Category: Business Daily

Motorists who have to grapple with the current administration and conduct of our traffic will take some solace from the fact that more Kenyans are now more ‘mobile’ than ever before. A very big tick in that box. But does that have to mean congestion, delay, exasperation, and danger? Mart

Any answer to that must start in the context of a prodigious increase in the population of people and vehicles. Both have increased nearly tenfold (!!!) in a few decades.

That would test the infrastructure and policy fibre of any country, and your ‘big tick’ would be well deserved even if we were just surviving. Yet we are doing that well enough to think about thriving!

On that basis, ask any politician or policeman what motoring laws and policies are trying to achieve, and the answer will be simple and consistent: Not just more vehicles, but roadworthy vehicles, well driven, on decent highways and streets, safely, smoothly, efficiently and economically.

Well here’s the news. That is exactly what the motoring public wants, too.

So why do the two sides seem to be constantly fighting each other? Surely people fight when they differ – not when they absolutely agree.

Let’s start with the motoring public. How many motorists actually prefer a car that is unroadworthy? How many actively wish to drive badly, or on an awful road, or dangerously, or over bumps, in clogged traffic? Does any motorist want to make vehicle ownership and use as expensive as possible? And how many motorists want roads to be unmarked or often incorrectly marked?

And so to the law makers and law enforcers. Accepting their declared wish-list begs some questions:

If they don’t want defective vehicles, then why are they giving such loopholes (even incentives) for importation of sub-standard used vehicles and parts; why do they pre-inspect new vehicles and genuine parts but not used vehicles and scrap components?

Why do they allow damaging bumps to be constructed, and potholes to remain unfixed? Why do they impose taxes that make quality replacement parts less affordable? Why do they keep proposing expansion of massively expensive inspection systems when the existing ones clearly don’t (and won’t) work?

Why don’t they inspect and license workshops so motorists who want to keep their vehicles in good shape can get competent service? And why don’t they make routine roadworthiness inspection a compulsory part of every service?

If they want good driving, why do they not set higher standards for licensing driving schools, and conduct a much more stringent driving test? Why do they not bombard us with public education campaigns?

If they want smooth and efficient travel, why do they allow desperately slow vehicles to obstruct arterial highways? Why don’t they mark and enforce clearways?

And so on, and so on.

Meanwhile the over-riding question remains: if both sides want the same things, why doesn’t their relationships look less like conflict and more like teamwork?

After all, if the motoring public wants all the things law makers and enforcers say they want we don’t need draconian crackdowns; we need enabling conditions and a partnership of mutual respect.

Policy’s priority should be to help motorists have roadworthy cars and good skills and decent roads. Not by punishing their failures, but by encouraging their success – incentivising the purchase of newer vehicles, improving the quality and reducing the cost of maintenance and repair; ensuring well-qualified tuition and backing it with popular and practical public education.

.in sum, guiding by incentives instead of penalties wherever possible. That way, the authorities (and law-abiding motorists) get a million supportive allies instead of a million resentful foes. Surely that would work better. Until that starts to happen, there is reason to doubt, after all, that the patrons and the public do want the same thing. We think we know what the motoring public wants. But the question is out there: what do the laws and policies want?

And don’t say ‘obedience’ because it will be good for you. Those who already comply – in every possible way – know for sure that strategy does not deliver respect or justice or smooth, safe, efficient, economical and relaxed travel by road.

What we all need to recognise is that the ‘policy pie’ is an extraordinarily complex matrix. Taken in isolation, traffic management has some glaringly obvious shortfalls and logical remedies.

The cost-benefit equation of the remedies is clear, but the skills and diligence and shillings required are limited and are in competition with dozens (nay, hundreds) of other real needs, conflicting priorities and vested interests.

For the time being, we must both hope and cope in the knowledge that things could be better.or worse.

In July this year, Tanzania quietly tucked into its Finance Act a new excise duty on goods supplied from fellow East African Community (EAC) member states. On paper, it looked like just another tax tweak. In practice, it struck at the very heart of the EAC integration dream.

