised, allocated, and accounted for—and who gets to influence that process.”
Stay Anchored
About the Author
