A fresh look at budgetary allocations for top government offices has opened up renewed debate about the cost of governance, with aviation related expenses emerging as a notable pressure point.
As the country grapples with a tight fiscal environment, scrutiny has intensified over how senior officials plan to move around in the year ahead and what that means for the public purse.
Documents tied to the current financial year indicate that Deputy President Kithure Kindiki has set aside more than Sh338 million strictly for air travel.
The allocation covers both domestic and international flights tied to official duties, regional engagements, and other state related commitments expected to take place over the course of the year.
Broken down, the figure translates to nearly Sh1 million per day spent on flights alone, a calculation that has raised eyebrows among lawmakers, economists, and sections of the public already concerned about rising government expenditure.
The travel budget is part of a broader operational allocation for the Office of the Deputy President, which includes logistics, security coordination and facilitation of executive functions.
Supporters of the allocation argue that the Deputy President’s role demands extensive travel, particularly given Kenya’s active involvement in regional diplomacy, security initiatives and continental forums.
Also read
- Ida Odinga Leaves Kenyans Talking After Revealing What Shocked Her When Raila Was Declared Dead
- Video: Gachagua Warned Over Nakuru Campaigns After Othaya Attack
- Video: Drama at Milimani Courts as Activist Interrupts Student’s Case
- Chris Brown’s Legal Battle in the UK Takes a New Step with Court Hearing
- Kenya and US Deepen Defence Ties with Strategic Manda Bay Upgrade
They note that air travel is often unavoidable due to tight schedules, security considerations, and the need to cover multiple locations within short timeframes.
However, critics see the figure as excessive, especially at a time when the government has repeatedly urged austerity across ministries and departments.
Some legislators have questioned whether commercial flights, better planning, or reduced delegations could significantly cut costs without undermining the effectiveness of the office.
Civil society groups have also weighed in, calling for greater transparency and justification for high travel budgets among senior state officials.
They argue that symbolic restraint at the top could send a strong message as citizens face higher taxes, increased cost of living, and reduced public services in some sectors.
The debate comes against the backdrop of ongoing discussions in Parliament over budget rationalisation and the need to rein in recurrent expenditure.
Treasury officials have previously acknowledged that travel costs across government remain one of the most challenging areas to control.
As the financial year progresses, attention is likely to remain fixed on how closely actual spending aligns with the approved allocation, and whether the growing calls for leaner government operations will translate into tangible cuts at the highest levels of leadership.
About the Author
