Category: Business Daily

Corruption is often described as a cancer that eats away at the very fabric of society.

From inflated procurement contracts to money laundering and the misuse of public resources, white-collar crime continues to undermine development, weaken trust in institutions, and deepen inequality.

As technology reshapes every aspect of our lives, one innovation-blockchain-is emerging as a potential weapon in this long-standing fight.

At its simplest, blockchain is a digital ledger technology that records transactions in a secure, immutable, and transparent manner. Once information is entered, it cannot be altered without leaving a trace.

This unique feature can make blockchain technology particularly attractive to governments, law enforcement and regulatory agencies that want to tighten controls against fraud, bribery and illicit financial flows.

For instance, public procurement systems powered by blockchain could make every contract, bid and payment visible to the public and auditors alike. Land registries, another common source of corruption, could be digitised on blockchain platforms, preventing manipulation of ownership records or multiple claims on the same property.

Such applications would close loopholes that corrupt actors exploit and strengthen public confidence in government institutions.

But blockchain’s potential does not guarantee success. Its effectiveness depends heavily on transcending factors-such as digital infrastructure, robust legal frameworks and political commitment-that lie beyond the technology itself.

As highlighted in U4 Issue 2020:7, technology alone cannot root out corruption; it must be embedded in a system that values transparency, accountability and strong oversight.

Unlike traditional systems that place trust in individuals or institutions, blockchain shifts the balance of trust to data and code. In practice, this means that citizens no longer have to rely solely on officials to safeguard records; instead, they can trust the transparency and immutability of the blockchain itself.

This paradigm shift could be revolutionary in societies where institutional trust has been eroded due to corruption and political interference.

The transition is not without challenges. Implementing blockchain in governance touches fundamental societal values: identity, privacy, transparency and accountability. Striking the right balance is critical.

One of blockchain’s most powerful features is its transparency. Every transaction is traceable, every record verifiable. Yet this strength can also become a weakness when it collides with individual rights, such as the right to privacy.

Blockchain, by design, makes deletion impossible.

This tension raises important legal and ethical questions: How do we balance the need to protect privacy with the need to harness transparency in the fight against corruption? Policymakers must confront these dilemmas head-on, crafting frameworks that maximise accountability without eroding fundamental freedoms.

Another critical concern arises when blockchain is used to manage registries of physical assets, such as land or vehicles. While the digital record may be incorruptible, it is only as accurate as the information entered at the outset.

Trusted gatekeepers are therefore essential to ensure that the physical reality matches the digital record. Otherwise, corruption could shift from digital manipulation to fraudulent inputs, thus undermining the entire system.

Several African countries are already ahead of the curve.

Nigeria has established clear regulations for cryptocurrency exchanges, South Africa has moved forward with comprehensive guidelines for digital assets and Mauritius has positioned itself as a blockchain-friendly hub with dedicated regulatory sandboxes.

Kenya, on the other hand, is still in the process of finalising its regulatory framework, currently at the Third Reading stage in Parliament.

This makes commendable progress; however, timely implementation would be important to ensure that gaps are not left open for potential misuse in the rapidly evolving digital finance landscape.

For many developing countries, adopting blockchain faces significant hurdles. Digital infrastructure remains weak, with limited internet access in some areas. Digital literacy is uneven, meaning that even if systems are built, citizens and officials may struggle to use them effectively.

These challenges underscore the need for a comprehensive approach: building infrastructure, enhancing capacity-especially for law enforcement officers to be able to trace and recover stolen assets-and modernizing laws alongside technological adoption.

A nuanced understanding of the technology is crucial before deciding whether-and how-to integrate it into governance systems.

Yet hesitation also carries risks. With global adoption accelerating, countries that delay may find themselves struggling to catch up in a world where corruption has already migrated to new digital platforms.

The balance for policymakers is delicate: act too slowly, and the window of opportunity closes; act without foresight, and unintended consequences could erode rights or waste resources. Its success will depend not on the technology alone, but on the legal, political and social ecosystems into which it is introduced.

Blockchain is not a magic cure for corruption, but it offers unprecedented opportunities to enhance transparency, strengthen accountability, and rebuild trust in public institutions. For policymakers and regulatory experts, the choice is clear.

The future of governance will increasingly be digital. Investing today in the right frameworks, infrastructure, and skills could position nations to harness blockchain not only to fight cryptocurrency-enabled crime and white-collar fraud, but also to redefine the integrity of public service for generations to come.

If corruption is the disease, blockchain could be part of the cure-provided leaders have the courage and foresight to use it wisely. Writer is an enthusiast blockchain and crypto investigator.

I walked away from my favourite burger joint over two paid squirts of ketchup. In most eateries, whether standing in a chips-and-chicken shop in the middle of the night, or seated at a fancy restaurant, tomato sauce comes with fries, by the bottle! Their small savings turned a loyal customer into an ex-customer. It is a trivial example, but businesses often make penny-wise choices that erode their treasured customers’ experience, loyalty and quietly drain revenue.

Even though the statistics on the impact of Customer Experience (CX) on competitiveness are eye-catching, it is hard for most leaders to articulate what needs to be done to make their companies more customer-centric. Companies that are leaders in CX achieve growth rates 3.4 times those of CX laggards, and leaders in CX can charge more than 16 percent more than their competitors. This is news that should make every leader sit up. Here is a simple four-step framework that teams can use to evaluate whether they are being customer-centric.

