Resolve issues raised in Galana before injecting more cash

President Uhuru Kenyatta operates a tractor when he commissioned Galana Kulalu Irrigation Scheme. [PICTURE/FILE]

In what could be seen as a candid assessment of one of Jubilee flagship projects, the National Assembly Committee on Agriculture raised a number of issues last week on the much-hyped Galana-Kulalu Irrigation project that need to be interrogated before moving to the second phase.

This assumes, of course, that the State is truly committed to giving taxpayers value for money as it often says. The committee’s revelation that the pilot 10,000 acres have already gobbled up Sh7 billions and has harvested a paltry 10 bags an acre raises serious doubts about the entire one million-acres project.

The calculation that the project would cost Sh1.45 trillion when the country is grappling with more immediate budgetary needs, in which every shilling counts, makes the ambitious project financially untenable.

Logic, therefore, dictates that people involved in the execution of the project—in the Government, its departments and agencies—be put on the carpet to explain just what happened. They should, at the very least, offer credible answers to why the cost ballooned, while productivity sank to levels lower than the national average of 17 bags per acre recorded in Northern Rift Valley.

The excuses that Sh135.6 billion for water conveyance system, Sh122 billion for dam construction and Sh6.4 billion annual pumping costs were not factored in the initial budget should be dismissed with the contempt they deserve because they hold no water. This is unless, of course, the individuals responsible for what is turning out to be a huge black hole can explain how they expected to implement this mega project without factoring these vital components.

Perhaps, those involved had resorted to trickery by deliberately down-playing the actual costs with the sole aim of clinching the contract after which they planned, all along, to spring a surprise on a gullible parliament and public.

Time has come for such individuals to be shown the door and duly prosecuted to recover some—if not all—the money lost in what is increasingly looking like yet another white elephant.

The latest revelations, once again, bring to the fore some of the flaws that were evident from the very beginning. First, even if the project was implemented on schedule and at the projected costs, its success would have led to the impoverishment of maize farmers in parts of North Rift, the country’s grain basket. A more realistic and cost effective way of increasing the country’s maize production would have been—and still is—by encouraging and motivating the existing farmers to improve the productivity on their farms.

This can easily be done by carrying out a systematic soil sampling on all farms to determine what they need for optimum production. Both Counties and National Governments could step in and absorb part of the costs for farmers who cannot afford to pay for the exercise. The farmers would then be offered the necessary inputs on credit to be paid from the sale of the farm produce.

Obviously, these inputs would include latest seed varieties that are said to take a shorter time to harvest and guarantee yields of between 40 and 50 bags an acre.

To maximize use of appropriate inputs, both levels of government might also consider launching a crash recruitment programme to train farmers on their application. If this involves employing more extension workers, so be it. This would have the added bonus of creating jobs for the youth unlike the Galana-Kulalu project whose projected employment is minimal, to say the least.

The counties in the maize-growing areas should also consider channeling part of the money they are using to mount investment forums and the funds set aside for youth and women empowerment into horticultural production. The current situation where the country imports fruits and vegetables when it can grow its own should not be allowed to continue when millions of farmers are living from hand to mouth.

The fact that these farmers would need to irrigate their farms should not present insurmountable hurdles because this could be easily achieved by conserving rain water either by digging small dams or installing storage drums. This water would be adequate if only the farmers receive instructions on how to build and use simple drip irrigation systems. —[email protected]