Jipe moyo wewe Kijana! (don’t give up!) – Kenya’s government has no intention of empowering you!

Today the youth in Nairobi converged on Charter Hall to celebrate International Youth Day. The purpose of this auspicious day (which will be officially celebrated tomorrow in the rest of the world) is to draw attention to social, economic, legal and political issues facing the youth.

The Nairobi Forum had as its theme “Harnessing Responsive Youth Development Initiatives for a Sustainable Kenyan Economy”, an issue which is at the heart of Agenda 4 of Kenya’s National Accord Agreement that established the current coalition government.

Regarding the youth, Agenda 4 has far reaching measures which are meant to include all Kenyans and indeed the youth who form over 75% of Kenya’s population into democratic processes and development.

Constitutional reforms are anticipated to include clauses that ensure equal opportunities and social inclusion for all Kenyans. Institutional reforms in the judiciary and police have been incorporated to ensure strong commitment to human rights, in a country where Kenyan youth are particularly vulnerable to such abuses, with the majority of inmates in the prison system being youth and a  police force that has also been accused of targeting the youth for extra judicial killings.

Further Agenda 4 reforms are also supposed to be implemented within the civil service, the same sector which in March this year raised the retirement age of civil servants up five years to 60! Land reforms are also a crucial Agenda 4 issue as land ownership amongst the nation’s youth is remaining a novelty.

However, these reforms cannot compare with the real poverty faced by Kenya’s youth. The youth require jobs and opportunities to fully exploit their talents. And Agenda 4 emphasises policies that ensure equity and balance  in terms of job creation and improved income distribution.

Thus, the main agenda in this afternoon’s Charter Hall forum centered on the Youth Enterprise Development Fund as well as the more recent Kazi kwa Vijana (KKV) programme.

After opening performances from Sauti Sol who can only be described as Kenya’s Boyz II Men, Hope Raisers a band from Korogocho inspired the title of this post “Jipe moyo wewe Kijana!” with their session that encouraged the audience not to give up in the face of poverty. It was ironic that above the stage were both the emblem of the Nairobi City Council which in the past has been guilty of not providing adequate social services as well as the seemingly benign face of President Kibaki, the very same principal who is meant to deliver Agenda 4 to Kenyans.

The forum was moderated by Louis Otieno of Citizen TV and began with a talk from Patrick Kasyula, the head of research at the Youth Enterprise Development Fund. In his speech, he extolled the virtues of the fund, more or less placing the blame for not reaching as many young entrepreneurs as could have been on parliament. He went on to say that the fund had to put internal structures and requirements such as funding youth groups as opposed to individuals so that the Kenya National Audit Office (KNAO) could not say they were spending money flagrantly.

Kasyula further mentioned that the fund was committed to responding to issues. As such the first question was raised by Fiona Mati of the Youth Interactive Portal for Enterprise (Yipe.org) regarding the over Kshs. 1 billion in financial discrepancies outlined in the Partnership for Change report “A fish rots from the head down: crony capitalism at Kenya’s Youth Enterprise Development Fund” whose basis was a financial management letter addressed to the then CEO of the Youth Fund, Umuro Wario from the very same Kenya National Audit Office (KNAO) Mr. Kasyula had earlier mentioned.

In response, Mr. Kasyula termed the “report” as being false and malicious. He went onto assert that those errors emanated from the fund’s parent ministry of Youth & Sports to whom the startup monies for the youth fund was given in grants. As a result of that “report” Kasyula continued, the CEO was terminated.  Mr. Kasyula never made any response to other questions from Ms. Mati regarding single sourcing by the Fund of suppliers and contractors, and neither did he answer her question on the Youth Fund’s “partnership” with Enablis East Africa.  However, he did provide a standard response from the fund that it is the only State Corporation that presents quarterly reports to Parliament and is one of the most transparent government agencies. Yet if this is the case, why the hesitancy in answering a few straightforward questions if the Fund is as transparent as its officers profess it to be?

Mr. Kasyula was further prodded by another audience member, Emmanuel Dennis the convenor of the National Youth Convention regarding his assertion that the “report” by the Kenya National Audit Office was both “false and malicious”. Mr. Dennis asked how Kasyula a civil servant could say the Auditor General’s office could make such “false and malicious” assertions– the very same office that draws its mandate from The Constitution of Kenya!