The HELO framework is an approach based on service design and design thinking. These methods give tools and guidance on deeply understanding your customer using empathy and isolating the challenges that the customer has to align the solution offering to solve the real problem.

The first step, H, for Human, is to assess whether your company is using qualitative tools to uncover its customers’ needs, challenges and aspirations.

Having your executives walking the floors and meeting customers is an absolute first step, but an intentional user research exercise will uncover the “why” behind customer preferences and choices. What you end up with is personas that explain motivation, context, and emotions. Having a practice of preparing well-defined personas is an essential part of a customer-centric organisation.

Now that personas are defined, map the Experience (the ‘E’) to find the key moments to enhance. It is important to distinguish between the user journey or the customer steps in a digital application, and the customer’s actions, thoughts and feelings throughout their journey, which is the customer experience journey.

The latter is viewed through the customer’s eyes, charting the complete path to and through your product, mapping every touchpoint from awareness to usage and retention. Some of the most cost-effective interventions and opportunities occur before and after the usage of the product.

The next step is to zoom into the point of the journey that needs improvement, which we refer to as Links (the L), or the touchpoint. These touchpoints connect to form the overall experience, like links in a chain. At this point, you have a clear view of where, along the customer journey, the biggest opportunities to make a difference lie.

Often, companies want to jump directly to fixing touchpoints, but without the insights of the previous stages, it is often based on blindly copying competitors and ending up with an undifferentiated offering that lacks any inspiration from your customers. It is no wonder we are surrounded by me-too products.

The O in our framework is for Organisation and is often the most difficult. However, it gets to the heart of the changes that the organisation needs to make to become more customer-centric.

A powerful tool to use here is the Service Blueprint. The blueprint is a map of the backstage processes that helps to break down both operational silos and siloed thinking.

For example, shouldn’t it be an easy win for my bank, where I have personal accounts and business accounts, to offer me a prequalified credit card or a car loan? It isn’t today because each product is run as its own business. This is often where innovators leap ahead; by creating efficiencies and agility that is aligned directly to customer needs and value, and this may be why your company is struggling to execute on a customer-centric strategy.

The HELO framework is a CX field guide with unmistakable guideposts to customer obsession. Run it as an assessment: how would your company fare? If the answer stings, it may be time to meet your customer again, and this time say “HELO”

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has been barred from collecting 16 percent value-added tax (VAT) from firms that link banks, mobile money operators and payment service providers, marking a major win for Kenya’s three main payment switch companies.

In a ruling on October 24, the Tax Appeals Tribunal faulted the KRA’s move to levy VAT on Kenswitch’s services, finding that the firm provides financial rather than ICT services.

The tribunal noted that these financial services are exempt from the consumption tax.

Kenswitch, which interconnects banks’ automated teller machines (ATMs) and point-of-sale (POS) networks, had challenged a tax demand of Sh41.6 million on the portion of interchange fees it received for switching services. The taxman argued that such services were ICT-based and therefore taxable.

However, the tribunal sided with Kenswitch, declaring that the company’s switching role is integral to the financial system and squarely within the VAT exemption.

‘The tribunal is persuaded that KRA erred both in law and in fact in finding that the appellant’s services are taxable under the VAT Act,’ the ruling stated.

‘The appellant’s services clearly fall within the meaning of ‘financial services’ exempt from VAT under Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(m) of Part II of the First Schedule to the VAT Act, 2013.’

It added that the VAT assessment of Sh41,637,843 issued on July 9 and confirmed on October 4, 2024, was ‘erroneous and unlawful’.

Besides Kenswitch, other licensed switch companies include PesaLink (operated by Integrated Payments Services Ltd-IPSL), a subsidiary of the Kenya Bankers Association.

Switchlink Africa, which supports fintechs and payment processors, is the third firm offering payment switch services.

A switch acts as the ‘traffic controller’ of Kenya’s digital payments highway, directing money and data between banks, mobile money operators and card networks.

These firms are licensed by the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) under the National Payment System Act 2022, and related regulations.

The KRA had relied on the Banking Act to argue that Kenswitch was not a ‘financial institution’ and that its commissions amounted to software-related income subject to VAT.

It claimed the company used third-party software supplied through Mauritius-based EFT Corporation and global provider ACI Worldwide, and therefore its services were excluded from VAT exemption as ICT.

The tribunal dismissed this reasoning, noting that Kenswitch neither supplies ATMs nor sells software and that its core function is financial intermediation rather than ICT services.

In a card transaction, several parties are involved: the cardholder, the issuing bank, the acquiring (receiving) bank, a merchant and the switch company. The acquiring bank deducts an amount from the money due to the merchant for the transaction, known as a Merchant Discount Rate (MDR).

The acquiring bank pays the balance to the merchant and then apportions the MDR between the card companies, the switch payment service firm and the issuing bank. The money paid to the issuing bank is the interchange fee.

The tribunal faulted KRA for seeking to charge VAT on only one of these parties while leaving the other two unaffected.

The stakes around switching are set to rise as the country moves toward a national switch that will enable customers to move money across any mobile provider or banking institution promptly and at reduced cost.

The CBK has announced plans to develop a ‘single integrated solution with multiple functionalities (national switch).’ While mobile money already allows instant transfers between Kenyan banks and digital wallets, coverage often depends on bilateral agreements, leaving gaps.

