Mumias East MP Peter Salasya has criticised President William Ruto’s directive requiring Tata Chemicals Magadi to end its operations in Kenya, questioning why the government would seek to remove an established investor instead of introducing competition.
Salasya described the decision as a sign of failure by the Kenya Kwanza administration, arguing that the government should have encouraged another company to enter the market and compete with Tata rather than order the century-old operation to close.
“Tata company ordered to close their business after 100 years of manufacturing instead of gvt going ahead and bringing another company to compete. Sema Ruto ni failure. Greed person who wants to be in all sectors,” Salasya stated.
His remarks came after Ruto directed Tata Chemicals Magadi to leave its operations around Lake Magadi, Kajiado County, amid a wider government push for greater local value addition from Kenya’s mineral resources.
Ruto has argued that the company’s long presence in the area has not translated into sufficient industrial development and economic opportunities for local residents. The President has also called for a new investor capable of establishing industries, including glass and chemical manufacturing facilities, to ensure more value is retained locally.
However, Salasya questioned the rationale of removing an existing company instead of creating an environment where new investors can compete with established businesses.
The MP’s comments add to growing political scrutiny of the government’s handling of the Magadi dispute, particularly over the balance between attracting investment, protecting existing businesses and ensuring communities benefit from natural resources.
Tata Chemicals has disputed suggestions that it has failed to comply with Kenyan regulations. The company has maintained that it submitted the information and documentation requested by the Ministry of Mining and demonstrated compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
The Magadi operation has been producing soda ash for more than a century, with the mineral serving as a key industrial input for products such as glass, detergents and chemicals.
The dispute has also previously involved disagreements over land rates, royalties and the company’s legal rights to operate in the area.
Salasya’s intervention places the Tata controversy within a broader political debate over President Ruto’s economic policies and his administration’s approach to foreign investors.
The MP’s central argument is that Kenya could have pursued competition and stricter regulation while allowing the existing investor to continue operating, rather than seeking its exit after decades of business in the country.