Westminster Hall
Wednesday 20 March 2013
[Mr Peter Bone in the Chair]
Government Policy (Kenya)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting be now adjourned.—(Mr Randall.) 9.30 am
Eric Joyce (Falkirk) (Ind): It is difficult to overstate the importance of Kenya to the United Kingdom and, indeed, the wider international community. Perhaps first and foremost, Kenya is at the centre of international efforts to ensure the security of our own citizens. Citizens of Kenya have played a high price for that role and for their pivotal location in the world in recent years, from the US embassy bombing in 1998 through to the al-Shabaab attacks of last year, yet that is rarely reflected in public discourse here in the UK.
It is not necessary to go into detail about the way in which Kenya has co-operated magnificently with her allies, because a good deal of that information is public. However, much of it, by necessity, is unknown by those who are not directly involved. What is a matter of considerable public knowledge is Kenya’s leadership role in stabilising its northern neighbour, Somalia. Authorities, from the UN Secretary-General to the leaders of all the major states involved, have officially recognised that Somalia is where it is today—fragile but, I hope, on the road to recovery—because of the efforts of Kenya’s servicemen and women in defeating al-Shabaab and securing Mogadishu. What is more, Kenya has done that while showing restraint and ensuring the appropriate UN and African Union mandates are complied with, such as by re-hatting Kenyan troops as African Union Mission in Somalia—AMISOM—troops.
Kenya’s role extends well beyond military action, too. Virtually all humanitarian efforts in Somalia are mounted from Kenya, and they have saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Somalis. Experts are in universal agreement that Kenya has deployed only appropriate force to assure its territorial integrity and that it has gone far above and beyond the call of national duty to help developed nations, such as the UK, to secure the safety of their citizens—here in the UK and abroad.
Anyone who has served in the British Army knows, like many others, how important Kenya has always been to our military capacity. The unrivalled training facilities that Kenya has always provided so freely have been a fundamental component of the UK’s capacity to launch military operations, including, for example, in our defence of the Falkland Islands just over 30 years ago. Many British servicemen regarded Kenya as the reason why we were able to mount that operation, given the personal and unit training capacity. Anyone who goes on the British Army’s website will read about the UK’s continuing reliance on, and gratitude for, Kenyan facilities, notably in respect of Operation Herrick in Afghanistan, but also in respect of British Army operations around the world.
Beyond military and security considerations, I have recently spoken to private equity investors who are interested in projects in Mogadishu, which is testimony to how astonishingly quickly Governments and investors can act together to build much needed infrastructure and services, following even the direst of civil collapses. That has been made possibly by Kenya, first and foremost. It will be some time before we can be sure that Somalia is unstoppably on the road to proper reconstruction, but when it is, we will have Kenya to thank for that.
Communications in Kenya are also fundamental to investment throughout the region. I have visited Africa many times over the past dozen years, and virtually every time, I have travelled through Nairobi. It is a simple fact that Kenya is Africa’s pre-eminent junction for flows of trade and investment, people and, inevitably, information. From a trade and investment perspective, Kenya has many buoyant businesses, and it is the world leader in mobile payment systems. The Minister will be well aware of the UK’s early role in facilitating M-PESA. Off the top of my head, I believe that the former Commonwealth Development Corporation—now the CDC—was involved in seedcorning that project in Kenya.
M-PESA is a payment system that utilises the Safaricom network and harnesses microfinancing principles to deliver a superfast and highly effective means of bill payment. It has been so successful that conventional banking institutions have made significant efforts to become involved, through the Government, in the regulation of such systems. That is because mobile platform providers such as Safaricom enjoy confidence among local consumers at a higher level than that for the banks. Although Kenya, unlike many African states, has a relatively mature local banking system, I understand that almost 20 million Kenyans—it has population of just over 41 million—have M-PESA accounts. That enables them to make payments and transfer cash. It involves trading in what we would view as relatively small amounts, but those amounts fit the size of the domestic markets that small traders are accessing.
M-PESA has also been successfully extended into Tanzania. One of the critical aspects of the system is that in Kenya, and across Africa, the mobile infrastructure is developed, but fixed-line infrastructure is undeveloped, so services are jumping ahead. In the UK, we are looking at 4G and considering how we might be able to access new services through mobile platforms, but people in Africa really have no choice. The sophistication of mobile platforms such as M-PESA is remarkable, and in that way Kenya leads the world.
About 15 or 16 months ago, I attended the Internet Governance Forum in Nairobi, at which many of us were privileged to meet a number of senior Kenyan Government Ministers. It is clear that Kenya takes its role in internet governance very seriously, because it makes an enormous investment in new media technologies.