The EAC Treaty and the Common Market Protocol are not just decorative documents gathering dust in Arusha. They are the glue binding together six economies promising citizens, and businesses alike, that goods, services, and investments will move freely without the old barriers that made cross-border trade a nightmare.

The principle is simple: if you can sell it in Nairobi or Kigali, you should be able to sell it in Dar es Salaam under the same rules. But these new discriminatory excise duties rewrite those rules. They send a blunt message: ‘Your goods are less welcome here.’ That message is not only illegal under the Treaty, but also politically toxic.

For Kenyan, Ugandan, or Rwandan businesses exporting into Tanzania, the effects are already being felt. Manufacturers are suffering immediate higher costs, delayed shipments, and having to scramble for exemptions.

For ordinary consumers, it will translate into pricier products and fewer choices. And for governments, it creates an awkward diplomatic moment: how do you talk about a ‘single market’ when one partner has just built a new wall?

Within days of the measure, trade diplomats were firing off protest notes, companies were calling their lawyers, and regional business councils were warning of a chilling effect on investment.

Trust, which is a currency of integration took a hit. The EAC is no stranger to trade spats. But here’s the danger: when one state breaks the rules and faces no real consequences, others are tempted to do the same.

Before long, a single breach snowballs into tit-for-tat protectionism. That’s how integration projects die. Not with one big blow, but with small, accumulating betrayals.

Investors are watching too.

If the perception grows that Treaty commitments can be shelved at will, boardrooms will quietly move capital to markets where the rules are clearer.

Tanzania, ironically, may be the biggest loser in that scenario, as it competes fiercely with its neighbours for manufacturing investment and logistics hubs.

Here’s the hopeful part: integration blocs often grow stronger after a near-crisis. The European Union only deepened its rulebook after members repeatedly tested the boundaries.

The EAC can seize this moment to do the same by forging ahead at breakneck pace with long-stalled plans to harmonise taxation and by giving its institutions sharper teeth to ensure compliance.

Read: Kenya, EAC States dominate global trade obstacle warnings

Ultimately it is the East African citizens who will suffer the most and therefore Tanzania should clarify whether this excise duty is a temporary protective measure or a permanent shift. The worst thing for the market is uncertainty.

Partner states should also think about a two-pronged approach: push diplomatically for Tanzania to repeal the discriminatory elements of the excise duty while also pursuing legal remedies at the East African Court of Justice.

Indeed, there has been some recent reporting that an urgent injunction request was filed at the EACJ by a Kenyan manufacturer of matches as their products in Tanzania increased in price seemingly overnight, having read the arguments, it seems impossible that this injunction would not be granted.

Finally, the EAC Secretariat must show it is more than a spectator by convening urgent talks and insisting on a corrective roadmap.

This is not just about a new finance act in a sovereign nation; it is about political will. Do EAC leaders mean it when they speak of integration as Africa’s future, or is the Treaty just a convenient slogan? Besides the action comes on the heal of the expiry of the AGOA deal with the US which should have signaled the need for increased intra-African trade.

The region’s citizens deserve an answer. And businesses, which have invested billions on the promise of one market, cannot wait forever nor should they.

If Tanzania’s July decision becomes the new normal, then the dream of a borderless East African economy will become a nightmare fraught with unilateral protectionist policies. Actions such as these not only undermine collective external bargaining power but saw mistrust into future common markets.

But if leaders grasp the moment, enforce the rules, and recommit to the hard work of integration, this crisis could yet be remembered not as an unraveling, but as a true test of the EAC’s systems, which will hopefully prove to stand the test of time and regimes.

State-owned energy sector firms, including the Kenya Electricity and Transmission Company (Ketraco) and the Nuclear Power and Energy Agency (NuPEA) are facing cumulative payout claims of Sh8.7 billion, while have pile up over the years after they lost contract breach court cases against contractors and individuals.

Disclosures by the Ministry of Energy show that the bill is for court cases that the two entities have lost between July 2019 and June 2025. A total of Sh9.027 billion has been awarded, and only Sh245 million of the amount has been paid to the various claimants.

