Kenya’s Affordable Housing Programme has found itself at the centre of an unusually humorous but politically significant debate after Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna questioned whether high-rise housing projects being constructed in Western Kenya adequately reflect the lifestyle and needs of local communities.

The controversy began during an interview with Mulembe FM in July 2026, when Sifuna questioned the suitability of 12-storey affordable housing units being constructed in Funyula, Busia County. Referring to the importance of poultry keeping in many rural households, he asked how a chicken would reach the 12th floor of an apartment building.

Sifuna’s argument was essentially about housing design and lifestyle, rather than a literal proposal that chickens must be transported into apartment blocks. Reports of the interview quoted him saying that people in Western Kenya could not comfortably live in places where their chickens could not enter.

The comment quickly became a political talking point.

Ruto fires back

President William Ruto responded strongly to Sifuna's remarks while defending the government's Affordable Housing Programme.

Ruto questioned why the inability of a chicken to reach an upper floor should be used as an argument against constructing affordable homes. He argued that Kenya needs decent housing and that the programme is intended to improve living standards, create employment and address the country's housing needs.

The President's response transformed what began as a discussion about housing design into a wider political confrontation between the government and opposition leaders.

The exchange was also amplified by the humorous nature of the argument. Instead of debating housing policy purely through statistics, politicians and Kenyans online began talking about whether a chicken could actually make it to the 12th floor.

But what was Sifuna really saying?

Reducing Sifuna's argument to “chickens cannot go upstairs” misses the larger question he appeared to be raising: Should affordable housing in rural and semi-urban areas simply copy the high-rise model used in densely populated cities?

For many households in Western Kenya, livestock and poultry are not merely pets. Chickens can provide food, income and emergency household cash. A housing model that moves families from compounds with space for poultry and other activities into apartment buildings inevitably changes how those households live.

That raises legitimate planning questions.

Where will residents keep chickens? Where will children play? Where will small-scale traders operate? Will residents have access to sufficient parking, storage and communal spaces? Can rural communities adapt comfortably to high-density living?

These are questions that can be addressed through proper architectural and urban planning rather than through political insults.

High-rise housing is not necessarily the enemy

At the same time, Sifuna's criticism does not automatically mean that high-rise affordable housing is unsuitable for Western Kenya.

Land is becoming increasingly valuable, populations are growing and governments everywhere are looking for ways to house more people using limited urban land.

Building upwards can allow more families to obtain decent housing without consuming huge amounts of land.

The challenge, therefore, may not be whether Kenya should build vertically, but how vertical housing should be designed for different communities.

An apartment development in Nairobi does not necessarily have to look or function exactly like one in Funyula, Bungoma, Kakamega or Kisumu.

A rural or semi-urban affordable housing project could incorporate communal poultry areas, gardens, children's play areas, small business spaces and other facilities that reflect the needs of residents.

The chicken became a symbol

Interestingly, the chicken has become more than an animal in this political debate. It has become a symbol of the larger question of what “development” means.

For the government, affordable housing represents modernisation, decent living conditions, employment and home ownership.

For Sifuna and other critics, development should also consider the realities of the people who are supposed to occupy these homes.

Both sides therefore touch on an important issue: development should not only be measured by how impressive a building looks, but by whether the people living in it can actually thrive there.

Sifuna later continued the joke after Ruto's criticism, writing on social media that arguing with him about chickens was like arguing with Nyandarua Senator John Methu about potatoes — a reference to the agricultural identity associated with Nyandarua.

Beyond the jokes

The political exchange has generated plenty of laughter, but the underlying housing question deserves a serious conversation.

Kenya needs affordable and decent housing. At the same time, affordable housing should be designed around the realities of the communities it serves.

A family moving from a rural compound into a 12-storey apartment should not simply be told to abandon every aspect of its traditional livelihood. Planners should ask how people will live, work, raise children and conduct small-scale economic activities within the new environment.

The government can build modern housing while still incorporating local needs.

That could mean apartment blocks with shared agricultural spaces, designated poultry areas where appropriate, community markets, storage facilities and other amenities.

So, can a chicken go to the 12th floor?

That question has become the punchline of the entire political argument.

But perhaps the better question is:

Should a family have to choose between modern affordable housing and the livelihood practices that have supported it for generations?

The answer should not be determined by either political slogans or jokes.

The Affordable Housing Programme deserves scrutiny, but that scrutiny should focus on cost, quality, location, affordability, infrastructure, access to services and whether the housing actually meets residents' needs.

Sifuna's chicken analogy may have been humorous, but it opened a genuine conversation about something much bigger than poultry: how Kenya can modernise without ignoring the people and communities that modernisation is supposed to serve.

And perhaps that is where the chicken debate should finally lead — not to the 12th floor, but to a better conversation about what affordable housing should actually look like in Ken