If you live in Kenya today, you will slowly become aware of a new National Policy that is being effected in a slow calculating manner aimed at slowly infiltrating society. It's a move to stop Kenyans from drinking.

Think about it. It started with these 'kumi kumi' dens and we were all agreeable after watching tens of people die and go blind around the country. We applauded the police's effort to net the brewers and find their poisonous stock.

Next came a ban aimed at removing advertisements of alcoholic drinks within school vicinities. Again we didn't think much of it. A little harsh maybe, but hey we don't want our young ones influenced by alcohol. No. Let them study. Fine.

The next step wasn't as painless to many. It was the regulation that all alcoholic beverages must be sold in quantities of not less than 205 ml. With this saw the end of the famous sachets that had served many. People became disgruntled and complaints were heard from all corners. Another lot of people were totally unaffected by the move as they were used to the larger quantities anyway or were beer guzzlers.

So imagine their shock at the next blow! (Pardon the pun). The breathalyser (Alcoblow) comes to town. Now you hear the masses jumping up & down declaring the contraption illegal, an infringement of privacy, unconstitutional, useless and downright evil. Of course the non-driving crowd are somewhat un-affected. Or are they? A look at the Traffic Rules indicates that it is an offence to enter a public service vehicle while intoxicated. Where does that leave you? Can’t drive home, can’t take a cab. Local? Think again!

It’s now been stated that bars in residential areas won’t get permits. Can you say ‘bye bye local’?

My suggestions are:
a) drink in the house.
b) drink tea.

Affirmative Action

So what's the deal with affirmative action? Why does its very mention get bees stuck up people's bonnets?

Case in point: The other day I was having a discussion with a few friends about women Ministers in Tanzania. One was applauding President Jakaya Kikwete for including all of 5 women Ministers in his new Cabinet. I quickly argued that 5 out of the 94 Women Members of Parliament was hardly a cause for celebration. That's where the big debate on affirmative action came up with some contorting their faces in disgust at the whole concept.

I mean really! Think about it. You’re born in some poverty stricken semi-arid area. You trek long distances to school in the unbearable heat hoping they’ll give you food as there sure isn’t any at home. Such comforts as electricity and water are out of the question and you’re just happy with what you get. When you sit down to take your final exams, you are up against some other kid who researches for her homework on the internet … at home! She has 5 meals a day and engages in such extra-curricular activities as swimming and is an ace in the debate team.

Do you think the playing field is equal? May it maybe be necessary for you to try harder to achieve what she can? Is it unfair to lower the standards for you to bring the start line for the two of you to the same position?

Ok … Ok … I hear someone shout “But some have made it. Why can’t you?!” The truth is that we’re not all the same and some do excel even under the worst of circumstances. We have to take on the debate while looking at the average Joe. Yes 5 Tanzanian women MP’s have made it to ministerial positions. That’s 5 out of 31 ministers. You do the math. The world is skewed in such a way that a man has an easier time in the political scene. We need to tip the balance in the women’s favour to even things out. The same applies to men. How many male receptionists do you know? Hell, it’s only the other day that male nurses became acceptable to most of us!

So you see, affirmative action is not a bad thing so long as it is carried out within some time frame. Leaving it open ended would just amount to discrimination.

Alcoblow

The issue on my mind today is the Alco-blow or the Breathalyser as its known in some parts of the world. First off, I think that the person who invented it was quite sadistic. Ok maybe not to go that far since some pretty nasty accidents have been caused by drunk driving. I was actually in court once when an accused driver who had been arrested the day before on the charge of drunk driving was still too high to enter a plea. Imagine him driving the vehicle behind you!

My question is just is this country really ready for such a contraption? Consider the following:

Stumbling block 1
The first obvious stumbling block can be found in our dear brothers and sisters the law enforcers. I’m sure many from our dedicated police force had a merry Christmas due to their heavily greased palms. Think about it; where the fine is Kshs. 10,000.00 the bribe (and of course that is an option) has to be heftier than would otherwise be the position.

Stumbling block 2
The penalties on being found guilty are just crazy! Kshs. 10,000.00? Loss of license? Loss of car!? The punishment just does not fit the crime. Hear me out here. One of the raisons d’etre of a penalty is to deter people from committing crimes having learnt from what befell one who was not so wise. The effect of having a punishment that is too severe is that people will put more energy into not getting caught (see stumbling block 1 above) and less in following the proper path. This is clearly counter-productive.

Today I was talking to a guy who gave me all manner of ideas on how to get away with more than two and a half beers and still sit on the driver’s seat. People’s minds are churning.

Karibu

So this is my space. Cool.

You will get to read my ramblings and ideas and maybe one day, I'll be a Pulitzer prize winner coz of this blog. Cool.