As part of its National Payments Strategy, the CBK wants to introduce a financial sector-wide interoperability system to allow users to send and receive money instantly, regardless of the bank or financial institution they use.

Kenya’s payments ecosystem remains fragmented, with mobile money platforms like M-Pesa and Airtel Money operating separately from other financial institutions; for example, some banks and microfinance institutions still do not allow transfers to Airtel Money wallets.

Mobile money continues to dominate Kenya’s payments market. In 2024, mobile money services processed over Sh8.7 trillion, outpacing traditional methods like cheques (Sh2.48 trillion). High-value transfers through the Real-Time Gross Payment System stood at Sh27.86 trillion in the eight months to August.

Kenya’s $223 billion infrastructure dream is slipping away. With rising debt, fuel levy securitisation, and weak project execution, the country must rethink how it funds and manages development.

According to the Global Infrastructure Outlook developed by the Global Infrastructure Hub and Oxford Economics, Kenya will need about $223 billion in infrastructure investment between 2016 and 2040 to sustain economic growth, urbanisation, and social transformation (Global Infrastructure Hub, 2023).

Spread over 25 years, this amounts to roughly $8.9 billion annually, covering transport, energy, water, and communications. Nearly a decade into this timeline, Kenya’s investment path reveals the country is significantly behind target.

Government expenditure records since 2016 show that development spending has remained far below what the economy requires.

Treasury’s 2024 data show annual development budgets have averaged between Sh600 billion and Sh740 billion, equivalent to $4.4 billion to $5.5 billion.

Yet, only around 60 percent of this typically goes into physical infrastructure such as roads, energy, and water works, according to the Parliamentary Budget Office (in 2023). This translates to about Sh350-Sh450 billion or $2.6 billion to 3.3 billion a year dedicated to infrastructure.

The problem is compounded by low absorption rates. Treasury data show that ministries and agencies frequently spend less than what is allocated, largely due to delayed procurement, financing bottlenecks, and weak project management, according to the Treasury Quarterly Budget Review of 2024.

In the 2023-24 fiscal year, only Sh434 billion of the Sh587 billion allocated for development was spent-an absorption rate of just 74 percent. As a result, even the modest allocations are underutilised, undermining project delivery.

On aggregate, infrastructure investment between 2016 and 2024 is estimated at $23 billion to $25 billion, or roughly 11 percent of the projected requirement (Oxford Economics, 2023).

Even after factoring in donor and private participation, the cumulative figure likely does not exceed $28 billion, leaving a $195 billion gap over the remaining 16 years. To meet the 2040 target, Kenya must therefore invest around $12.4 billion annually from 2025 to 2040-almost four times the current rate.

Achieving this would require infrastructure investment to grow by eight percent annually, or by 13 percent to close the gap within a decade.

This ambition faces a stiff fiscal headwind. Kenya’s public debt has ballooned from 42 percent of gross domestic product in 2013 to over 70 percent in 2024, according to the Central Bank of Kenya. Debt service obligations are projected to hit Sh1.9 trillion in the 2025-26 fiscal year, consuming more than half of total government revenue (National Treasury Budget Policy Statement, 2025).

This leaves little fiscal space for new capital spending and forces the government to rely heavily on off-balance-sheet financing mechanisms.

One such mechanism is the securitisation of the fuel levy, through which the Kenya Roads Board (KRB) has pledged future road maintenance revenues to raise infrastructure capital.

The government has already securitised Sh175 billion by diverting Sh7 out of every Sh25 per litre from the Road Maintenance Levy Fund to a special purpose vehicle.

As of mid-2025, about Sh60 billion has been raised and disbursed to contractors, helping to revive over 580 stalled road projects. Financial institutions, including the United Bank for Africa, have collectively invested over Sh16.38 billion in the scheme.

While the programme is structured to avoid direct government guarantees, it effectively shifts borrowing off the national balance sheet by mortgaging future fuel revenues.

Other off-balance-sheet strategies include public-private partnerships (PPPs).

Since Kenya adopted the PPP framework in 2013, about Sh140.7 billion in private capital has been mobilised into infrastructure, including flagship projects such as the Sh88 billion Nairobi Expressway and the Kenyatta University Teaching, Referral and Research Hospital.

However, PPP inflows have sharply declined: private investment plunged from Sh80.6 billion in 2022 to Sh4.3 billion in 2024. The Treasury reports that 39 PPP projects worth a combined $13 billion (Sh1.69 trillion) have been approved, but progress has been slow due to regulatory delays, financing uncertainty, and risk allocation concerns.

For fiscal 2025-26, the Treasury targets Sh70 billion worth of PPP projects in the energy, housing, health, and transport sectors.

The most promising financing frontier lies in mobilising domestic long-term capital.

Kenya’s pension funds now hold more than Sh1.6 trillion in assets, yet less than two percent is invested in infrastructure (Retirement Benefits Authority, 2024). Channelling even 10 percent of these funds could significantly close the investment gap. Additionally, implementing the Kenya Sovereign Infrastructure Fund would provide patient capital for strategic projects while easing reliance on commercial borrowing.

Still, Kenya’s challenge is not merely one of financing-it is also about efficiency. The Office of the Auditor-General has repeatedly flagged inflated project costs, delays, and incomplete works. Without addressing governance weaknesses, even increased funding will yield poor outcomes.