The African proverb ‘When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers’ has long captured the collateral damage of great power rivalries.

Today, as the US and China compete for global influence, Africa often finds itself caught in the middle-absorbing the ripple effects of decisions made far away. But this time, the grass need not suffer.

China’s recent decision to eliminate tariffs for 53 African countries presents a rare opportunity: a chance for Africa not to be trampled, but to rise. If seized wisely, this moment could mark a turning point in Africa’s shift from raw material exporter to value-added producer. At the 2025 China-Africa Economic and Trade Expo, over 30,000 participants gathered to witness the signing of 176 projects worth $11.4 billion, with an additional $43 billion in cooperation opportunities announced. This is more than diplomacy; it’s a signal that Africa is being invited to play a bigger role in global trade.

Of course, this gesture is not without strategic benefit for China. Tariff elimination is a lever to secure long-term political goodwill, commercial influence, and access to Africa’s fast-growing markets and critical minerals.

The challenge for African governments is to ensure this generosity works both ways-not as dependency, but as leverage.

Yet trade data tells a cautionary tale. Between January and August 2025, China-Africa trade reached $222 billion, but Chinese exports to Africa surged 24.7 percent, while African exports grew only 2.3 percent.

The result: a $59.5 billion trade deficit. Africa continues to export raw materials and import high-value goods. This is a pattern that must change.

Kenya’s recent negotiations to convert $5 billion in Chinese loans from US dollars to yuan offer a glimpse of strategic recalibration.

Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi has said the shift could halve interest costs, with the conversion potentially reducing rates from 6.37 percent (USD terms) to around three percent under yuan terms.

This move is expected to ease fiscal pressure, reduce dollar dependency, and extend repayment terms-offering much-needed breathing room in a tightening global credit environment. It’s a bold step toward greater financial sovereignty and a sign that Africa can shape its own terms, even in the shadow of global power realignment.

But the real transformation lies in industrialisation. Across the continent, entrepreneurs are proving that Africa can export more than commodities. It can export quality, innovation, and resilience, as well.

Africa’s industrial future will not be built by tariffs alone. It will depend on bold policy choices and practical reforms that make local production viable and competitive.

That means investing in infrastructure and logistics to lower the cost of moving goods, reforming capital markets to unlock financing for small and medium enterprises, and structuring trade agreements that reward local value addition over raw exports.

It also requires deepening regional integration through initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area, so that African producers can scale beyond their borders.

China’s zero-tariff policy is a door. What lies beyond depends on how Africa walks through it and, whether this time, the grass chooses not just to survive, but to grow tall.

From cassava flour in West Africa to chili sauce in Rwanda, African entrepreneurs are building value chains that deliver nutrition, income, and resilience. In our work at Acumen, we’ve had the privilege of backing several of these pioneering businesses: transforming cassava into flour, starch, and snacks to boost farmer incomes; unlocking new markets for coconut oil and cosmetics in East Africa; improving nutrition through poultry ventures in Ethiopia; and enabling solar-powered cold storage in Kenya to reduce food loss and reach premium buyers.

These are not isolated success stories, they are signals of what’s possible when patient capital meets local ingenuity. While traditional aid is fading, catalytic concessional capital still has a critical role to play.

Smartly deployed, it can complement zero-tariff trade by helping entrepreneurs scale, invest in processing capacity, and compete globally. It’s not the aid itself that matters, but how it’s structured – and whom it empowers.

Africa’s industrial future will not be built by tariffs alone. It will depend on bold policy choices and practical reforms that make local production viable and competitive.

That means investing in infrastructure and logistics to lower the cost of moving goods, reforming capital markets to unlock financing for small and medium enterprises, and structuring trade agreements that reward local value addition over raw exports.

It also requires deepening regional integration through initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area, so that African producers can scale beyond their borders.

Governments must act with urgency to ensure that zero tariffs don’t simply open the floodgates to more imports, but instead catalyze the rise of African-made products and brands on the global stage. The shift from aid to trade is already underway. The question now is whether Africa will shape that future – or be shaped by it.

