Time flies with great content! Renew in to keep enjoying all our premium content.
How government infighting hurts climate action and public welfare
City Hall Annexe and Kenya Power, Electricity House in Nairobi County. When state agencies prioritise financial disputes over collaboration, they waste valuable time and resources that could be directed towards clean energy investments and sustainability programs.
The recent showdown between Nairobi City County and Kenya Power is not just a financial dispute—it is a glaring example of how government institutions prioritise bureaucratic battles over their core mandate: serving the public and protecting the environment.
This clash raises an urgent question: are we truly committed to climate action and environmental protection in our service delivery, or are we merely going through the motions?
At the heart of the dispute is a financial standoff—Kenya Power accuses Nairobi County of failing to pay Sh3.1 billion in electricity bills. At the same time, the county claims that Kenya Power owes them Sh4.83 billion. In an unfortunate turn of events, both entities have resorted to retaliatory actions—power disconnections and sewerage and water cutoffs.
Kenya Power cut off electricity to essential county facilities, while the county dumped garbage at Stima Plaza, cutting off water and blocking sewer lines to punish Kenya Power.
Did anyone stop to consider the ripple effects of their actions in the heat of their dispute? This tit-for-tat exchange reveals governance failures and exacerbates systemic problems affecting energy transition and public services.
Beyond the immediate inconvenience to citizens, these actions have direct environmental consequences. Piling garbage in public spaces leads to pollution and disease outbreaks.
Disconnecting electricity means essential facilities may resort to diesel generators, increasing carbon emissions. Blocking sewer lines leads to contamination of water sources, harming people and ecosystems. Every decision these institutions make has an impact beyond their boardrooms—but was any of this considered?
The incident exposes failure in governance and commitment to sustainable development. If government bodies can engage in reckless internal wars, what hope is there for citizens relying on them for services? If climate action is a priority, then decisions should be made with sustainability in mind—not as knee-jerk reactions to disputes over unpaid bills.
Climate change demands a united front, not administrative gridlock. Kenya has made significant strides in clean energy adoption, and the current leadership must ensure that such bureaucratic wrangling does not set the country back. Public welfare must come first, and the responsible agencies must uphold their mandate to serve the people—not just their balance sheets.
Cooperation, efficiency, and accountability must guide the path forward, lest we lose sight of our larger goals in a sea of institutional infighting.
At a time when Kenya is positioning itself as a leader in renewable energy and sustainable urban planning, such conflicts between key institutions stall critical climate initiatives.
As the nation's capital, Nairobi should be at the forefront of implementing green energy solutions.
However, when government agencies prioritise financial disputes over collaboration, they waste valuable time and resources that could be directed towards clean energy investments and sustainability programs.
Stern action should be taken to prevent such incidents in the future. Leaders must be held accountable for actions that harm the environment and public welfare.
Beyond financial settlements, both Nairobi County and Kenya Power must acknowledge their failure and put in place mechanisms to resolve conflicts without resorting to actions that jeopardise public health and environmental sustainability.
If we take climate action seriously, government institutions must lead by example. Service delivery should never be weaponised in internal power struggles.
The true test of leadership lies in making decisions that balance fiscal responsibility with environmental and public well-being. Anything less is a betrayal of public trust.
The writer is a communications specialist and Yale University School of Environment postgraduate student. Email: [email protected]