Transparent project appraisal, stronger monitoring frameworks, and prioritisation of high-return investments are critical for value creation. The focus must move from the volume of spending to the quality and sustainability of investment.

Infrastructure is the backbone of Kenya’s economic future. Roads, ports, water systems, and energy networks shape productivity, lower logistics costs, and attract investment. Yet, with less than one-eighth of the 2040 target achieved in nine years, the gap threatens to undermine Vision 2030’s goals.

To meet the $223 billion target, Kenya needs fiscal discipline and innovation. Securitisation, PPPs, pension mobilisation, and sovereign funds all have roles-but they must be guided by clear governance and risk frameworks. Otherwise, off-balance-sheet financing will simply shift debt burdens into the future without improving real infrastructure outcomes.

Kenya’s infrastructure journey is at a crossroads. Unless the country realigns its priorities and expands domestic financing while tightening governance, the 2040 horizon will arrive with unfulfilled promises, congested highways, and the same power and water deficits that have constrained growth for decades.

Edmands not only more money but smarter management of what is already in hand.

Kenya’s airline operators have joined other tourism stakeholders in opposing the new park fee payment system introduced by the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS).

Under the new system, only M-Pesa and Visa card payments are accepted, with the KWS scrapping the bank transfer option that many tour operators relied on for group payments. What has further unsettled the industry is the introduction of an 8.5 percent processing fee for all card payments, a rate KTF says is high compared to other government platforms.

The KWS has also been faulted for using an inflated exchange rate of Sh135 per US dollar, which is higher than the Central Bank of Kenya’s current rate of around Sh129.50.

Stakeholders say the discrepancy has pushed up park entry costs, making Kenya’s destinations less competitive regionally and globally.

Alex Avedi, CEO of Safarilink Aviation, says the new system has triggered booking cancellations and uncertainty among tour agents who are the main clients for local airlines flying tourists to parks and conservancies.

‘We are at the end of the chain; we only fly on behalf of agents. When agents face cancellations, it hits us directly. We make investment and operational plans based on projected passenger numbers, and once you commit to acquiring an aircraft, it’s a long-term engagement. It’s not something you can easily walk away from,’ he said.

Mr Avedi said the abrupt changes, including the withdrawal of bank transfers and the introduction of an 8.5 percent card processing fee, have led to a drop in air traffic to key tourist destinations.

He added that the uncertainty caused by frequent policy shifts is undermining investor confidence and hurting the country’s image in key source markets.

‘In regions like the EU, once a safari quote is given, it cannot be changed. When additional costs are introduced suddenly, the travel agents have to absorb the loss and that risks pushing them out of business,’ said Mr Avedi.

Kenya Tourism Federation Chairman Fred Odek said the sector is already under immense pressure and that the abrupt rollout of the new system has worsened the crisis.

According to a regulatory impact statement from the Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, park fee revenues are projected to rise from Sh7.41 billion in 2024 to Sh16.58 billion by 2028.

However, KTF estimates that industry players risk to lose almost Sh370 million annually in the unbudgeted costs under the current system.

Mr Odek said the federation wants the government to restore the previous eCitizen-based payment system to allow multiple and flexible payment options for both local and international visitors.

It also wants the suspension of the 5 per cent gateway fee pending stakeholder consultations and review, and the full compliance with existing court orders to uphold the rule of law in managing the system.

‘Digital progress should not translate into economic hardship for legitimate businesses. We remain open to collaboration with KWS and the Ministry, but urgent corrective action is needed,’ he said.

The rapid pace of technological development exceeds organisations’ ability to establish effective governance systems.

The workplace experienced a similar phenomenon in the last decade when staff members brought Dropbox, Google Docs and Slack into their work environments before organisational approval. Workers adopted these tools because they needed solutions that official systems failed to provide. The official tools were too slow, clunky, or nonexistent, so workers found their own.

The current situation with shadow AI mirrors the previous case of shadow IT. Shadow AI is the unsanctioned use of AI tools or applications by employees without approval or oversight of the employer.

There are several reasons why employees turn to shadow AI.

The underlying factors are similar to previous situations, which are activated when employees encounter performance deficiencies, including productivity pressure, where a marketing associate uses AI to generate campaign ideas within a short time frame and complexity gaps, where a financial analyst uses AI to verify formulas instead of waiting for their peers to review them.

These examples demonstrate that staff members use AI tools to address genuine operational challenges rather than seeking new technology for its own sake.

However, the challenge arises when employees are using AI tools without proper oversight. There are several hidden risks, and shadow AI creates three distinct risk categories that organisations must address.

One, data exposure represents the first risk factor because sensitive information and client data become vulnerable to unauthorised disclosure when fed into unprotected AI systems.

The implementation of AI systems leads to two major problems – biased results and non-compliance with regulations. AI systems generate biased or inaccurate results, which can lead to legal exposure when organisations use them for hiring or decision-making processes.

Leaders who are at the centre of organisations need to first validate employee needs by understanding that shadow AI demonstrates their desire to enhance their work efficiency and create specific rules which define authorised tools and data handling procedures and prohibited usage practices.

The organisation needs to deliver training sessions about proper AI usage, which should include lessons about bias detection and privacy protection and system security and should also purchase enterprise-grade AI solutions which provide secure platforms for employees to work with, instead of forcing them to hide their tools.

Executives who view shadow AI as a threat alone will overlook the substantial business potential it presents. Organisations that recognise shadow AI as a strategic indicator will convert potential risks into business advantages.

