Jim Muhwezi’s claim of poverty eradication is not supported by facts

The leadership of NRM government has mustered the art of using sound bites, attractive titles and high flying concepts like poverty eradication, universal primary education, modernization of agriculture, monetary discipline, individual merit, economic metamorphosis, entandikwa and bona bagagawale, etc. These expressions raised the hopes of Ugandans who believed they would soon emerge out of medieval conditions of poor housing, poor feeding and poor dressing, etc. Government representatives have talked with confidence that Uganda will exceed the targets set in the MDGs by 2015. They even began to talk about joining the club of Asian tigers and dragons. The World Bank and IMF who used Uganda to test structural adjustment programs went along with government obsession with economic growth, per capita income and macroeconomic stability leaving the rest such as social and ecological conditions to the operation of market forces.

As a member of the inner group of NRM leadership, and using the same flattery approach, Major General (rtd) Jim Muhwezi, Member of Parliament (MP) for Rujumbura constituency in south west Uganda recently issued a statement to the effect that poverty eradication – not even reduction – is all that he does in his constituency. I responded that poverty in that constituency has actually increased during his term as MP. Someone whom I believe thought I was de-campaigning Jim Muhwezi challenged me to elaborate. And I concurred.

Uganda’s economic growth alone is insufficient for poverty eradication

In May 1987, the National Resistance Movement (NRM) government under the leadership of President Museveni signed an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for assistance. The government opted for the ‘shock therapy’ or extreme version of structural adjustment or Washington Consensus. The agreement called for the abandonment of employment policy in favor of disciplining inflation, promotion of economic growth and export-orientation, privatization of state corporations, retrenchment of public servants, and significant state withdrawal from the economy and virtual abandonment of social policy especially in education and health sectors.

Investments in infrastructure and the economy generally declined considerably. For example in 2008 budget allocation to agriculture, Uganda’s economic mainstay, declined from 4.2 percent in 2007 to 3.8 percent against African Union’s 1993 decision to allocate at least ten percent of national budget to the sector.

The government handed over responsibility for economic management to the invisible hand of market forces and laissez faire (let alone) capitalism as required under the neo-liberal economic ideology. A trickle down mechanism was expected to distribute the benefits of economic growth through employment creation in the private sector. As expected under the Washington Consensus the government focused on law and order by investing heavily in the armed forces, police and intelligence sectors to contain any resistance against the harmful effects of structural adjustment. To mobilize resources for this effort, the government had earlier imposed a 30 percent charge for converting old currency into the new notes against the advice of the IMF.