By Mutabazi Sam Stewart
Any country’s development is determined by many indicators, most important of which is human development. Human (personal) development usually remains low when investment in infrastructure and social services is minimal. Development is a broad term that encompasses issues such as per capita income, infrastructure, employment levels, health and education of the population among others. There is no specific development model that is agreeable to everyone. Every country must employ what they perceive as the best means to achieve development. However there is a strong and positive casual link between the quality of administration of government on one hand and economic performance on the other.
To any critical analyst, the means the government of Uganda has chosen to use to achieve development serve contrary purposes. Formation and creation of new institutions, departments, districts and other organs has been the hallmark of the present government. For instance a new institution in the name of Uganda National Roads Authority (UNRA) was formed recently leaving many of us to wonder whether this new institution will deliver meaningfully than its mother ministry (Works and Transport). I cannot talk about creation of new districts because this is a disaster in waiting for not only the planners of this country but future political leaders as well.
New institutions rarely bring new innovations. They only concentrate on developing documents and making reports that are hardly ever implemented. PMA, PEAP and Bonabagagawale are some of the huge documents that have been developed to guide the development process but have had little effect on the same. The development agenda has been blurred by too much and unnecessary paper work which is not only hard to implement but sometimes ends up confusing the would-be implementers and the people for whom the services are intended. Enough policy papers have been produced without corresponding efforts in making tangible implementation. The public has been fleeced by institutions through innumerable documents that hardly translate into development. Most times policy documents are overtaken by events and time, only for institutions to come up with revised editions and new policies altogether. PEAP for example which is regarded as the most comprehensive document by government aimed at eradicating poverty in the country, has since inception, remained a mere document. It has been revised more than two times. The other example is that of Ministry of health with more than 50 policy papers and programmes and unnecessarily many administrative staff at its headquarters who spend much of the time in workshops within the country and abroad.
According to the current (2007) UNDP Human Development Report, the priorities in public spending for the government of Uganda still leave a lot to be desired. In 2004, 2.8% of GDP was spent on health compared to 2.3% on the military and defence services excluding police and other security agencies.
Although government continues to blow its own trumpet on how it is doing well on education because of the introduction of Universal Primary Education (UPE) everything is not fine as it would want us to believe. A bigger chunk of UPE funds come from donors, let alone the fact that the quality of education especially in UPE schools continues to deteriorate due to large numbers of pupils per class. Between 2002-2005, government spent 5.2% of the country’s GDP on education. During the same period, our eastern neighbour Kenya, which had not introduced UPE then spent 6.7% on education. Rwanda has been for the last five years spending approximately 20% of its budget on infrastructure development especially roads, hospitals and schools. Apart from the money that was recently spent on beautifying Kampala city in preparation for CHOGM, the rest remains on paper (Greater Kampala Master Plan) without any definite programme on when actual implementation shall take place.
In spite of the fact that the three most important sectors (education, health and agriculture) are still under funded, even the little money that is allocated is never optimally utilised. The ministry of agriculture remains one of the most redundant ministries in the Uganda. Arguably, it receives the largest share of the government budget (over 10%). Of this 80% is spent on wages and salaries, cars, workshops and travel abroad. The reminder is allocated to county and sub county extension workers in purchase of motorcycles and fuel to monitor rural farmers’ performance and to provide the so called outreach services. I can authoritatively state that the government and the people of Uganda can comfortably live without the ministry of agriculture given its below average performance over the years.
Uganda’s poor performance in infrastructure development and sustenance can be explained by the adoption by government of inappropriate strategy of creating innumerable entities which are not viable. The notion that infrastructure development has now shifted from being a government responsibility to a responsibility of the private sector is a big mistake which is likely to lead to disproportionate development in different sectors of the economy. Where as for instance, the communication sector in Uganda today compares favourably with that in developed countries, the energy and transport sectors remain largely under developed. It is high time government wakes up to the fact that it takes more than talking and writing policies to develop a country. Policy papers can only serve as a guide towards achieving bigger goals. However important they may be, irrespective of what is written on them they will always remain what they have been - papers
The writer is a Human Rights Activist
Contact: mutasamste@yahoo.com
0772-882547
No comments:
Post a Comment