Reuben Kigame Opposes Ruto’s Cattle Vaccination Campaign, Citing Lack of Public Input
2022 presidential aspirant Reuben Kigame has voiced strong opposition to President William Ruto’s push for a nationwide cattle vaccination campaign, which he claims is being driven by business interests rather than public welfare. The vaccination program, aimed at combating diseases affecting livestock, has sparked significant debate across the country, with Kigame arguing that it is more about advancing private agendas than addressing the needs of ordinary Kenyans.
Kigame criticized the government’s decision to promote mandatory vaccination without consulting local communities or seeking public input. He raised concerns that the initiative might be part of a broader collaboration with influential figures such as entrepreneur Bill Gates, whose foundations have been involved in global health and agricultural projects. According to Kigame, such partnerships may have more to do with profits and business ventures than with improving the well-being of Kenyan farmers.
“The vaccination program is being pushed as a way to protect cattle, but the underlying agenda seems to be more about business deals than genuine public health concerns. Why is the government so quick to enforce a program without involving the very people it affects? This vaccine might benefit a select group of individuals, including international entrepreneurs, but it does little to address the needs of the Kenyan farmers,” Kigame stated.
He further emphasized that the compulsory nature of the vaccination was a major point of contention, as farmers across the country are being pressured into adopting the program without sufficient information or understanding. “This is not just about cattle health; it’s about imposing a policy that the government believes is right, without taking the time to understand what the local people want or need. The voices of farmers are being silenced in the decision-making process,” Kigame said.
Rather than enforcing mandatory vaccination, Kigame suggested that the government should shift its approach to one of collaboration and education. He proposed that local agricultural experts, rather than government officials or external interests, should lead public awareness campaigns to educate farmers on the benefits and potential risks of cattle vaccination. This approach, he believes, would allow farmers to make informed decisions about whether or not to vaccinate their livestock based on their unique circumstances.
“The government should create platforms for dialogue and give local experts the resources and freedom to educate farmers on vaccination. Instead of dictating a top-down policy, they should empower the farming community to make decisions based on science, facts, and their own experiences. Informed consent should be the cornerstone of this campaign, not coercion,” said Kigame.
He further questioned the lack of transparency in the process, calling for more clarity on the specifics of the vaccination program, its funding, and its long-term effects on the agricultural sector. “There needs to be transparency in the implementation of this program. Kenyans deserve to know the full details — who stands to benefit, how the program is being funded, and what the long-term implications are for the farming community,” Kigame added.
Kigame’s remarks have sparked a wider public debate on the role of government in public health and agriculture. While proponents of the vaccination campaign argue that it will help prevent livestock diseases, improve the productivity of cattle farming, and ultimately benefit the national economy, critics like Kigame remain unconvinced. They fear that such programs, if poorly executed, could lead to financial burdens on farmers who are already struggling with rising costs of living and agricultural challenges.
Some have also raised concerns about the influence of private companies in shaping government policy. With Bill Gates’ investments in global health and agricultural projects, many are wondering if the vaccination campaign is part of a larger trend of privatizing public health initiatives. “We should be cautious of any program that prioritizes private interests over the well-being of our people. Kenya’s agricultural sector is a vital part of our economy, and it should not be exploited for corporate gain,” said Kigame.
In response, supporters of the vaccination initiative argue that diseases like foot and mouth disease and brucellosis have devastated Kenya’s livestock sector in recent years. Vaccination, they say, is essential for ensuring the health of cattle, protecting farmers’ livelihoods, and ensuring that the agricultural industry remains competitive on the global market.
The government has assured farmers that the vaccination program will be rolled out with their interests in mind, but the lack of consultation with local communities and the rapid pace of the implementation have left many questioning the process. Some farmers have also expressed fears about the side effects of the vaccine, with little information available to them about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness.
As the debate over the cattle vaccination campaign continues to unfold, Kigame has called for greater transparency, consultation, and accountability in government policies. He urges the government to listen to the concerns of Kenyan farmers and to prioritize their well-being over external business interests. “We need a government that works for the people, not one that imposes policies without their consent. Only by engaging with farmers directly can we create solutions that truly benefit the agricultural community,” he concluded.
With the vaccination campaign set to begin in the coming months, it remains to be seen how the government will address the growing concerns and whether they will adopt a more inclusive approach that involves all stakeholders in the decision-making process.
Post Author