Organisations face a straightforward decision between letting shadow AI control their operations or using it to establish purposeful leadership.

Further, the organisation needs to develop a system for periodic assessments which will monitor AI usage for safety and compliance with business objectives.

Additionally, when staff members start to conceal productivity tools from their superiors, it leads to a breakdown in employee trust which damages organizational culture.

Government entities must maintain close observation of these developments. The AI Act has partially taken effect throughout Europe, it demands organisations to maintain records about their AI system utilization and implement proper governance systems.

Organisations that fail to monitor shadow AI usage today will face difficulties when regulatory bodies start enforcing new rules in the future.

History shows the right path. Organisations progressed from banning cloud services to creating structured systems for cloud adoption after their employees started using shadow IT. The same approach needs to be applied to AI systems.

Leaders who are at the centre of organisations need to first validate employee needs by understanding that shadow AI demonstrates their desire to enhance their work efficiency and create specific rules which define authorised tools and data handling procedures and prohibited usage practices.

The organisation needs to deliver training sessions about proper AI usage which should include lessons about bias detection and privacy protection and system security and should also purchase enterprise-grade AI solutions which provide secure platforms for employees to work with instead of forcing them to hide their tools.

Further, the organisation needs to develop a system for periodic assessments which will monitor AI usage for safety and compliance with business objectives.

Shadow AI functions as an indicator rather than an act of defiance against authority. The current situation demonstrates that employees want to adopt new work approaches although their leaders have not adopted these changes.

Executives who view shadow AI as a threat alone will overlook the substantial business potential it presents.

Organisations that recognise shadow AI as a strategic indicator will convert potential risks into business advantages through the development of organisations that excel at AI operations.

Organisations face a straightforward decision between letting shadow AI control their operations or using it to establish purposeful leadership.

Stand-up comedy is often dismissed as a mere “side hustle,” sometimes compared to the frivolous skits dominating social media, but anyone paying attention to the Kenyan stand-up scene knows it’s a demanding art form requiring immense intellectual rigour.

The current crop of comedians is a testament to this. We have Ruth Nyambura (a banker), Ty Ngachira (a lawyer), George Waweru (a telecommunication engineer) and Doug Mutai (an entrepreneur), just to mention a few.

And to reinforce that, on the evening of November 1st at the Alliance Française Auditorium, we got the long-overdue recording of Bashir Kiptoo Halaiki’s stand-up special, who just happens to be an aeronautical engineer.

With six years in the Kenya stand-up scene, Halaiki, a witty, sociable, and intelligent character, finally took the leap to tape his first special, simply titled A Halaiki.

Setting the stage

The evening’s atmosphere was first established by Darren, the show’s director. His task was to manage the live taping logistics, setting ground rules with a comedic touch.

He didn’t issue sterile commands, instead, he used his own stand-up ability to gently enforce protocols, ensuring the crowd’s energy was high and everyone understood their role in the recording process. It was a brilliant, almost meta-performance that established the required seriousness while maintaining the mood.

Emmanuel Kisiangani

As the official host he proved to be the perfect choice. His energy was okay (I have seen him do better), I thought his experience in crowd work and improv did a lot of the heavy lifting.

Kisiangani effortlessly transitioned from hosting duties into the first act, immediately engaging the audience with material ranging from the popular Mwafreeka/Raptcha relationship to the relatable struggles of employment, living in Kitengela, and the nuances of marriage.

While his hosting felt perfectly honed, his stand-up set leaned heavily on crowd work and improv, giving the impression of an incredibly smart student who did not prepare for the exam, sometimes struggling to keep up. Though he scattered some brilliant material, the set felt more like a spontaneous clinic in improvisation than a carefully structured opening act.

Titus Mutai

Titus Mutai followed with a very solid set of material that felt prepared and well-rehearsed. While familiar to seasoned fans, his material on his name, relationship arguments, and weight issues was layered with decent storytelling but weak delivery.

He delivered a quality set that at times resonated with the majority of the audience, showcasing a comedian who didn’t need to prepare for the exam because he benefited from a leakage.

Nduta Kariuki

Her performance was wonderfully laid-back and intimate. While she demonstrated a warm, storytelling style, speaking on growing up on the farm and the challenges of gym life, she seemed genuinely shaken by the lights and sheer size of the audience.

Her set felt less about conventional comedy and more like a heartfelt conversation, focused on appreciating her peers and the fans of The Kisiangani podcast.

Like Kisiangani, there was a sense of brilliant content that hadn’t been fully solidified for the magnitude of the event, yes, another brilliant student who didn’t prepare for the exam.

George Waweru

George Waweru (Chai Knees) was prepared. He did a fantastic job of keeping the focus squarely on the laughs. His bits, covering topics like dating, toxic masculinity, wearing the same shirt as Kisiangani and the chaos of protests, were well-tagged, and his delivery was perfectly timed. He was highly present and engaging.

There was a sense of ownership of his set time, a sense of control, earning a huge reaction from the audience and proving that he was that one student who came in fully prepared for the exam.

Themain event: Bashir’s execution

When Bashir Halaiki finally took the stage, the evening culminated in an undeniably well put-together performance. Out of fairness to the upcoming release of the special, I won’t detail the material.

However, I can attest that his content was deeply personal, pushing the envelope on subjects like religion and his own background, while maintaining a surprising level of approachability.

