Githunguri MP Gathoni Wamuchomba has sparked debate by opposing the Kenyan government’s planned mass vaccination program targeting livestock. President William Ruto announced that starting January, the government will roll out a nationwide initiative to vaccinate 22 million cattle and 50 million goats and sheep against diseases. However, Wamuchomba termed the plan a globalist ideology with potential risks to livestock productivity and reproductive health.
President Ruto’s Justification
The President unveiled the vaccination plan during the Maa Cultural Festival in Samburu on November 8. He highlighted that the program aims to curb livestock diseases and secure both local and international markets for Kenya’s livestock products. According to Ruto, preventing disease outbreaks will ensure sustainable productivity and enhance Kenya’s competitiveness in global markets.
“This will ensure we access both national and international markets for our livestock products,” Ruto stated, emphasizing the program’s economic benefits.
Wamuchomba’s Opposition
Wamuchomba strongly opposed the plan, alleging it is tied to climate change mitigation strategies that could harm Kenya’s livestock sector. She claimed the vaccination is rooted in foreign ideologies aimed at reducing methane emissions through genetic modification. Methane, a greenhouse gas released during livestock digestion, has been identified as a contributor to climate change.
“Listening to the President, it’s clear that the intention is a climate change move that’s supposed to help us reduce the release of methane into the air,” Wamuchomba argued.
In a video shared on her X feed, Wamuchomba expressed concerns over the lack of transparency about the vaccine’s impact on livestock. She urged the government to conduct thorough public participation before implementing the plan, citing the significance of livestock in Kenyan livelihoods.
“We have had these animals for centuries as part of our livelihoods. It is important for the President of Kenya, before pronouncing such plans, to engage the people of Kenya very heavily because they are the real stakeholders,” she said.
Questions Raised Over Costs and Transparency
The MP also criticized the government for failing to clarify the economic implications of the program. She pointed out that Parliament has not been consulted on the budgeting for the initiative, raising questions about whether the costs will be passed on to farmers.
“Now that the President wants to vaccinate 22 million cows, does he have a budget? Are the farmers going to pay for this vaccination? If as a country we are going to spend money for this vaccination, has he come to Parliament for budgeting?” Wamuchomba asked.
She further argued that farmers have not been adequately informed about the potential risks and benefits of the vaccines. According to her, the government’s narrative focuses solely on disease prevention without addressing other critical aspects such as the vaccines’ effects on livestock productivity and reproduction.
A Call for Rejection
Wamuchomba urged her fellow MPs to reject the vaccination plan, citing the concerns she raised. She argued that the initiative, if implemented without sufficient scrutiny, could have far-reaching consequences for the livestock sector.
“This is a globalist idea, an idea that comes with a lot of negative impact. As a representative of a constituency where people I represent are livestock farmers, I reject this experimental program in totality,” she said.
Conclusion
The planned vaccination program has ignited a conversation about the balance between modern agricultural practices and traditional livelihoods. While the government views the initiative as a pathway to economic growth and sustainability, critics like Wamuchomba caution against adopting programs perceived as foreign-driven without robust local consultation. As January approaches, the debate over the vaccination plan underscores the importance of engaging stakeholders and addressing concerns to ensure long-term benefits for Kenya’s livestock industry.
