UDA Defends Government Fuel Pricing Amid Global Oil Crisis and Policy Debate

Contributory By: Liz Anyango

In Summary:

The United Democratic Alliance (UDA) has issued a firm response to opposition leaders following a opposition criticizing the government’s handling of rising fuel prices, attributing the crisis primarily to global geopolitical disruptions rather than domestic policy missteps. In a statement released on yesterday, the party described the opposition’s claims as misleading and politically motivated, emphasizing that Kenya’s fuel pricing challenges mirror broader international trends driven by instability in global energy markets.

At the heart of the government’s defense is a series of interventions aimed at cushioning consumers from the surge in fuel costs. Authorities pointed to the allocation of KSh 6.2 billion through the Petroleum Development Levy (PDL) Fund to stabilize pump prices, alongside a reduction in Value Added Tax (VAT) on petroleum products from 16% to 8%. These measures contributed to a moderated pricing structure, with Super Petrol, Diesel, and Kerosene retailing at relatively eased rates compared to earlier projections that had raised fears of sharper increases.

The government further highlighted the strategic role of its Government-to-Government (G-to-G) fuel import arrangement, which it says has enhanced supply stability while reducing pressure on the US dollar. By consolidating fuel procurement through this framework, officials argue that Kenya has avoided speculative foreign exchange demand from multiple oil marketers, a factor previously linked to currency volatility and inflationary pressures.

Beyond pricing, the statement sought to reassure the public on fuel supply security. Authorities dismissed claims of potential shortages during the Easter period, citing sufficient in-country reserves and contingency measures, including the rerouting of shipments affected by Middle East tensions. According to the government, replacement cargoes were secured without additional cost and met national quality standards, preventing disruptions in supply chains.

However, the political undertone of the dispute remains pronounced. The UDA accused opposition figures of exploiting the crisis for political gain, while also criticizing proposals to dismantle key fiscal instruments such as the National Infrastructure Fund and the Affordable Housing Levy. The party warned that such measures, if implemented, could undermine Kenya’s long-term development agenda, particularly in infrastructure financing and job creation.

The exchange underscores a broader policy divide on how best to navigate external economic shocks while maintaining domestic stability. While the opposition has called for structural reforms and public mobilization, the government continues to position its approach as pragmatic and globally aligned, emphasizing resilience in the face of external pressures.

As global oil prices remain unpredictable, the situation in Kenya reflects the delicate balance policymakers must strike between shielding consumers and sustaining economic growth. For now, the slight easing of fuel prices offers temporary relief, but the underlying vulnerabilities tied to international markets suggest that the debate over fuel policy—and its political implications—is far from settled.