The UDA Government: A Fish Riding a Bicycle?

 The senator's remarks yesterday sparked significant attention across Kenya. His statement, which criticized the government's approach to national issues, was blunt: "It is not clear, they have no plan, none. It is government betrayal and error. In the UDA government, we've got a fish riding a bicycle."

To understand what triggered these remarks, we need to look at the government’s decision to step back from the Gulf fuel import scheme. Simply put, Senator Ole Kina's words highlight what he perceives as a government operating without direction—making decisions by trial and error. His statement reflects his belief that the Kenya Kwanza government is struggling, as it often lacks foresight in implementing its policies.

However, before we jump to conclusions, let’s analyze the facts. This analysis isn’t about bashing UDA or its supporters but about objectively evaluating the government’s actions. It’s essential to set aside emotions and approach this issue with reason, even if it’s difficult for supporters of opposition groups.

Let’s start by acknowledging an important detail—there are issues with some of the statements made by the senator, particularly regarding prayers. While Senator Ole Kina mentioned prayers, it’s important to clarify that the focus should remain on the government’s actions rather than digressions into matters of faith.

Now, let’s return to the central question: Has the UDA government done anything that can be considered a success? Take a moment to reflect on this, devoid of bias. For instance, there was an attempt to lower the prices of basic commodities such as unga and cooking oil by giving importers the responsibility of sourcing products like maize and oil duty-free. However, the scheme faced problems almost immediately. Greed and inexperience led to the importation of low-quality maize, which was rejected by local millers. As a result, the plan failed, proving Senator Ole Kina’s point: this was a "fish trying to ride a bicycle."

Additionally, the government had high hopes for its fuel import strategy—purchasing fuel on credit in hopes of stabilizing the Shilling by reducing demand for U.S. dollars. On paper, this seemed like an ingenious plan, but the result was the opposite of what was intended. The Shilling has continued to lose value despite the fuel credit scheme, revealing deeper systemic issues in the government’s strategy.

Moreover, the government attempted to quell opposition protests through the use of force, thinking this would reduce the numbers of demonstrators. Yet, this strategy backfired, with protests growing even stronger. This, too, highlights a failed approach to governance.

In conclusion, there’s a recurring theme of well-intentioned but poorly executed policies. The government's failure to address basic issues such as food prices and the weakening Shilling exposes the reality behind the façade of progress often reported in the media. Unfortunately, much of what Kenyans hear about the government’s achievements is manufactured news, driven by propaganda rather than factual progress.

If we are to evaluate the state of the nation honestly, we must acknowledge that the government has faced significant challenges, and the so-called "successes" are, in many cases, nothing more than mirages. The truth is that Kenyans are facing a crisis, and the current trajectory suggests the situation may worsen unless substantial changes are made.