Dennis further reminded the audience of further financial issues raised in the KNAO financial management letter including a Kshs. 50 million grant to the youth fund by the Kenya Pipeline Organisation, for which no agreement was supplied at the time of the KNAO’s audit of the fund; Kshs. 500 million put into a fixed deposit account without Treasury approval and monies paid out for events to an organization for whom no legal registration documents were made available to the KNAO.

At this point, Kasyula directed any interested questioners to find out more from the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, whom the forum’s moderator Louis Otieno reminded everyone present was new in his job. But Kasyula maintained that a visit to the parent ministry would yield answers, albeit the same answers the Partnership for Change has been seeking since June 27^th 2009!

At the beginning of the Forum, Louis Otieno had asked the audience how many had received money from the youth kitty and only a smattering raised their hands. Indeed there were more audience members who raised their hands when asked who had applied and been rejected.

Two of these from one youth group in Embakasi narrated their story. They said that even though the concept of a youth fund was good in the boardroom, its implementation was far from realistic on the ground. They had tried to apply twice and never received even an email rejecting their application. One of them, Njambi said that rejection communication would not quench her thirst for entrepreneurship, but could only improve the development of her group’s business proposal. Njambi added that even a short note saying that the handwriting on her group’s proposal was bad would have been preferable to no response at all.

The second entrepreneur Lydia said that on one of their applications they approached the Fund and were told there was no money and that they should return after the national budget was read as all the money had been returned until then to the Treasury! She further cited the major hurdles imposed by the fund’s application process saying that her group had a hard time even finding a youth officer. That is not surprising because the youth officer they eventually found in Embakasi was in her words a “Mzee” (an old man) who told the group that what they were requesting was not within his mandate and even called the administration police to send them back to where they came from. Kasyula responded to this by admitting that the Fund does not itself employ youth officers who commonly are “senior” civil servants seconded to such duties by the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports.

The question of what impact the fund has made was raised by other audience members who said the youth in the “hood(s)” of Nairobi do not know about banks and “big money” and asked the fund to make its presence known on the ground. A member of a youth performing group added that road-shows would be a good starting point so the youth can leave the ghetto and reach the leafy suburbs of Lavington.

The second issue under discussion at the forum was jobs, specifically those under the controversial Kazi kwa Vijana (KKV) programme. A representative from the KKV National Management Committee Mr. Adak said that the initiative was aimed at assisting those youth most “at risk“. In his introduction he outlined the structure of the programme and stressed that the initiative had been successful, employing 100,000 youth so far.

Expenditure is Expe! (expensive)

An audience member from Mathare later told Mr. Adak that the amount of 250 shillings per day  was too little to feed him and his family. He also asked whether the initiative was just a 2012 campaign gimmick. In response, Adak told the young man that we should “praise God” for 250 shillings! – further revealing the insensitivity of government policy makers and political elite to the plight of the nation’s youth.

That response confirmed that Kenya’s government policy is solely populist and not geared to any sustainable development as far as youth policy and mainstreaming is concerned. That the government through KKV has employed 100,000 youth and intends by the end of September 2009 (next month) to make this figure 300,000 (how they get this figure and how they intend to achieve 300% growth is anyone’s guess) shows that Agenda 4 is on the back-burner as far as Kenya’s youth are concerned. World development has shown that as the noted economist and Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen says, development is not just about numbers but how the quality of life of a nation’s population is being improved. Obviously Kenya’s development economists and policy makers remain unaware of this.

To further show that the KKV programme is solely intended to give Kshs. 2,500 to as many youth as it can, the project is set up so that an “at risk” youth gets temporary employment for a maximum of 10 days. The means test to assess those “at risk” was questioned as well as the use of the provincial administration in implementation. Audience members testified that local chiefs were using the KKV as a means to solidify their influence in communities with no scrutiny. Negative ethnicity was also cited when a participant called Bill from Kiamaiko in Huruma told the forum that only youth from one community were being employed in his area. Another, George from Mathare said that the KKV supervisors looked 75 years old! He also told the forum that there were cases of supervisors demanding a cut of the earnings.

