Jubilee shouldn't blame others when it has erred

In normal parlance, to eat your words means to admit that a statement you made earlier was wrong. In Jubilee parlance, it means, apparently, to substitute an earlier statement with another in direct conflict with it, but also maintain that this is what you have been saying all along. This in essence is to take people for fools.

Our government has perfected this art form, from the claim of terrorists burning mattresses at Westgate Mall to the ridiculous attempt to blame the Opposition for the Mpeketoni attack, both examples of callous acts of deceit perpetuated on the public by a government that could not care less.

As the sugar importation scandal has raged we have seen disclaimers issued by the Jubilee circus spokespeople that no deal to import Ugandan sugar was signed. Even if we are fools, we are not blind. We have already seen the Ugandan sugar in our supermarkets.

Both the Kenyan and Ugandan press reported that a deal had been struck. On the 14th of this month, a Ugandan paper, The Daily Monitor, whose motto happens to be “Truth every day” reported in an article titled that a deal allowing cheaper Ugandan sugar into the Kenyan market had been struck.

The paper was reporting on the statements made by our President when challenged on the sugar deal. Had no deal been reached, the President, surely, would have been the first to set the record straight and allay fears. Instead, he provided reasons why the deal was reasonable. In other words, he justified it.

Justification is one route of defending one’s actions. And he did not stop at that, he was in a sanctimonious mood and served sermon to the leader of Opposition who was present.

Incredibly even in the light of damning evidence, the government will not give an inch. It will admit no wrong. The speed at which Ugandan sugar appeared in Kenyan markets is suspicious.

It is very possible that the deal was sealed by Uhuru and Museveni wheeler dealers long before the Uganda visit but the facts are now bare. There is Ugandan sugar in the market, it is cheaper than Kenyan sugar and it is going to cripple the Kenyan sugar industry.

These are exactly the concerns that the Opposition had raised. In so doing of course the Opposition was only doing its job as mwananchi’s watchdog. Yet the entire debate has now been turned into personal attacks on those who first raised the alarm.
I have said before that some of those currently in Opposition have little, if any, moral high ground to criticise government on some issues because their genesis can be traced back to a time when they were in government.

However, while it may score some political points to use this fact to defray criticism, it achieves little in the lives of the people.

Your regular sugar farmer would never even have known about this deal were it not for the hawk-eyed Opposition. Your regular farmer cannot call press conferences to issue statements to express his displeasure at the deal. Your regular farmer has never been in government in the past nor contributed to his plight in any way.

Whereas it is easy to dismiss some in Opposition for hypocrisy and contribution to the problem, what would Jubilee say if the issue was actually highlighted by a regular sugar farmer? Which moniker would they attach to him? What moneys would they be requiring him to pay back?

My point is the shame of those who have may have contributed to the cane farmers woes by act or omission does not and cannot attach to him in instances when such people just happen to speak for him. This is another perfect example of situations where you can very much kill the messenger if you please, but take the message.