NIC group acquired ICEA and Lion Insurance when?

Wealth preservation for a 100 years is a very wide concept and I am not sure if this case is here in question. It is about enlargement of capital and market position. I have some feeling that there will be some more mergers in the future

The experience of transcentury after loss of power tells wazuans to be careful of Greeks bearing gifts turns out to be trojan horses and value traps.

Huduma number is a waste of time and money.

For these so called huduma number proponents will huduma number do that an id number cannot be made to do.

It is very ridiculous that the above question has not been made clear. This country is a joke

I may sound ridiculous and uneducated with this question lakini wacha niulize tu.

Why not digitize the id numbers they already have. Furthermore all institutions of govt require id number and my prints are already with them. Nhif, kra, nssf, employer, police abstracts etc all have my id number. Why not digitize what you have first then sort out matters of duplication that may arise. Subsequently start issuing id numbers from birth but question arises of which biometric to capture in a newborn that remains relevant 30yrs later.

1) Is not the current ID number unique?
2) What is "digitally unique"?
3) How can the current ID be replicated? [If you mean faked then change the ID to a smart ID with a chip like ATM cards using the same ID number]

There are more urgent problems to be sorted out before we even think about huduma number,
If we had a visionary leadership kenya would now be second to South Africa in terms of development in Africa if we continued with the pace of NARC and Grand coalition

Huduma no. only simplifies work for the govt. Not the individual citizen. I can access ALL govt. services currently with my ID and telephone number alone! The govt. already has a massive fingerprint database from ID registration, passport issuance, travel at airports, electoral database, etc. They should spend more money integrating these databases rather than creating a whole new database.
From a civil liberties perspective, that is why MOST Western democracies do not have MANDATORY fingerprinting for simple registration to access govt. services. If it wasn't for 911, even passports would still be issued generally via one's birth certificate.
The concept of ID's and fingerprints is colonial in its origin. Only suspects get fingerprinted in most of those cases.
And then there's the below analysis of issues with a similar system in India:

See: https://www.washingtonpo...;utm_term=.4426afa5f1ae
AND
https://www.bbc.com/news...rld-asia-india-43619944
Key excerpt from the BBC article:
"....In many of the other highly-developed societies in Europe and North America - and in the view of many computer scientists and policy-makers who study and advocate for policy in this area - using single number identity systems for everything is simply not a good idea.

In 2010, the United Kingdom abandoned a similar scheme of a national identity card linked to biometric information.

Israel has a smart card identification system with no fingerprints where data is not stored in any centralised database but stays only on the card.

The US has no such nationwide, all-encompassing program and only two states - California and Colorado - fingerprint driving licence applications
Biometric information is collected by most of these countries only for visitors but not for their own citizens.

Connecting bank accounts and voter registration to biometrics is a trend seen only in China, some countries in Africa, Venezuela, Iraq and the Philippines.


Biometric information is collected by most countries only for visitors but not for their own citizens
Centralised government-controlled databases of biometric and genomic data create high levels of social risk. Any compromise of such a database is essentially irreversible for a whole human lifetime: no one can change their genetic data or fingerprints in response to a leak.

Any declaration by a government that its database will never be compromised is inherently far-fetched. No government can argue that its flood prevention or public health system will never fail under the pressure of weather or disease. The goal of policy is risk management, not perfect risk-prevention.
...."