Payment was also an issue. Under the programme, the youth are paid two weeks AFTER the job and several cases were raised in the forum regarding delayed payment even after that time period. However, Adak of the KKV said that some youth had been involved in monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the exercise to avert such incidents and even narrated an instance of M&E youth entering government offices questioning why they were unmanned. Though this sounds like empowering youth, the tale evoked memories of the dreaded Kanu youth wingers of the Moi regime who in their red-shirts terrorized everyone including civil servants.

As for the KKVs national steering committee and its offshoots, queries were raised by youth group members in the audience as to who actually appoints these committee members? A youth leader echoed the campaign gimmick question asking why the programme was under the Prime Minister’s office and not the Ministry of Youth Affairs? He reiterated that the initiative was being used as a cash cow for the provincial administration where bribes to be employed on the programme went as high as Kshs. 2,000 – leave alone that the total take home amount should be Kshs. 2,500!  The potential for corruption in this Kshs. 15 billion project was cited as being too high particularly where no checks and balances have been instituted. Adak, the KKV representative could only respond that the committees were manned by civil servants from roads, forestry, solid waste collection and other labour intensive government departments.

Siku njema ina kuja (A better day is coming)

But the ray of hope came from the recommendations of an earlier morning session where the forum was informed that a report will be presented to the government regarding the youth fund with the following demands:

• An acknowledgment that the youth enterprise development fund is not structured in such a way as to eradicate poverty. The beneficiary criteria has not been well thought out and enables those who can access loans elsewhere to benefit to the exclusion of those that really need it.
• The fund should not be so stringent in its loan disbursement: small quick turnaround loans should be included.
• Devolvement of disbursement from commercial banks should be immediate and grassroot structures that are more accessible to Kenya’s youth should be promoted.

As for the Kazi Kwa Vijana, this policy was only slated to last until September 2009. However, the youth are growing more restless by the day. The only solution to avert a youth revolution is a full and committed implementation of Agenda 4.

Kenya’s Youth Council Bill is merely a means to keep the old guard on top

Kenya’s National Youth Council Bill 2009 came up for reading this week in parliament, though lack of quorum once again caused some delay. Though this should be cause for celebration for the country’s youth movement, several clauses illustrate the government’s inability to respect the needs and demands of Kenya’s youth.

Indeed the Bill is ambiguous even when it comes to the definition of who actually constitute the youth. In the Bill’s preliminary, the youth are termed as persons between fifteen and thirty years. However,the United Nations categorises youth as those between the ages of 15 to 24 years old. And for one to benefit from a loan from the Youth Enterprise Development Fund, one has to be between the ages of 18 to 35 years.

Then there is the issue of actual youth participation in the proposed Council. Section 5 of the Bill states that the Chairperson shall be appointed solely by the Minister of Youth Affairs & Sports. However, she need not even consult with youth groups when making her decision, so she could appoint a geriatric if she chose.

On further perusal of the clauses regarding the composition of the Council, it turns out that it is not only the Chair that could turn out to be old. Apart from the traditional practice of having permanent secretaries from the parent ministry and the Treasury in addition to the Attorney General (or an appointed proxy), the Minister also holds sole powers to appoint six other members to the Council. The clause once again does not insist on any consultation with youth groups, and also has no mention whatsoever of the age of these members.

Further, the Chief Executive of the Council can be as old as Methuselah as far as the Bill is concerned. This is the same officer who should serve as the face of the Council and be the voice of the youth to the Council members, yet the Bill omits to mention that they even need to form any liaisons with the country’s youth groups or have any prior experience in youth policy making.

The staff of the Council too do not have to be youth. And remember that it was only a few months ago when the retirement age of civil servants in Kenya was hiked up by five years to 65!  Seeing that the government claims to be striving to implement austerity measures, most likely the staff will be deployed from other government ministries; so who is to say that the Council offices will not be manned by 59 year olds? This in the same country where nearly 10% of the total population are unemployed youth, stinks of the same insensitivity government policies have had towards the Kenyan people.

