The recently introduced tax regime by the government has seen price adjustments on various basic commodities, both food and non-food items. Condoms are among commodities likely to suffer an upward price adjustment.
It is naive to debate where condoms belong in the hierarchy of commodity importance. We cannot, for example, equate the effects of higher priced condoms to those of higher priced milk or maize flour. Lack of condoms is arguably less painful than lack of kerosene or cooking gas. The latter has a direct and visible negative impact.
But as any developmental economist will tell you, the impact of the so called ‘invisible and hidden indicators’ devastates the society or nation at a higher magnitude, for a longer period and at a higher cost than the visible direct indicators.
The pain of some indirect indicators are almost everlasting. That’s why, for example, whereas the world has largely been able to address the impact of the 2004 Asian tsunami through massive reconstruction and community empowerment programmes, the impact of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear explosion in Ukraine remains live and hurts even more.
That’s why, I believe, the world is enraged by the alleged use recently of chemical weapons in Syria; the effects are long-term and dangerous. And that’s exactly why, due to its almost ‘hidden’ etiological dynamics, HIV/Aids has continued ravaging the world for years, unlike, for example, Ebola, which can be contained through strident public health measures.
Condoms remain the most important tool in HIV and STI prevention and management. It’s clear that accessibility of good condoms, correct use and disposal are key attributes in HIV management.
And whereas the government has made several strides in enhancing accessibility through outlets such as health facilities and specific HIV/Aids community programmes, commercial retailing of condoms remains the most popular means to getting them to the populace.
Retailing commercially at an average price of Sh8 per condom (Sh20 per packet of three), it can be argued that currently, these goods are moderately affordable for the average Kenyan.
Like with all other commodities, an upward cost adjustment of condoms will likely mean low consumption in terms of purchase. Will this translate to low sexual activities? This is unlikely because evidence from low condom-accessible-areas such as the ones under humanitarian crises, Eastern Congo for example, shows an upsurge in HIV/Aids cases, an indicator of increased sexual activity; forced or otherwise.
What it means, therefore, is that with higher pricing of condoms under the new VAT regimen, more deserving Kenyans will likely not afford them hence increasing the possibility of unsafe sex. This will likely lead to higher cases of new infections. Unless the government undertakes to streamline condom distribution outlets and scale up community HIV programmes as a counter-measure, the VAT imposed on condoms ought to be revised downwards.
{Julius Koome, Mombasa}
