The Association of Kenya Insurers (AKI) has opposed the proposed law in which the State wants to create a single body to coordinate engagement between government and the private sector.
The Public Sector-Private Sector Engagement Bill, 2025, which has been fronted by the Ministry of Investments, Trade and Industry, proposes the establishment of the Business Council of Kenya (BCK).
The State wants the council to act as the primary vehicle for structured dialogue between policymakers and private sector’s business interests on issues such as taxation, regulation, investment facilitation and trade policies.
However, the proposal has continued to come under criticism, with the latest being from AKI, which says the arrangement will not promote timely, sector-specific and technically informed engagement engagements in its current format.
‘While the intention, to improve engagement, investment and overall business climate, is commendable, the approach risks achieving the opposite. A single, centralised channel for engagement is more likely to reduce interaction, weaken quality of dialogue and undermine effective policy making,’ said AKI.
AKI’s concerns follow that of Kenya National Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KNCCI) which said last December that the formation of BCK should have been ‘private-sector led and private-sector regulated’ to adequately address the needs of the private sector.
Under the proposed framework, industry associations and lobby groups would be required to register with BCK before engaging the government. Private sector actors would channel their policy proposals through quarterly submissions.
AKI has warned that the proposed centralised model could undermine, rather than enhance, effective public-private sector engagement. The insurers’ lobby argued that Kenya’s economy is too diverse and specialised to be adequately represented through a single coordinating entity.
‘Having all engagement through one entity restricts the range of voices reaching policymakers and limits diversity of perspectives necessary for sound and balanced policy development,’ said AKI.
AKI cautioned that consolidating dialogue under one body risks diluting the quality of input reaching decision-makers.
According to the association, different sectors face unique regulatory, operational and risk-related challenges that cannot be squeezed into a one-size-fits-all framework.
‘A banker cannot effectively speak to insurance-specific regulatory challenges, just as an insurer cannot fully represent banking concerns. Expecting a single representative to adequately articulate the policy needs of an entire sector risks misrepresentation,’ said AKI.
They also raised concerns about the potential bureaucratic barriers the Bill could introduce. For instance, AKI warned that the requirement for industry bodies to register with the proposed council before engaging the government could end up excluding smaller, niche or emerging sectors.
Commenting on the proposal for quarterly submissions by private sector actors, AKI argued that such timelines are incompatible with the realities of business operations given that urgent issues frequently arise and require immediate engagement.
‘Imagine a challenge at the port of Mombasa with congestion having to wait for quarterly submissions . delayed responses translate to lost opportunities, disruption and real economic costs,’ said AKI.
The structure of the proposed council has also come under scrutiny. The Bill envisions a governing board made up of representatives from major sectors of the economy. AKI cautioned that this approach risks misrepresentation, particularly in complex sectors such as financial services.
‘Public-private sector engagement should be the direct responsibility of each Cabinet Secretary, within their respective mandates. Ministries should identify and engage with relevant industry and lobby bodies before, during and after policy formulation,’ said AKI.