The bid to control the youth through this reactionary document, also rises higher up in government echelons, not merely resting on the shoulders of the Minister of Youth Affairs. The President who himself is inching closer to 80 years holds the sole power to appoint the Chairperson of the proposed Advisory Board to the Council. This is the same person who oversaw the re-appointment of the oldest civil servant in Kenyan history back to the Kenya Airport Authority! Even scanning appointments to commissions and government agencies, it would be more in keeping to norm for the President to appoint someone over retirement age, this time not even having to consult with younger MPs let alone youth organisations themselves.

But there is a glimmer of light where the advisory board is concerned where the Minister of Youth (again!) has the power to appoint eight representatives of youth organisations. However, yet again the youth are locked out in getting extra seats on this board by the following factors:

• Though one member must be nominated by the Kenya Private Sector Alliance, to be a member one has be an association or a corporate entity and fork out at least Kshs. 5,000 (US$ 65). Youth entrepreneurs generally tend to be cash strapped, and thus more likely to be unable to even afford this sum, precluding them from such a nomination.
• Including only the Commission of Higher Education to represent the education sector ignores the millions of youth who never had or will have the opportunity to benefit from tertiary education.
• The National Economic and Social Council has a small minority of youth members, who once again only represent the creme de la creme of industry and financial services in the country. What about the informal sector entrepreneurs who form the majority of business activity in Kenya and employ 75% of Kenyans of working age?
• Finally where are the nomination categories that will nominate members to press for the rights of rural and urban poor youth?

Even the experts that are supposed to advise the advisory board do not have to be youthful. To us, the best expert is the one that is living the life – the youth themselves!

Another toothless dog?

It seems that indeed this proposed Council is once again a PR gimmick of the government, a mere toothless poodle to appease and control the youth.  Under the Bill, the activities and mandates of the Council are only a duplication of what national youth movements have already being doing for eons. The proposed Council pales in comparison to the youth council in Rwanda, which even has enough power to elect members to the country’s Chamber of Deputies, the second chamber of parliament.

As Hon. Denis H. Obua MP of Uganda writing earlier in this same blog comparing the mainstreaming of youth policy in his country to that of Rwanda commented:

“My observation was that issues of the youth are given top priority by the Rwandan government.

Their youth councils are one of the best supported in Africa and the Ministry of Youth Affairs is considered one of the core ministries … But does the Rwandan government have more resources than Uganda’s? The answer is no, but issues of the youth attract top attention in Kigali”.- Govt crippling youth efforts to live better, November 21 2008

Though the Bill tries to ensure fresh talent by limiting the number of years one can sit on the Council or the Advisory Board to three years, a better limit would be to ensure that the main decision making powers rest with the youth membership, while the permanent secretaries and Attorney General’s representative act as advisers to ensure they act within mandate and the law. The maximum limit for the youth Council members can be either 30 or 35 years, after the Ministry of Youth finally settles on one age. After that the Council members should retire.

Also the powers of the Minister of Youth to hire and fire should be curtailed, by insisting that there should be some consultative process with the youth of Kenya, before embarking on such actions.

Business Planning: Looking forward to 2012

When will it ever end?

The politicians are at it again, this week’s topic of course is “that envelope”. As entrepreneurs it has now become imperative for our business plans to take into consideration political risk. Many businesses are still reeling from the after shocks of the post-election violence, whilst some of our fellow entrepreneurs lost their businesses and still languish in IDP camps.

This political risk to enterprise goes further than just Kenyan borders. Our fellow East African entrepreneurs should not forget the impact the blocked highways had on the availability of fuel and commodities in their markets.

Since the politicians won’t let us forget, we at Yipe decided to re-publish this blog posted on October 2nd on our sister site. It was written in response to the jostling for positions in political parties for the 2012 elections. Now with all this talk about “that envelope” and the Waki Report that was rejected yesterday “in toto” by ODM, it behoves us to revisit the issue of business planning for 2012….

Business Planning: Looking forward to 2012

As much as politicians may try to deny it, campaigns for the 2012 Kenyan elections are on. Leaders are being anointed as flag bearers, this not even long after the bloody chaos that marked the beginning of 2008.