What truly defined his performance was the execution. The pacing of his set was magnificent, he moved from setup to punchline with no awkward pauses or noticeable breathing room.

It was evident this was a show years in the making; every joke was lean, well-constructed, and precise. He possessed the committed, focused energy of a self-aware comedian at a crucial moment in their career, similar to watching comedy legends during their breakout specials in the 90s.

The only slight gripe was his stage presence. Though he occasionally moved, and the contrast between his outfit and the background made him stand out, it felt as though he had been strictly directed to stand at one spot.

Sacrificing some of the stage control seen in the other acts. But this minor blocking constraint did nothing to slow the relentless momentum of his tightly packed material. The director, Darren, will undoubtedly have a tough time editing, as there was virtually no fat to trim.

Despite the rain and the slight feeling of a ‘Kisiangani Podcast’ get-together among the performers, the event was a fun experience.

More stand-up

The stand-up special will hit our screens sometime in the future, but if you are still hungry for some Kenyan stand-up comedy, there are events taking place weekly, plus Mammito Eunice, Amandeep Jagde, and Doug Mutai have a stand-up special available on YouTube for free.

At a time when Nairobi’s satellite towns like Ruiru, Utawala, and Ruai are thriving with new apartment blocks and high rental demand, Buruburu, once the pride of Kenya’s middle class, is struggling to attract decent renters.

The estate’s streets still carry traces of the 1970s promise of modern living, but that charm no longer appeals to today’s professionals.

‘Buruburu was designed to serve the emerging middle class in the 1970s,’ says real estate investment analyst Johnson Denge. ‘It comprises five phases built between 1974 and 1984.’

Five decades later, that vision is showing its age. Many of the maisonettes are now 40 to 50 years old, with outdated designs and little renovation.

‘The estate is nearing obsolescence,’ Mr Denge says. ‘Without regeneration, it cannot attract as much rent as newer areas.’

Buruburu’s early appeal lay in its neat rows of maisonettes, gardens, and paved roads. While similar estates such as South C and Kilimani have transformed to accomodate the tastes of today’s middle class, Buruburu has not given in to the pressure, remaining stunted.

‘Areas like Ruiru and Utawala have taken over because they offer modern designs and better planning,’ Mr Denge notes. ‘Tenants looking for value for money prefer those locations.’

The unchecked conversion of homes into commercial spaces has worsened the situation. ‘People are extending their houses to tap into high-density demand, which erodes the estate’s original appeal,’ he says.

Infrastructure has also declined. Poor roads, congestion, and rising insecurity have pushed the middle class elsewhere.

‘Buruburu is now surrounded by lower middle-income estates and suffers from poor infrastructure and social ills. The middle class has options, and Buruburu is no longer one of them,’ says Mr Denge.

He estimates that maisonettes of 100-200 square metres fetch between Sh35,000 and Sh60,000 monthly, rates that have barely changed in years. ‘The rent should be around Sh300 to Sh500 per square metre, depending on condition,’ he says.

The zoning hurdle

One of the biggest barriers to redevelopment is Buruburu’s zoning restrictions, which prohibit high-rise apartments.

‘Unlike South B and South C, where the county government relaxed zoning rules and upgraded sewer systems, Buruburu remains tightly controlled,’ Mr Denge explains. ‘Investors prefer nearby areas where they can build higher and maximise returns.’

Even if zoning were relaxed, expansion options are limited since the estate is fully built up. ‘Buruburu was fully built up, so there is very little room for expansion. To spur development, the county must allow higher densities to attract private investors,’ he suggests.

Property agent Christine Otieno of Urban Realtors says tenants nowadays prioritise convenience and aesthetics, qualities Buruburu struggles to offer.

‘A modern two-bedroom unit in Kamakis or Utawala goes for Sh35,000-Sh45,000, with amenities such as rooftop laundry areas, parking, a gym, and security. In Buruburu, for the same rent, you get an older maisonette that needs renovation,’ she says.

Many tenants, she adds, would rather pay Sh5,000-Sh10,000 more for a modern, secure home. ‘For them, it’s about lifestyle, not just shelter.’

Rental income

Data from several agencies show that while a standard maisonette in Buruburu rents for Sh35,000-Sh60,000, similar units in newer estates like Greenspan, Nasra, or Mihango fetch between Sh45,000 and Sh70,000, and tenants are willing to pay the difference.

Ms Otieno says that middle-class tenants increasingly view Buruburu as ‘an outdated option,’ despite slightly lower prices.

‘When clients compare a fresh apartment in Ruiru with an old Buruburu unit with cracked terrazzo floors and little parking, the choice is obvious,’ says Ms Otieno.

According to Moses Akumu, another property agent, single rooms go for Sh4,000-Sh8,000, bedsitters Sh8,000-Sh12,000, one-bedroom units Sh12,000-Sh18,000, and two-bedroom houses Sh18,000-Sh30,000.

Buruburu’s golden era

In the early years, Buruburu homeowners bought their units through the Housing Finance Corporation (now Housing Finance Group), paying gradually while in occupancy.

Phase One resident Patrick Mwai, who now chairs the Buruburu Phase One Residents’ Welfare Association, recalls buying a house for about Sh44,000, a significant cost then.

‘Salaries were about Sh600-Sh800 for government workers,’ he says.

He fondly remembers the estate’s original setup: ‘We had short wooden fences, shared courts with trees, flower beds, and car parks. It was a planned, green neighbourhood.’

