Raila Odinga alleges vested interests in Kenya-Uganda sugar deal

As accusations and counter-accusations between the ruling Jubilee coalition and Opposition CORD continued raging over the week,  CORD leader Raila Odinga demanded answers from President Uhuru Kenyatta over the sugar deal he signed with President Yoweri Museveni in Kampala last week. Below is Raila's interview with The Standard on Sunday's Senior Writer Nzau Musau.

The Standard on Sunday: Have you seen the Kenya-Uganda sugar deal yourself and what are the contents? If not, what informed your opposition to it? What if there’s no deal at all?

Raila: None other than President Uhuru Kenyatta himself has confirmed that he did sign a deal allowing sugar into the country because he “would rather import sugar from Uganda than Brazil”. Uhuru said the new deal with Uganda is key to addressing Kenya’s shortfall as the product is cheaper there. Ugandan and Kenyan media reported there was a deal. If you are still doubting, you are the only stranger in Jerusalem. You do not need to see the document. Any sane person would know the deal is bad for our sugarcane farmers. We are asking what I believe are legitimate questions over this deal. How does this deal help the Kenya sugar belt? What safeguards are in place to stop sugar from the rest of the world coming into Kenya via Uganda, including by Kenyan sugar barons who can use Uganda as a base?                                                                                                                                                  We are aware that EAC partner states who are also members of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (Comesa) received a final extension of the sugar industry protection. This period was supposed to allow each country to revamp its industry and make the necessary changes and investments in their sugar industries ready to compete in Comesa when the final extension runs out. How does this deal help our industries prepare for the end of Comesa protection period? These questions deserve answers. When does this importation from Uganda end and what happens when our factories begin producing enough for the local market? Where will they then sell their sugar? What is the overall plan?

What do you think is the end-game in the controversial deal? What is it aimed at and who is benefitting?

This is a simple case of incompetent and poor negotiations coupled with pursuit of personal gain. The State has been captured by personal interests and that is usually a very dangerous situation for any nation. You have to know who sat in those negotiations and who was in the delegation to tell how much personal business interests got intertwined with state business. People who have no business negotiating bilateral matters sit in negotiations over importation of a product in which they have deep business interests.

It also appears the Kenyan delegation was ambushed. They were not prepared. To us out here, we can only see the impact on livelihoods in the sugar cane growing counties of Bungoma, Homa Bay, Kakamega, Busia, Kisumu, Migori, Narok and Kwale. It opens doors for crooked business and government officials who have the money and the connections to import sugar from anywhere, give it a Uganda label, and dump it here. That impoverishes the farmers, sinks them into deeper debts and kills the factories, making millions poor and unemployed. The sugar industry supports up to six million Kenyans.

Will the cancellation of the deal, in and itself, solve the crisis affecting the sugar sector? What else is CORD proposing to solve the problem?

Cancellation will not solve the problems of the sugar sector. But allowing it will worsen the problem. So we are asking the President to work on solving the problems of the sugar sector instead of abandoning the farmers and leaving them at the mercy of importers. Over six million Kenyans know no other source of living except sugarcane. We did not solve the problems of coffee sector by importing the product. They were solved by writing off debts, putting in sound management and looking for markets for the product. The same should be done for sugar sector.

CORD appears to have descended on this matter with a lot of gusto. There are those who say you are taking advantage of the situation to win back Western, what do you have to say on this?

If speaking strongly for the people is called gusto, so be it. I know no nation on earth that abandons its farmers to the whims of business traders and exporters. Even industrialised and developed nations like the US, UK, France, protect their farmers, subsidise them and cushion them against competition. What has happened here is a first. Sugar cane farming is not a Luhya or western Kenya issue. Sugar cane growing involves Nyanza, Western, parts of the Rift Valley and Coast. This is a national issue. All we are saying is that the government must protect our farmers and our factories and all farmers must be treated equally.

 If you were in power, what approach would you have taken in regard to trade deals with Uganda and on the matter of sugar deficit?

We would prioritise the strengthening of the local sugar sector first by following the laid out plan. There was the 2010-14 Strategic Plan that clearly spelt out what needed to be done. I don’t know at what stage the government abandoned it and why. We would address the question of production costs and capacity by investing in better seeds and fast maturing cane as is the case in Sudan and Mauritius. That is in the strategic plan. I would address the issues of time lapses between cane maturity and harvesting. Canes mature at 18 months. But sometimes they remain unharvested for up to 36 months. The Strategic Plan focused on reducing this period to a maximum of a month of waiting. I would focus on post harvest losses by helping companies acquire better modes of cane transportation. Work had began on this. I would focus on increasing the Sugar Development Fund and strengthening of corporate governance, expand area under irrigation for sugar cane. Importation would be a last resort under clearly spelt out policy with clear timelines to safeguard our farmers.

Some would say the Opposition, read CORD, has failed to offer effective check on the government. Is the opposition up to the task and are you taking full advantage of all situations to keep the government in check?

We are talking about bilateral agreements and comminiques. That is the domain of the government. There is nothing the Opposition can do about that. We are talking about delivering services to farmers. That is the work of the government. Opposition does not implement government policies. We oversight and that is what we are doing by raising the issues we are raising.

What in your opinion, and from your experience, is making the Opposition not operate to its maximum? Are you comfortable with the legal framework for the Opposition politics?

The Opposition is operating at its maximum. It could not stop the government from travelling to Uganda to sign the deals. We cannot stop the ruling coalition from pursuing its policies. What we can do is raise questions about those policies. We have stopped bad laws from being implemented by going to court. We will continue doing that. We have pointed out at the rising cases of corruption, the tribalisation of government and the policy of exclusion. Beyond pointing these out and going to court, we can only wait for elections.

Do you think there is room for increased opposition-government cooperation on critical matters such as security and what is holding back this cooperation, in your opinion?

We spent the better part of 2014 asking for dialogue with the government on matters affecting the nation, particularly insecurity, corruption, electoral reforms, exclusion and marginalsation. That appeal was rejected and we closed that window. We are pursuing other means of having these issues addressed. We have closed the doors on dialogue.

Key CORD members have been accused of running down sugar factories, moneys which later fed into CORDs political machinery. How committed are you to fight against graft in the sugar sector?

I know no person who was appointed by CORD to run any sugar factory or who was sent by CORD to take money from any sugar factories for campaigns. I know no member of CORD who has been charged with stealing money from any sugar factory. If there is any such person, ask the government why he or she has not been held to account.

For once in this sugar matter, our politics appear to have been elevated to issues. What other issues are you looking at to check on the government?

We have always been talking about issues as opposed to personalities. We have talked about corruption, insecurity, electoral reforms, inclusivity, addressing land matters and historical injustices, sharing of natural and mineral resources, strengthening devolution. All these are issues, not personalities. What has hit the sugar sector now is a continuation of the culture of corruption that we have been talking about.