To get it right, let us start right: How Kenya can best reclaim Vision 2030

March 2026 opened with Kenya well into the 2027 electoral campaign season, sorry, 2026/27 budget preparation season. If we were to do a national poll of which season we think we are in right now, 2027 would probably whitewash 2026/27.

This is today’s Kenya already arguing over whether or not the 10-point ODM-UDA MoU that terminates on Saturday, March 7 also collapses the broad-based government. We will return to this agenda later in the week.

Thinking about the budget season, should we not expect, beginning this week, the National Assembly’s outputs- reports with recommendations- on the 2026 Budget Policy Statement (BPS), National Infrastructure Fund (NIF) Bill and Safaricom’s Divestiture Sessional Paper? 

It will be intriguing to see what the MPs report on Safaricom’s divestiture says. First, about the fact that the “premium” at which Vodacom was expected to acquire that extra 15 per cent stake to secure a controlling interest might end up being a “discount” based on current price trends. Second, about the over-priced discount rate, aka cost of capital, implied by a higher annual dividend, the government over-estimating its future dividend payback period in taking them in advance.  Third, about the prospect of a foreign controlling interest in the core player in Kenya’s national digital infrastructure, from finance to socials, SHA/social protection to security.

Ditto MPs final report on the NIF. It is clear from observing public participation on trust is a key issue.  Kenyans don’t reject the idea of the NIF. They simply don’t trust this administration to run it transparently and accountably. It doesn’t help when, before the Bill is law, we hear leadership declarations of a Sh2.5 trillion target to be raised for the Fund by April, that is, by next month. Yet at the same time, we are still consulting the experts on how to set up and operate this Fund.

How MPs address this “spray and pray” approach will be interesting. NIFs, or Public Infrastructure Funds (PIFs) are a dime a dozen. They are not new ideas to the world, or Africa, but we seem to be making heavy weather of getting this going.  And, to repeat, we still don’t have a public list of projects to be funded by the NIF. Put it this way. When South Africa is publicly debating its National Infrastructure Plan 2050, we are debating the NIF Bill which promises a plan.

Ideally, the BPS that Parliament approves should reflect recommendations on the NIF and Safaricom deal. But it already fails to paint a lucid picture of our “first world” vision, while endless roadside and official speeches aren’t factored into the macro-forecasts and, importantly, micro-targets.  Again, where is the Sessional Paper to succeed Vision 2030 -which was Sessional Paper No 10 of 2012?  Whenever you see something going badly wrong, it often starts badly wrong.

As we fumble around, Vietnam is well along its own journey  to hit double-digit economic growth by 2030, and become an advanced economy, what we are calling “first world” by 2045.  Closer to home, Tanzania’s long-term planning envisages similar double-digit growth towards a trillion-dollar, not trillion shilling, economy by 2050. Here, we are still making noises in market places.

And there is a specific reason I keep referring to Vision 2030 in the context of our first world vision. First, exactly 20 years ago, President Kibaki had recovered the economy by the end of his third year in office, and as the final years of his first term approached, Vision 2030 was developed to succeed the Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation (ERSWEC). 

When you strip out the politics, we have a similar situation with President Ruto, having stabilised the economy while taking forward much of the Bottom-Up Economic Transformation Agenda (BETA). To be clear, BETA has a longer lens, timewise, than ERSWEC. The difference for President Ruto is he is able to build a holistic vision that leverages BETA and Vision 2030.

To do this requires, as said before, an open and honest evaluation of Vision 2030, even though we have four years to go. Remember, the current 2023-2027 Fourth Medium-Term Plan (MTP IV) is officially the final MTP under this vision. So here is the first of two evaluation perspectives.

Our aim here is to qualitatively, then quantitatively, evaluate the vision’s 25 goal statements set out in 2008 based on the overall aim to be “a globally competitive and prosperous nation with a high quality of life by 2030” even as we also sought to be “a newly-industrializing, middle-income country providing a high quality of life to all its citizens in a clean and secure environment”.

On the economic pillar “to move up the economic value chain” we set the following goal statements.

Innovative, commercially-oriented and modern agriculture. Robust, diversified and competitive manufacturing. Efficient, multi-tiered, product-diversified and innovative formal wholesale and retail trade. A top ten long-haul tourist destination in the world offering a high-value, diverse and distinctive visitor experience. The top BPO off-shoring destination in Africa. A vibrant and globally competitive financial services sector driving high levels of savings to finance the country’s investment and economic growth needs. Oil and mining, and the blue economy, sustainably developed and managed for citizen benefit.

On the social pillar “to invest in people” this is what we targeted. Globally competitive quality education, training and research for sustainable development.  Equitable, quality and affordable health care of the highest standard. Water and sanitation availability and access for all in a clean, secure and sustainable environment with adequate and decent housing. Improved, dignified and rewarding livelihoods for women, youth and vulnerable groups driven by equity in access, control and participation in resource distribution.  A celebration of “the best in us” through inclusive and lucrative opportunities in culture, arts and sports. 

On the political pillar “to move into the future as one nation” we set five goals.

Adherence to the rule of law as applicable to a modern, market-based economy in a human rights-respecting state. Genuinely competitive and issue-based electoral politics. A people-centred and politically-engaged open society. Transparent, accountable, ethical and results-oriented government institutions. A secure, just, cohesive, democratic and conducive environment for a prosperous Kenya.

With the passage of the 2010 Constitution, catalytic devolution became the sixth goal. 

Finally, on the enablers or foundations of the vision, we set the following goals.

A nation of peace and stability and a society free of danger and fear. A citizen-focused and results-oriented public service. Decent and gainful employment for every Kenyan in a just and equitable society without extreme poverty. World class infrastructure facilities and services. ICT leveraged for increased competitiveness. The STI (Science, Technology and Innovation) transition to an innovation-led and knowledge-based economy”. Globally competitive and sustainable land management.

Those are 25 goals. 

Four more goals later emerged to reflect contemporary developments. An end to drought emergencies and food insecurity. Acting towards a low carbon and climate resilient environment. An integrated and coordinated disaster risk management system. A Kenya free of HIV infection, stigma and AIDS-related deaths.

That is a total of 29 goals that we might do well to evaluate. 

We will return to the second evaluation perspective in a future column.  In the meantime, let us try a simple thought experiment. Forget all about development plans, strategic plans, investment plans, recurrent and development budgets and the like and simply take a look at these 29 goal statements with two questions in mind.

Where are we now? That is, how far have we travelled? That is the monitoring question.  Why? is the related evaluation question.

To get it right, let us start right!