But over time, matatus began using estate roads, and livestock grazed freely. Residents also started building upwards, beyond the original one-storey limit.

‘We have been resisting that, because if you build a house on three floors because they block sunlight and airflow,’ Mr Mwai says.

Estate ranking

A 2023-2024 KNBS real estate report ranks Buruburu in the ‘Nairobi Middle’ category alongside Kasarani, Donholm, Kamulu, Ruai, and Madaraka, the third of four residential tiers.

A two-bedroom bungalow in Buruburu now averages Sh11.2 million, far below the Sh66.3 million average in upper-tier areas. A three-bedroom maisonette costs Sh13.5 million, compared to Sh31.3 million in Kilimani and Sh88 million in Karen.

Kariobangi South MCA Robert Mbatia blames poor roads for further dampening Buruburu’s prospects.

‘Phase One has very dilapidated service roads that have never been repaired since construction,’ he says. ‘They’re now bare and muddy, especially during the rains, one of our biggest challenges.’

Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi has ousted the board and CEO of Consolidated Bank of Kenya in changes that have caught the attention of the regulator and triggered a court battle.

The boardroom coup followed Mr Mbadi’s rejection of the directors’ decision to offer the bank’s chief executive officer, Sam Muturi, a second term from October 11.

Before tapping Mr Muturi’s replacement on October 8, the Treasury CS fired three directors on October 3 after they insisted on Mr Muturi’s second term and rejected the push for recruitment of a new CEO.

Mr Mbadi advised the remaining two of the seven directors to hire Dr Murage Njeru, a lecturer at the University of Nairobi, as acting CEO, prompting Mr Muturi to petition court for his reinstatement or a compensation of Sh76 million.

Dr Njeru’s appointment came days after he stepped down in the race for the Mbeere North parliamentary by-election, which set for November 27, in favour of the candidate of President William Ruto’s United Democratic Alliance (UDA).

But his appointment has landed Consolidated Bank in trouble after the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) said the lender had breached its rules that demand executives pass a fit and proper test before of their appointment.

Dr Njeru’s appointment came as his brother and another contestant for the Mbeere North seat, Charles Njagagua, was removed as chair of Consolidated Bank.

The by-election is seen as a litmus test for the President’s popularity in the Mt Kenya region following his fallout with former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.

‘In light of the absence of a substantive board of directors, I hereby appoint Dr Dominic Murage Njeru, who is being seconded from the University of Nairobi as the acting chief executive officer to ensure effective succession management pending his certification by the Central Bank of Kenya,’ said Mr Mbadi in an October 8 letter to the Treasury’s representative on the Consolidated Bank board, Jane Njogu.

Ms Njogu later sent a memo to staff announcing the appointment of Dr Njeru as the acting CEO, prompting protests from the CBK.

The CBK reckoned that that Dr Njeru was yet to be vetted by the banking regulator, who earlier questioned Ms Njogu’s role, arguing it has not approved her second board term that started in September.

‘We bring to your attention provisions of Section Section 9A of the Banking Act which stipulate that institutions are required to ensure that no person is appointed or elected as a director or appointed as a senior officer unless the central bank has certified the person as a fit and proper person to manage or control the institution,’ CBK’s deputy director of bank supervision, Timothy Kimutai, told Consolidated Bank.

‘In addition, CBK Prudential Guideline on corporate governance stipulates that no senior officer shall take up his position prior to being cleared by the central bank,’ he added in the October 23 letter.

Consolidated Bank’s board in a letter to Mr Mbadi in March pushed for Mr Muturi to be offered a second term on grounds that he had delivered the bank’s first profit in 15 years.

But the Treasury CS in September rejected the bid to renew Mr Muturi’s term, urging the board to start the process of hiring a new CEO.

In a meeting held in September, four of the six directors opted to challenge the CS’s decision and insisted on Mr Muturi.

The former chairman, Mr Njagagua, and Ms Njogu sided with the Treasury CS.

‘In view of the foregoing, it was resolved that a letter be written to the Cabinet Secretary seeking further consultation and a reconsideration of the decision by the CS recommending the commencement of the recruitment of a new CEO in view of the fact that the board had instead recommended the renewal of the CEO’s contract for a further three years,’ say minutes of the board on September 12 seen by the Business Daily.

However, on the same date, Mr Njagagua terminated the contract of Mr Muturi, before the board’s resolution was communicated to the CS.

In a letter dated September 17, the CS acknowledged receiving a letter signed by four directors requesting extension of the CEO’s contract but insisted on ending Mr Muturi’s term.

On October 3, Mr Mbadi revoked the appointment of three of the four directors who had signed the letter save for Florence Oluoch, who had been appointed in November last year.

President Ruto revoked Mr Njagagua’s chairmanship on the same day, leaving the bank without a substantive board.

Mr Muturi on October 16 petitioned the court to have him reinstated, arguing that Mr Mbadi had no powers to overrule the board in the appointment of CEOs.

Consolidated Bank has been struggling with leadership gaps with more than half of its top management – six of 11 – serving in acting capacity, denying them full authority to execute their roles.

Albert Anjichi is acting as the bank’s head of legal and company secretary since 2023.

Fred Ronoh, head of finance and administration, and Harrison Muthoka, head of risk and compliance, are also temporal.

