President William Ruto has denied that governors were coerced into signing contracts for the National Equipment Service Program (NESP). The program, which aims to supply medical equipment to county governments, has sparked controversy after some governors raised concerns about their involvement.
The NESP, which is part of the broader Social Health Authority (SHA) initiative, is designed to equip county health facilities with state-of-the-art medical tools. However, some county leaders, including Nyeri Governor Mutahi Kahiga, have argued that they had little choice but to sign agreements with suppliers for the program. They expressed concerns about a lack of autonomy in the decision-making process, claiming that governors were forced into the deals.
Governor Kahiga brought these concerns to the Senate, questioning whether counties had any real freedom in deciding whether to join the program. “Did we have a choice? The program is even open to private facilities. What happens if you do not join? Did we have a choice?” he asked, raising doubts about the voluntary nature of the agreements.
However, President Ruto was quick to dismiss these allegations, calling anyone who claimed to have been forced into signing contracts “liars.” He emphasized that the decision to engage with suppliers under the NESP was entirely voluntary, with no pressure from the national government. “Anybody who says that they were forced by the national government to sign whatever contract are liars,” Ruto stated during a public address. He further reinforced that no governor had been compelled to sign any agreement, urging that the procurement process had been conducted regularly and transparently.
The president’s statement came as part of a broader defense of the NESP, which he described as an essential initiative for improving healthcare services at the county level. Ruto also reiterated that the program involves multiple suppliers, with seven different companies selected to provide medical equipment to the counties. This, he argued, ensured that no single supplier would monopolize the provision of medical services.
“There is no obligation on any county to get any equipment from any suppliers. There is no one supplier. I think there are seven,” Ruto clarified, seeking to address concerns of monopolies or undue influence by specific companies.
The president also emphasized that the procurement process had been carried out with the utmost care and due diligence, involving experts in cost estimation for both medical equipment and drugs. Ruto sought to assure the public that there would be no room for corruption or fraud within the program. “We have costed the equipment, we have costed the drugs, we have costed the services with experts,” he explained, outlining the steps taken to ensure that the program would be both transparent and efficient.
Despite Ruto’s assurances, the controversy continued to simmer. The Ministry of Health (MoH) and the Council of Governors (CoG) have moved to address the concerns raised by Governor Kahiga. In a joint statement, they clarified that the medical equipment would be provided under a Fee-For-Service (FFS) model, meaning that suppliers would supply, maintain, and upgrade the equipment at no cost to the counties. Payments for services would be made based on tariffs gazetted by the SHA.
Ahmed Abdullahi, the Chairperson of the Council of Governors, defended the NESP, arguing that it was the best available option under the current circumstances. “The NESP arrangement is the best option we had under the circumstances,” Abdullahi said, underscoring the importance of the program in ensuring counties have access to the necessary medical tools and equipment to serve their populations effectively.
While the debate over the NESP continues, the national government remains steadfast in its position that the program is voluntary, with counties free to choose whether or not to participate. The next steps will likely involve further discussions between the government, governors, and the private sector to address any remaining concerns about the program’s implementation.
