LEAN GOVERNMENT IN KENYA: Ceding sovereignty to International NGOs for development

A woman rolling a water container by by foot as she carries another

 

LEAN GOVERNMENT IN KENYA: Ceding sovereignty to International NGOs for development

By Jossi Tinga

The country is abuzz with talk of a lean government. No less than President Uhuru Kenyatta has set the tone of the debate. He argues a lean government will make room for investment in development. Actually this is old talk. Reducing the size of government has been in vogue since the days of the Structural Adjustment Program in the 1980s. Back then the government dabbled in everything from groceries in supermarkets to selling farm inputs. By the time government run stores were shut down, they had little on their shelves- they died a natural death.

In the 1990s the knife went deeper ripping off whole government departments to cut costs. In the roads department, only a skeletal establishment remains. Its main task is to issue contracts for construction and issue other contracts for supervision of the work. In the water sector, the government basically left it to rural communities to cater for their needs with occasional interventions. The government has been withdrawing from the community retreating to the major centres in the districts. In its stead International Non-Governmental Organisations have sprung up to fill the vacuum.

In Turkana County, the Catholic Relief Services boast of an establishment to rival any Third World government. The Catholic Church runs schools, hospitals, training institutes, livestock and agricultural extension services, orphanages and is the first point of call for many in the region. It has an impressive bureaucracy employing professionals in the various sectors as well as technicians and artisans. The Catholic Church is the de facto government in the area.

Perhaps less visibly but nonetheless critical is the role of the International NGOs in the government itself. Many programs in the government ministries are funded through donor organisations. These not only require two streams of reporting but usually give the funding agency free rein over the program including determination of its goals, methodology and ideology. In effect, NGOs not only have space to influence government programs and policy but also to oversee its implementation. The myriad of organisations competing for space in the rural districts and urban slum areas are testimony to this as are the numerous logos on any national campaign be it an anti-malaria campaign to the campaign for peaceful elections.

International NGOs are in the thick of the governance and rights campaigns just as they are in the business of providing potable water and maternity services to far-flung rural communities. Traditionally, these are roles left to government and sometimes local initiative through for-profit and non-profit organisations e.g. the private sector and community organisations. Crucially, these organisations are moving in at a time the Kenyan government is retreating into a supposedly regulatory and supervisory role. It is not retreating in the face of improved capacity to fend for local needs but actually ceding its role and power to the NGOs.

Ceding power to NGOs is not bad in itself. It is assumed these organisations are addressing local needs and most actually do. However, by limiting government capacity to intervene in the various sectors while increasing the role of NGOs in the same we are actually ceding our sovereignty to foreign interests. Whereas the government is accountable to Kenyans in its operations, these organisations owe allegiance to foreign interests and are only accountable to these interests. Where these interests and local interests concur; much stands to be gained. Increasingly the so-called partners are becoming the hands with which government intervenes in the community.

The government purports to be the brain behind these interventions while the NGOs retain capacity on the ground. Government departments in the districts ride piggy-back on the better-funded and equipped organisations. The one area they are yet to penetrate is the Police department. It is not surprising that the Police department remains the most poorly trained and equipped of any department of government as a result.

The modus operandi of the international organisations is not too different from that of a malaise that progressively weakens the limbs even as the mind remains alert. Eventually, physical frailty will weaken the mind and consume the whole body. Retaining capacity in the higher echelons of government and stripping it in the districts has similar consequences. Eventually the international organisations will run government. In many ways they already do so.

Even as we bid for lean government, we should always retain strategic local capacity. The main problem with bloated government is often duplication. As we implement devolved government there are strong moves to retain the former provincial administration even though its role can be fulfilled by the devolved units.

The Office of the President has historically been the main culprit in refusing to shed off excess baggage. It retains many directorates which essentially perform roles delegated to the ministries. Political considerations, as opposed to merit, often determine the structure and form of government departments. It is time we did away with these instead of ceding our sovereignty in order to massage egos of top government officials.