Others serving in acting capacity are head of human resources Rose Mukoba, head of retail and SME Josephine Mutunga, who however holds the docket of corporate banking substantively and head of credit Jullie Odadi.

Mr Muturi had banked on a fresh term after the bank posted a profit of Sh12 million for the six months ended June from a Sh84 million loss.

The bank, whose capital levels remained below statutory requirements, cut its operating expenses by four percent to Sh812 million from Sh848 million.

It reduced its staff costs in the six-month period by Sh5 million to Sh349 million, with management forced to look at cost cutting to spur growth as the government continued withholding its support despite persistent calls for cash injection.

Consolidated Bank has been in the red for the last nine years with losses wiping out its core capital to negative Sh731 million.

Its accumulated losses stood at Sh4.4 billion, putting it in breach of all CBK’s capital parameters.

The bank’s core capital to total deposit liabilities ratio is at negative 5.8 percent against a mandatory eight percent while its total capital to total risk weighted assets is at negative 6.1 percent against the statutory 14.5 percent.

The Treasury, which owns 93.5 percent of the bank, has failed to heed pleas to inject cash in the lender for the last 12 years.

The difference between what Kenyan banks charge for loans and pay on deposits has hit its highest level in nine years at 7.44 percentage points, leaving borrowers and savers both worse off despite falling policy rates.

Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) data show that lending rates have eased by just 1.77 percentage points between August last year and September while deposit rates have fallen by 3.65 percentage points in the same period.

The cuts in deposit rates are in tandem with reduction on the benchmark CBK rate.

The uneven adjustment-which placed average interest rate at 15.07 percent in September and deposit rate at 7.63 percent-has pushed the spread to 7.44 percentage points.

This is the highest spread since August 2016, when the gap reached 11.29 percent just before Kenya introduced lending caps to tame the cost of credit.

The widening gap suggests that banks have been slow to pass on lower interest rates to borrowers, even as they moved quickly to cut what they pay depositors – a trend that reflects profit protection in the sector.

Concerns about the mismatch between lending rates and Central Bank Rate (CBR) had prompted CBK Governor Kamau Thugge to intervene more directly through moral suasion and threat of daily fines to improve rate transmission.

In addition, CBK has reviewed the risk-based pricing framework, establishing a common base lending rate for all banks based on the overnight-interbank lending rate, renamed the Kenya Shilling Overnight Interbank Average (Kesonia).

Kesonia is closely tied to the CBR under the interest-rate corridor framework, where overnight lending rates for borrowing between banks are held at no more or less than 0.75 percent of the benchmark.

The total cost of credit to a borrower equals Kesonia plus a premium denoted as K, which is determined according to the risk profile of each customer, but also factors in bank margins plus expected returns to shareholders.

Dr Thugge believes Kesonia has ended ‘all excuses’ for banks not to lower their lending rates, adding that the interest rates on loans should now mirror the prevailing policy rate.

‘There should be no excuse by banks for whatever reason [not to cut interest rates]. There have been quite a number of excuses. This time, there won’t be an excuse. Once we lower CBR, banks should also lower their interest rates,’ Dr Thugge said.

The CBR had hit a 12-year high of of 13 percent in February last year where it lasted up to August of the same year before CBK started

The CBR is now at 9.25 percent, being a 3.75 percentage points cut that has come from eight cuts since August last year.

This means the reduction in the deposit rate to an average of 7.63 percent compared with 11.28 percent at the start of August last year has nearly matched the CBR. However, over the same period, the cuts on lending rates have barely matched the cumulative cuts in the CBR.

Some banks have argued that they have been reluctant to cut lending rates significantly because they still face elevated credit risks in sectors like manufacturing, real estate and small and medium-sized enterprises.

The sharp drop in deposit rates reflects both lower competition for funds and subdued private-sector credit demand. The result has been a squeeze on savers, who are now earning the lowest returns on deposits in nearly a decade, while borrowers continue to face double-digit loan costs.

The last time the interest rate spread was this wide was in August 2016, when lending rates averaged 17.71 percent and deposit rates just 6.42 percent – a gap of 11.29 points.

That environment triggered public outcry and eventually led Parliament to enact the Banking (Amendment) Act of 2016, which capped lending rates at four percentage points above the CBR and set a floor for deposit rates. The interest rate caps were repealed in 2019 after concerns they had curtailed credit access, especially to SMEs.

The return of a large spread has seen CBK call out banks for not passing the benefits of a lower CBR to customers. This points to a long-standing issue of weak monetary transmission which has seen the regulator unveil a new loan pricing formula.

The widening spread is translating into improved profitability for banks. A faster drop in the cost of funds compared with the price of loans has seen banks maintain a growth in profit amid a soft economy.

CBK data shows Kenyan banks pre-tax profit for seven months to July grew by 8.75 percent to Sh177.7 billion from Sh163.4 billion in a similar period last year.

Equity Group, which is the only one that has so far published nine-month earnings shows net profit grew 32.6 percent to Sh52.12 billion in the period, mainly supported by Kenyan operations where there was a 51.2 percent rise in net earnings to Sh31.09 billion.

The persistence of high borrowing costs threatens to undermine the CBK’s efforts to boost private-sector credit, which had posted negative growth between November last year and March this year before recovering slightly to close September at a growth of five percent.

The declining deposit poses a challenge for savers given that inflation has been rising, hitting 4.6 percent in September compared with three percent at the start of the year and 2.7 percent in September last year.