Jomo Kenyatta (then Prime Minister of Kenya and Chair of the Summit in his opening remarks stated,
"… This meeting has been called to discuss the Tanganyika Governments's decision to leave the East African Common Market and Currency. Here in Kenya we are alarmed at the prospect of implementing this decision. On balance, we have accepted that Kenya gains most from the market. We do not , however, admit that our gains are made at the expense of the other partners. Our examination shows that Kenya is rapidly losing its hare of these gains, oddly enough to Tanganyika. Besides, there are other advantages arising form East African Common Services and Raisman arrangements…
If it proves impossible to establish a Federation, we consider that the Common Market should be preserved for yet another year. We have just become independent, we have problems of unemployment….
I should like to command to you these thoughts. I hope prosperity will say that this meeting saved the Common Market; that the Common Market begot the Federation.
Dr. Julius Nyerere had this to say:
" ….. Chairman, you stated in your opening remarks, that Tanganyika had decided to leave the Common Market. I wish to correct that statement. Tanganyika has made proposals to modify certain structural relationships and the problems posed by this are easy and simple: they do not involve withdrawal.
We have, however, inherited advantages and disadvantages in the Common Market. No one can be blamed or congratulated for these disadvantages and advantages inherent in the Common Market.
All the people who have studied the Common Market say it is very useful thing for East Africa. East Africa has gained industries, investments and an infrastructure as a result of the Common Market. Indeed, East Africa would not have been as attractive to investors overseas without it. If you break the Common Market, there is no doubt that East Africans would suffer.
There is however a paradox here. What is good for the whole should be good for the part. This is not true in economics. It is possible for the Common Market to serve East Africa as a whole without serving the component parts. There must be deliberate actions to redress the imbalances which may arise……….
The aim behind the establishment of the Common Market was that it should serve Kenya. Let me make it clear, however, that I am not blaming Kenya: it is the rulers of East Africa at the time who planned deliberately that Kenya should be the center of economic activity. They, at first wanted a federation; they could not get it, so they established the Common Market to serve their interests.
Now, there are certain rules which determine accumulation of investment and one of them is indicated in a passage in the Bible which says, (He who has more will be given and he who has not even that which he has will be taken away form him). In so saying, Jesus was referring to facts of life. Kenya has developed more than Uganda and Tanganyika: the result is that we have only a legal common market, while in fact , it is Tanganyika which is the Common Market for all. Uganda and Kenya sell to Tanganyika more than Tanganyika sells to either of them and, therefore, Tanganyika is the Common Market of Kenya and Uganda. As such, it will be some time before we can have a true Common Market of the three East African countries…..
One-way of meeting Tanganyika's problem is to have some form of tariff protection. Another possible way might be to agree to limit the amount of goods which one country buys from another. Up to now, Tanganyika had not pressed this solution because it would be painful to Kenya who would have no market for her goods. Another method is that we could aim at reducing the trade imbalance gradually with a view to eliminating it in a given period…."