Why Ruto's Mt Kenya tour did not yield much

It’s disheartening that President William Ruto’s Mt Kenya tour is primed to be primarily remembered for crowd turnout, with apparent prioritisation of street audiences and amplified sound over genuine engagement with the people’s needs.

The reported expenditure on mobilisation raises concerns, especially for a development tour, not a campaign rally. A presidential development tour should ideally centre on critical aspects.

Firstly, it should involve launching and celebrating completion of legacy projects—visionary initiatives that endure as symbols of a regime’s accomplishments. Secondly, it should entail inspecting ongoing projects, providing honest explanations for delays, and offering clear completion timelines.

Thirdly, it must address specific promises made during campaigns or previous engagements with people and their leaders. The tour’s foundation should be based on concrete financial planning. Are all projects and promises adequately budgeted?

Prior to the tour, local leaders should engage with the President, securing confirmation from the Treasury regarding fund availability. If the planning reveals a need to relaunch previously launched projects or undertake minor tasks for the tour to look successful, then it should be reframed as a consultative forum.

Annually, the government allocates nearly a trillion shillings for nationwide development projects. That is not little money. Proper fund utilisation would yield numerous completed legacy projects for presidential launch every year.

Delivering on promises builds trust and facilitates future commitments. The President should task his Cabinet to provide project status updates, ensuring adherence to timelines. I tend to think hosting national day celebrations in specific counties yields better results on the pace of development projects with there being a level of urgency and planning.

The President’s role should be limited to making commitments and returning for commissioning of projects worth his legacy, eliminating unnecessary attention.

Ideally, there should be a distinction between a campaign rally and a development tour. While it is okay for the President and his entourage to address crowds from the top of a vehicle when campaigning, it becomes a different ball game when you want to engage them for development purposes. Getting on the ground and walking around projects and addressing the press would make more sense. Having town hall meetings and letting the people speak would yield better results.

Times are changing, and there is a growing awareness around how things should work. People are learning how to access data about projects, contractors and budgets. The internet has also become a record keeper. All the promises and commitments made in the past can be easily retrieved and used to counter narratives that contradict reality.

In local parlance, it is called ‘evidence kwa karatasi’. The oversight role that was a preserve of Parliament has now been extended to the people themselves. When you go to them, allow them to feed you back.