I said that Kenya is a junction for people and information within Africa. I know people who arrange to meet African colleagues and potential clients from across the continent in Kenya. I know people who go on holiday there, and I also know people who, a few days ago, helped to secure the release of 25 mariners from the Somali pirates who were holding them hostage. Of course, the UK Government are wary of that detail, but I will say a word or two about it, because it is pertinent to Kenya. The whole business of security in relation to piracy off Somalia involves significant reliance on Kenya, and such security is another area of activity that has saved the lives of many people.
Kenya suffers the consequences of—if I can call it this—non-terrorism related piracy. I know that we might call all Somali piracy terrorism, but there is a clear distinction in my mind, because while it is all done for money, some people are highly motivated by simply the commercial gains, whereas others, such as al-Shabaab, are motivated by what they can spend the money on. Nevertheless, piracy continues, and Kenya helps to do everything that it can to help to fix the problem at the macro level and, more significantly, in very practical ways that, for good reason, are rarely discussed.
I should say, perhaps as a side note, that while it is in vogue for some non-governmental organisations to say that they do not negotiate with hostage takers, responsible employers ensure that their employees are properly insured in case they are taken captive, particularly in dangerous areas of the world. That insurance is almost invariably taken out on the London markets, and the unsung people who get on with negotiating and sorting immediate crises are almost invariably British. Indeed, the overwhelming majority of people and companies involved in ship security for anti-piracy work off Somalia are British. Britain has an enormously important role to play, and Kenya sits at the core of things, because during an arrest operation, pirates are often taken to Kenya and then the Kenyan justice system endeavours to deal with the situation, which is clearly a contentious issue in itself. The Kenyan Government have handled things responsibly, and there is clearly a close relationship between the various navies of the developed nations and the Kenyan Government, because invariably such people could end up—and in some cases do end up—on trial in Mombasa.
Having stressed some aspects of our crucial mutual relationship with Kenya, I would like to move on to recent events regarding the Kenyan presidential election and the International Criminal Court. Media reports are still reporting the result of the Kenyan presidential election as “razor-thin”. In fact, President-elect Uhuru Kenyatta won by almost seven points on an 86% turnout in an election that was regarded by observers as fair and free, and was, thank God, peaceful. Prime Minister Raila Odinga, the losing candidate, has observed the law and rules, and lodged a court appeal, which will be considered in due course.
Going into the election, there was a perception in Kenya that the UK and US Governments, as well as some others, were not wholly impartial. It was said that UK diplomats had sought to encourage an Odinga win and that they had made comments during the tallying process that had seemed to work towards enabling a second-round run-off, which might have disbenefited Kenyatta, the first-round winner. I have scoured all the sources I can—as you know, Mr Bone, our resources in this place are very good for scouring the international media—and I also have many contacts and friends in the media across the world and in theatre in Kenya, but I can find no source whatsoever that serves as reasonable evidence of such a public bias. I could find no example whatever of a public comment by a UK diplomat or Minister anywhere. We can draw, in this place at least, our own conclusions about that.
There is a well-known quote by a senior US official that is now said everywhere in Kenya. I do not know the exact context in which he said it—it might have been in a speech—but that comment is “choices have consequences”. It is certain that the comment was made, although I would not wish to put it in the wrong context, and whether it is accurate or not, it did, in itself, have consequences. As I think the Minister will know, the quote was taken by some in Kenya as an implied threat that if Kenya did not vote for the developed world’s preferred candidate, there might be a price to pay in one way or another. CONTINUE READING HERE…
KSB CREW
About the Author
CAPITALISM COLLAPSE IN CYPRUS WHICH NEXT COUNTRY? Crisis in Cyprus shows collapse of the West
20.03.2013
In 2014, all EU countries will hold parliamentary elections that may be won by the opponents of European integration. Recent EU measures to stabilize the situation in Cyprus showed that the foundations of the ideology of the Western world based on the Catholic and Protestant faiths have been undermined. The West is trying to explain its hurried decisions with the pressure from the Russian Federation.
After the summit in Brussels approved a plan of Cyprus “rescue” (by providing a tranche of 10 billion euros in exchange for the withdrawal of 10 percent of all deposits in the country), it became clear that this was the beginning of the end for the united Europe. The basis of any state ideology is religion. The measures undermined confidence in the notion sacred for Catholics and Protestants – inviolability of private property. Expropriation is a measure completely alien to the Western mentality and may lead to a social unrest. Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg Prime Minister and former President of the Eurogroup (the club of finance ministers of the euro area) said that against the background of recession and rising unemployment he did not rule out the risk of a social rebellion.
The measure so far has been implemented only in Orthodox Cyprus (Orthodoxy, unlike Catholicism, encourages sharing and sees the path to salvation in poverty). However, people in many countries began to worry, even in the U.S., as the practice may become universal, particularly in those countries that have requested assistance from the EU, i.e., Spain, Ireland, Portugal, and Italy.
