On 21st January 2025, the Executive committed to streamlining government operations, reducing waste, and curbing excesses. The Cabinet also approved a series of recommendations aimed at reforming State corporations. 

This follows an extensive assessment by the National Treasury of the 271 State corporations, excluding those earmarked for privatisation. The reforms involve merging 42 State corporations with overlapping or related mandates into 20 entities to enhance operational efficiency and eliminate redundancy. Additionally, nine State corporations will be dissolved, with their functions transferred to relevant ministries or other State entities. Sixteen corporations with outdated functions that the private sector can fulfil will be divested or dissolved.

Among the casualties is the Engineers Board of Kenya. Currently categorised as a State corporation, it should be declassified and not receive financing through budgetary allocations. The Institution of Engineers of Kenya (IEK) issued a letter stating that while it acknowledges good intentions, such drastic changes must include the views of the sectors affected. 

IEK is aware of the impact these changes will have on engineers working within these institutions. They stress the need to ensure that engineers employed in the affected corporations are not disadvantaged. Engineers transferred to ministries or agencies must have their roles, responsibilities, salaries, and benefits maintained, or ideally matched, to those in their new positions in accordance with the level of work they undertake.

Furthermore, most of these State corporations have been established under various statutes. The process must respect the State Corporations Act, the Companies Act, and the specific Acts of Parliament that establish them. 

IEK urges prompt legislative action to amend the statutes governing these institutions. This would enable the proposed changes to be implemented without undue delay and alleviate the anxiety felt by the affected employees due to this announcement. Prolonging the process undermines the intended purpose and creates further anxiety and confusion among those impacted. The lack of clarity and a detailed timeline for implementation is counterproductive for the country. 

Self-regulation

Among some of the solutions put forward by IEK is the concept of self-regulation. It stated that the alternative to the lack of clarity stripping professional bodies of state corporation status would be self-regulation. This would require that the professional body implement a complaints and discipline system. Such a system permits members of the public to raise concerns about the services a professional provides, as well as offers a process to investigate and, if necessary, discipline any member of a profession who fails to meet professional standards of practice. It is expected that all activities and decisions made by a regulatory body will be carried out in the “public interest”. In other words, the primary purpose behind all regulatory body decisions is to protect the public from incompetent or unethical practitioners.

Approaches to professional self-regulation range from minimal to extensive control over a profession. Governments select different regulatory approaches based on the activities performed by members of a profession and the extent to which the public might be harmed if an incompetent member provides services. Professional self-regulation may take the form of licensure, certification, or registration. While the process of registration can be as straightforward as a requirement to ensure that one’s name is officially recorded, the processes of licensure and certification have more onerous requirements.

Licensure is one of the most restrictive forms of professional regulation. Specifically, licensure grants an occupational group monopoly control over who can practise a profession. Only those who have met specific requirements to enter a profession are issued a “licence” to practise. Entry requirements are generally quite detailed and often include achieving specified educational credentials and completing some form of licensing examination.

Certification is essentially the stamp of approval given to an individual for meeting predetermined requirements. It is often linked to the monopoly use of a specific title or professional designation. This model protects the public by providing information about qualifications so that it can make an informed decision about who they wish to receive services from. 

In conclusion, the government’s proposed reforms to State Corporations, while aimed at improving efficiency and reducing redundancy, present significant challenges for affected stakeholders, particularly engineers. The concerns raised by IEK highlight the need for careful planning and clear communication to ensure that engineers’ rights, roles, and benefits are adequately protected during transitions. 

Furthermore, the reform process must be executed in compliance with existing laws and statutes to avoid legal challenges and unnecessary delays. The proposal for self-regulation by professional bodies, such as the Engineers Board of Kenya, offers a potential pathway to safeguard public interest while maintaining professional standards. 

Ultimately, the success of these reforms hinges on a balanced approach that addresses both operational goals and the well-being of the professionals involved, ensuring that public trust in the engineering profession remains intact.