Kenya’s imports from the United States fell for the first time in five years, pulled down by lower demand for aircraft and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG), and coinciding with the start of President Donald Trump’s protectionist second term in White House.

Data from the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) show that import expenditure from the United States declined by 9.8 percent to Sh70.39 billion in the six months to June 2025, from Sh78.11 billion in the same period in 2024.

Absa Bank Kenya projects its lending volumes to grow this season on branch network expansion and gains from a new loan pricing formula.

The lender plans to expand its physical footprint across the country by opening branches in Mtwapa and Wajir before the close of 2025, buoyed by the strong performance of its recently opened outlets.

According to the bank’s top management, the repositioning of the brand towards the retail segment of the economy is delivering desired outcomes as the latest branches prove their ability to cover their costs at just about 80 percent of the typical time taken to break even. ‘We’ve opened seven branches in the last twelve months, and those branches have broken even within anything between six and twelve months, which is a record pace. It’s about understanding demographics and checking what’s happening in the cities as people are moving and coalescing towards neighbourhoods as opposed to malls. Last year alone, we brought on book about 130,000 new customers,’ Absa Bank’s Consumer Banking Director, Moses Muthui, said.

‘So, it is about a carefully selected expansion around the country as Kenyans increasingly scout for a physical manifestation of banking, even as they go digital. Wajir, for example, where we are going next, is a county headquarters,’ the official added.

Absa Bank Kenya said that right-sizing traditional branches has been key in this outcome and created avenues through which they can complement the fast-growing appetite for transactions conducted predominantly via digital platforms.

‘It’s not your 4,000 square foot traditional branches, it’s now about 1,800 square foot, and that is then complemented by investing in digital, where it really matters, and that is in payments’, Mr Muthui said.

The bank has shrugged off concerns that its leaning towards the retail segment of the market to drive organic growth and expansion exposes it to the challenge of rising bad debt experienced in the market.

‘Our NPL (non-performing loan) ratio as of the last filing was around 10 percent, unlike what we are seeing in the industry at around 17 percent average. For us, it’s about tightening how we manage the flow to default, and that is the art of walking with clients and ensuring, where need be, you are restructuring early enough because that is where the greatest impact of sustaining a good quality on your portfolio lies’, Muthui says.

On October 7, 2025, the bank notified its customers of the impending transition to a new a risk-based credit pricing model (RBCPM), which takes effect for new loans on December 1, 2025.

The bank’s management says it sees an opportunity for high-volume lending once the new regime takes effect, given the transparency in price build-up for loans across the sector.

‘There’s obviously a lending opportunity presented, and we think we are going into a high-volume season in terms of lending with the new framework in place. We are adjusting our appetite accordingly as we get ready for that cycle, as we engage in stress testing and do the operational readiness work. The greatest thing here is the opportunity for product innovation’, Muthui said.

The Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) introduced the RBCPM, which took effect for new variable-rate loans on September 1, 2025.

The new model will use the interbank rate as the common reference rate for determining lending rates to all customers. Banks will be allowed to load a premium (K) on the reference rate, now referred to as the Kenya Shilling Overnight Interbank Average (Kesonia). The total lending rate is now calculated as Kesonia + Premium (‘K’), where the premium reflects the borrower’s risk profile, bank costs, and shareholder returns.

Commercial banks have been granted a three-month grace period to implement the new formula on loan pricing.

The CBK has given the banks a grace period of up to December 1, 2025, to start using the new pricing model on loans booked, while giving them a six-month window to March 1, 2026, for existing loans.

Approximately 81 percent of healthcare facilities across the country are dissatisfied with the Social Health Authority’s (SHA) digital system, revealing frustration over frequent downtime, delayed reimbursements, and unreliable integration, which have disrupted service delivery and strained hospital cash flow.