At Yipe, we just put up a new advice section for startups, but whilst doing that I thought, is it worth the bother? After all, apart from the lives lost and people displaced living in camps, many entrepreneurs lost their livelihoods. It must take a lot of faith on their part to take the bull by the horns (so to speak) and begin a new venture.

As political parties race to comply with the requirements of the new Political Parties Act, news reports frequently tell us this or that leader has been appointed torchbearer to vie in the next elections.

Now, every startup has (or we hope has) a plan, but seriously have we planned for 2012 and indeed 2013 after the results are declared? Unless your business plan is to re-locate out of Kenya, this is a critical consideration. If we don’t it will be as someone (it may have been Judge Johann Kriegler recently formerly of IREC) said, what happened at the beginning of 2008 will look like a Christmas party in 2012 if nothing is done to prevent it.

It seems like the debate for an official “grand” opposition to our “grand” coalition has taken over the national agenda as opposed to pertinent issues such as constitutional review and the agenda 4 items.

So if politicians have forgotten to ensure that 2012 and 2013 are safe for doing business in Kenya, what can the micro and small entrepreneur do? Should we just have a four year plan and spend the beginning of 2012 closing or looking for (gullible) buyers for our businesses?

Will there be any repercussions of what happened this year on consumer demand come 2012? Maybe people will be scared to spend, remembering how prices skyrocketed because normal product distribution channels were closed. This effect could trickle westwards and affect markets in Uganda and Rwanda who bore the brunt of delayed shipments (particularly of fuel) when the Mombasa-Kisumu highway was blocked.

On the other hand, the post election violence may mean booming business in 2012 as consumers stock up in case of the re-emergence of violence. However, this will be felt in a slow market come 2013. What about the kiosk owner in Kibera, Mathare or any other flash-point for that matter? Have they thought if they will stay open past the elections? And if so, how will they manage to get their products past the protestors and the policemen, that is assuming that their property is not looted.

Location, Location, Location: the mantra for business

It matters not where you are in Kenya or indeed Uganda or Rwanda (if you depend on supplies from or through Kenya) for that matter, your business will be affected in some way if due to the early campaigns and jostling for prime positions in political parties means that nothing is done regarding constitutional reform, poverty and inequity, unemployment, cohesion, land reform and transparency, accountability and impunity (Agenda 4 Kenyan National Dialogue and Reconciliation).

On an individual level what can we do?

Recently I did a test that asked me to describe myself in 10 words. My answers in order were my gender, occupation, physical attributes, nationality, belief system and my roles in family and the wider society. It’s a test you should try. Simply imagine you have 10 words to describe who you are to someone who has never met you. But know there are no correct answers for this test. In a nutshell you are who you believe yourself to be.

What does our social identity have to do with our role in 2012 and 2013? The post election violence was mainly driven by ethnicity, with members of one community attacking the other, and the victims responding in revenge attacks.

That means that my ethnicity either marked or saved me from being a victim of the violence. Yet from my top 10 social identities, my ethnic group is not a priority in how I perceive myself as a person and member of Kenyan society. In fact in terms of grouping I feel more affiliation with my fellow entrepreneurs, women and Kenyans long before my tribesmates. Yet, and I can’t help this, there are other people who have made assumptions about me based on what community I happen to be born in (note: I said “born in” and not belong to). They have already foretold that come 2012 I will vote for a certain leader. If say that leader happens to win or lose, I will bear the brunt of their animosity if I happen to be in the wrong business location at the wrong time. That I cannot help.

But I can help in how I conduct myself and business to show that we are above ethnicity. I can be Kenyan. By treating every person I know and customer fairly and equitably (barring the one’s who don’t pay on time!).

I can ensure that amongst my small social group there is understanding that we are all Kenyan, East Africa or African for that matter. The Ubuntu spirit sums it up: if you hurt, then I hurt.

Leave the politicians to the campaigns (however early they have begun), but when they approach us in 2012 to take up arms or fists against (their) perceived enemies, know that it may be YOU in that IDP camp come 2013 figuring out what business to start-up with the Kshs. 10,000 from “Operation Rudi Nyumbani”.

Ok… I just realized there is hope for the startup section!