Gichugu MP Gichimu Githinji has pushed back against growing criticisms of the Constituencies Development Fund (NG-CDF), calling recent comparisons between rural and urban constituencies “unfair” and “intellectually lazy.” The MP’s remarks, made during a visit to Githage Primary School in Kirinyaga County on January 20, 2026, came amid a national debate about the future of NG-CDF, with civil society groups releasing scorecards to rank MPs based on their infrastructure development work.
Unique Challenges of Rural Constituencies
Githinji argued that evaluating MPs based on a uniform set of criteria is misleading, given the stark differences in the challenges faced by constituencies. “You cannot compare Gichugu with a constituency in Nairobi,” he said. “Here, I am dealing with coffee factories, tea roads, and deep-seated historical neglect of rural schools. In the city, they are buying buses. Our needs are different, our terrain is different, and our priorities are different.”
The NG-CDF model allocates a flat rate of KES 137 million to each constituency, but Githinji pointed out that this sum does not account for the vast differences in purchasing power and the local context. For example, a classroom in the rocky, hilly terrain of Gichugu is far more expensive to construct than one in the relatively flat landscape of Ruiru, Nairobi County.
Furthermore, Githinji revealed that a significant portion of his constituency’s NG-CDF budget is used to fund bursaries for students. “More than 60% of my fund goes to bursaries because the poverty levels in the coffee belt are high. If I build a palace of a school but the children are at home because of fees, I have failed,” he explained, underscoring the importance of education access in his area.
Fighting for NG-CDF’s Future
As the debate intensifies, the MP voiced concern over what he sees as a sustained campaign against NG-CDF, particularly from the judiciary and activist groups. He warned that such criticisms threatened the fund, which he described as the only one that effectively reaches the grassroots level. Githinji urged fellow lawmakers to unite in defending the fund, rather than engaging in a competition for media attention.
In a direct plea to his critics, Githinji told the gathering, “Do not judge me by the paint on the wall. Judge me by the grades of the children inside those walls.” His words emphasized the real-world impact of the fund, especially for communities like his, where tangible results in education and infrastructure matter more than superficial appearances.
However, while Githinji’s defense of NG-CDF highlights the unique circumstances of rural constituencies, critics of the fund argue that it is often misused for political patronage. Audit reports have raised concerns about the fund’s accountability, with some suggesting that it may be more about securing political support than delivering meaningful development. Despite these concerns, for the parents of Githage Primary, the results—such as the new tuition block at their school—are what truly matter.