The nationwide assessment, conducted by the consortium of healthcare providers comprising the Kenya Healthcare Federation the Kenya Association of Private Hospitals (Kaph), the Rural and Urban Private Hospitals Association (Rupha), and the Christian Health Association of Kenya (CHAK) shows that, one year after replacing the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF), the SHA digital platform remains unstable.

Eight directors of agricultural firm Kakuzi, including the chief executive Christopher Flowers, have lost a bid to block the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) from investigating them over alleged conflict of interest and financial impropriety.

High Court judge Anthony Mrima dismissed the appeal by the group, saying the probe by the markets regulator cannot be faulted on the grounds of procedural impropriety, under either the Constitution or the law.

The law requires every vehicle to carry a first aid kit. That is okay. But what should be in it.to save a life? Muraia.

Carrying a first aid kit in your car is a jolly good idea. But making it legally compulsory is more about emphasising a message than delivering medical aid. Especially if the law doesn’t specify what should be in the kit or educate its potential users.

An aspirin? A sticking plaster? Some antiseptic cream, perhaps, and pills in case someone in the vehicle gets the runs? A safety pin, a needle, some cotton thread, a pair of scissors, and a bandage? Some eyewash and antihistamine? By all means pack all of that, and more, to help deal with all the little troubles than can arise on a safari.

But that’s your choice. Not a legal issue. No one is going to die if you don’t carry these remedies (and anyone with a severe toothache might rather be dead anyway). If you want to pick just a single item, a mobile phone (and perhaps some rubber gloves).

Where first aid could and should have legal status is when dealing with life-threatening injuries from an accident. And when that happens, anyone who knows what she or he is doing might welcome but won’t need a first aid kit, and anyone who doesn’t know what they are doing shouldn’t try to use one.

Basic first aid ‘knowledge’ is the essential and arguably only first aid kit that might help keep someone alive until an ambulance and paramedics (second aid) or a fully equipped operating theatre (third aid) arrive.with oxygen, defibrillators, blood transfusions, adrenalin, immobilising collars.

Emergency first aid is what you can do before that to prevent an avoidable death.

For the full details, talk to an expert. But for the cardinal principles, it is axiomatic that to avoid death you need to sustain the essentials of life. If you can.

The essentials are breathing, adequate blood supply and a heart/pulse to pump it. If breathing is not happening you need to get it started or substituted with all possible haste, and to do that you need to know how to position the patient, how to prevent choking, and preferably how to administer artificial respiration and/or CPR (get the heart beating and the lungs pumping). The value of a first aid kit (without a defibrillator) in those respects is about zero.

If there is major blood loss you need to stop it, pronto, by applying pressure to the wound and possibly a tourniquet (if the bleeding is from a limb).

If there’s no pulse, CPR is urgent. Again, the absolute need for a basic first aid kit is nil. Though some sterile pads and a bandage to hold them can be helpful, their ‘urgent’ job can be done with all sorts of other materials that will be at hand. Start with your shirt.

Consciousness is a good sign, and can be helpful to managing the patient, but it is not essential and, again, you will not find it (or any means of restoring it) in a minimal first aid kit.

Beyond those most basic things, it is more important to know what you should not (repeat not) do, than to know what you might try to do (usually the less the better). With some injuries, randomly moving a patient can do more harm than good. Indeed, it could kill someone who might otherwise have survived.

While breathing, bleeding, pulse and consciousness are being attended to, priority attention should be given to managing the scene – getting someone to call for expert help, others to warn on-coming motorists – and keeping the injured person warm, calm and reassured.

What the law should do is insist these principles are taught and tested. Knowledge of them should definitely be carried in every vehicle. They are immeasurably more important, and more likely to save a life, than a first aid kit.

Platitude, a noun, is a remark or statement often with some moral content, used to mask real meaning. Politicians use platitudes to sound interesting or thoughtful. But it is often devoid of the deep explanations or solutions to the issues at hand. Here is one example.

Economic growth in the second quarter of 2025 was 5.0 percent, up from 4.0 percent in the third quarter of 2024. This, combined with low inflation and a stable exchange rate, is good news for businesses. It means better times ahead.