Beyond big projects, how will Kenyans feel impact of proposed National Infrastructure Fund?

As Parliament debates the National Infrastructure Fund Bill, 2025, questions are emerging about how Kenya will balance big infrastructure ambitions with pressing needs in health, education, and social services.

The bill proposes creating a National Infrastructure Fund (NIF), a corporate-style investment vehicle that can finance roads, energy projects, water and irrigation systems, and agribusiness infrastructure. 

Unlike current infrastructure spending, which depends on yearly Treasury allocations, this fund would use capital-based financing, attracting investments through equity, debt, and private participation.

Policy documents show Kenya faces a Sh400 billion annual infrastructure financing gap. The fund is designed to provide long-term, stable financing that isn’t tied to election cycles.

The sectors targeted, transport, energy, water, and agribusiness, are seen as productivity multipliers. The idea: better infrastructure reduces production and distribution costs, boosts industrialisation, improves food security, and strengthens trade competitiveness.

Some Kenyans worry that big infrastructure projects could mean less money for hospitals and schools. Massive highways, dams, and energy projects often feel like elite-driven investments far removed from daily life.

According to the architects of the bill, the fund will use blended financing, which is a mix of private investment, institutional funds, and limited government support. 

This reduces pressure on the National Treasury, meaning the government will not have to pull money from health, education, or other social services.

Proponents of the bill also argue that better roads and transport reduce delivery costs for food and goods. 

Reliable energy keeps factories running, creating jobs and lowering energy bills. Water and irrigation projects improve food security, helping families afford nutritious meals.

Every road, dam, or energy project has the potential to unlock opportunities, create jobs, and make public services more sustainable.

The Bill sets up governance safeguards: an independent chairperson, four independent directors, competitive recruitment, and strict conflict-of-interest rules. 

Investment decisions are to be insulated from political interference, learning from other countries where political capture weakened infrastructure funds.

It also requires a five-year investment policy, sectoral allocation priorities, expected rate-of-return thresholds, and project exposure limits. 

According to the bill, all projects will undergo feasibility studies, commercial viability assessments, value-for-money tests, public participation, and competitive tendering, aligning with Kenya’s Constitution and procurement laws.

Transparency rules include quarterly and annual reports, audited financial statements, anti-corruption disclosures, and oversight by the Auditor-General, with continuous updates on project-level performance and financial exposure.

The real discussion isn’t about whether Kenya needs infrastructure, but how it should be financed and governed. 

Parliament will have to decide whether this new model can deliver big projects without compromising fiscal sustainability or social priorities.