Print version Font Size Send to friendMeanwhile, Forbes magazine has already drawn parallels with the Great Depression in the United States that would not have been that destructive if the Federal Reserve abstained from a similar measure. The magazine wrote that Cyprus did away with the guarantees on bank deposits and removed protection from flight of capital, which may result in a cascade of bankruptcies. Indeed, regardless of what the European Commission says, people got alarmed and started withdrawing or transferring their investments to other currencies and countries. The euro is dropping in value against the national currencies and the dollar.
British magazine The Economist called this not only nonsense, but a catastrophe and said that the decision was unfair, short-sighted and self-defeating. The injustice is in the fact that the measure affected ordinary depositors, while holders of debt obligations have not been affected, the magazine wrote. The measure is called short-sighted because it would lead to risks and flight of capital. Also, these measures undermine the political credibility of the rescue program under the auspices of the EU. Reuters agency wrote that the Cypriot government would be forced to violate one of its most important promises – a promise that the contributions under 100,000 euros would be safe.
The European Union decided to clear the air by utilizing the old mechanism of blaming Russia that allegedly is most affected by the proposed measures. Raúl Ilargi Meijer from Business Insider speculated that with 37 percent of the deposits in Cyprus, Russians heavily pressured European politicians to take this populist decision – to punish the perpetrators, which made the Europeans neglect the consequences. Gavin Hewitt of the BBC agreed, saying that the Germans suspected that half of the deposits in the banks of the island belonged to the Russians, and these deposits are made for money laundering. Therefore, according to Hewitt, the Germans did not want to continue to save Cyprus by giving it money. The statement of Finance Minister of the Russian Federation Anton Siluyanov that in exchange for the extension of the credit to Cyprus (EUR 5 billion) Russia may require it to provide all the data on the Russian owners of the capital of the island only added fuel to the fire.
It turns out that Russia began fighting corruption and “let down” Europe. Unfortunately, the EU is falling apart without Russian participation. There is no unity anywhere, including politics. Besides the opposition of the “hardworking North” and “lazy and irresponsible South”, there are other conflicts, such as creditor countries vs. debtor countries, as well as contradictions between the leaders. Germany is accused of usurping power, the UK raised the issue of withdrawal from the EU, and France is unilaterally sending troops to Mali and is going to supply weapons to the Syrian terrorists. There is no peace and quiet at the national level either. Nationalists became active in all directions, from extreme left to extreme right. In Portugal, protesters are singing a revolutionary anthem “Grândola,” Spain is splitting before our eyes torn by separatist movements, in Greece the Nazis emerged in the Parliament, and in France the far-right “National Front” of Marine Le Pen is activating. In Italy at the parliamentary elections a “clown prince” comedian Beppe Grillo secured sensational 25 percent of votes. In Germany, a new party “Alternative for Germany” was created that calls for the dissolution of the euro area and creation of small alliances with “some countries with healthy economies,” namely, Austria, Finland and the Netherlands.
Founded on the basis of ideological confrontation with the Soviet Union, the European Union has created a system of social protection that the Soviet people could not even dream about. The benefits included average pension of 600 euros, year-end and Christmas bonuses, unemployment payments nearly equal to salary, and great medica
l insurance. But these guarantees were based not on the income growth of the real sector but the speculative funds of the banking sector. The crisis of 2008 caused the neoliberal economic model to collapse. Europe’s population does not want to live as one family any longer. The term “welfare state” has disappeared from the vocabulary of politicians. ZDF channel reported that nearly half of Germans believe that their country would be better off without the euro. In other countries this percentage is much higher. In Spain, for example, it is 75 percent, in Portugal – 68, according to the Eurobarometer.
The election of Pope Francis, who first spoke about the Catholic Church as the Church of the poor, denying, in fact, wealth as a virtue, shows that the crisis in the West has moved from the economic and political spheres to religious and ideological ones.
It makes its leaders and the elite face a dilemma – either change the model of wealth distribution and the burden of difficulties, or be destroyed.
Kenya: About 618 people have died in road accidents in the country in the last two months alone.
Statistics released by police show the 245 of those killed are pedestrians. In the same period, 216 passengers, 53 drivers, 51 motorcyclists and nine pedal cyclists were killed. More than 1000 were injured in the incidents.
This is an increase as compared to the past similar period in which 480 people died.
The revelations were made as the death toll from the Mwingi road accident rose to 36.
Inspector General of Police David Kimaiyo said most of the accidents were caused by reckless driving and urged for caution amongst road users.
“We have experienced an increase in the number of road accidents and fatalities in the last two months and we urge for extra caution on road users at large and especially on highways,” he said in a statement read by acting police spokesman Charles Owino.
He also urged police to continue implementing the traffic laws as part of efforts to address road carnages.
Police have been partially blamed for the accidents in the country for failing to implement the traffic laws.
Owino said the welfare of police officers will be looked into after the general election.Police insurance will never happen .why should the govt insure rogue policemen who earn more by robbing Wananchi ?