What a period of political contest. For quite some time, and for
the ordinary folks, it felt like wading through a flooded jungle with
half-a-knee-deep paddles to go through.
Perhaps
Kenya’s politics could have been one of the inspirations behind Buckhard
Dallwitz’s ‘it’s a jungle out there’ composition.
With
the conclusion of the hotly contested presidential elections, political
risks, over the coming months are somehow expected to gradually
dissipate from asset-pricing models.
However, even if
we blind the political risks window, the economy may not be fully out of
the woods yet—which then implies that asset prices, especially stocks,
may not fully retrace the pre-election strength.
Remember
that even before being dipped into the political freezer, Kenya’s
economy was already a walking mass of frozen flesh, having previously
passed through a number of freeze points.
In the second
quarter of the year, economic growth slowed to five per cent compared
to 6.3 per cent in a similar quarter of 2016.
On an annualised basis, only trading, technology and real estate sectors posted growth accelerations.
Otherwise major sectors such as construction, transport,
agriculture and manufacturing reported growth slowdowns. By activity,
these four sectors contributed slightly over half of the country’s gross
domestic product (GDP) last year.
The three months of
active politicking could have sucked out any little steam that might
have been left of 2017 prospects and we should expect an acceleration in
economic slowdown, unless a miracle happens.
Resultantly,
we are likely to see continued private sector lay-offs, albeit in small
scale, and less hiring as companies adjust to growth slowdown—which, in
turn, will likely soften payroll tax collections.
Further,
the twin deficits are still alive and kicking. As a matter of fact, the
economy was already bracing for current account deficit widening.
Indeed,
going by data from the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, current
account deficit widened to 6.2 per cent of GDP in the first six months
of the year, from 5.5 per cent in 2016.
It probably
could rack up some more basis points in the second half of the year on
account of two factors: first, subject to official confirmations, there
is a high chance the three months of politicking could have softened
exports.
Secondly, global oil prices have been toying
with $60 per barrel especially after the escalation of secession
stand-off between Kurdistan and Iraq (the former being an oil rich
region within the latter).
In 2016, Brent Crude prices
averaged $43.5 a barrel. In October 2017, Brent prices averaged $57 a
barrel. The $13.5 rise in prices will be reflected in the import bill,
albeit not by a similar quantum.
However,
I need to issue a mega caveat to the effect that when it comes to
global oil price drivers, there are often several moving parts that it
becomes difficult to wrap your hands around the wheel.
In
addition to current account deficit, the economy continues to grapple
with a fairly elevated fiscal deficit (which in itself has been
triggered by the Treasury’s failure to roll out fiscal consolidation
measures).
In fiscal year 2016/17, deficit, as
percentage of GDP closed at 9.2 per cent. While the Treasury secretary
in the fiscal year 2017/18 budget statement had projected the figure to
drop to six per cent of GDP, his estimates may have been a statement of
optimism.
But it is the aggressive pursuit of deficit
financing that continues to entrench fiscal dominance which, in turn,
has triggered a de-alignment of fiscal and monetary policies.
This
absence of line of sight between the two macro-policies, in addition to
the Banking (Amendment) Act, 2016, has significantly lowered the
opportunity costs of public sector lending, hence crowding out the
private sector.
Resultantly, private sector credit
growth has stagnated over the past 12 months. Effectively, dissipation
in political risks will only give prominence to other structural
deficiencies in the economy—and the economy will not be out of the woods
yet
No comments:
Post a Comment