The President’s address to the nation omitted vital information

President Museveni should be congratulated for observing Article 101 (1) of Uganda’s Constitution that requires the head of state to address Ugandans through Parliament on the state of the nation. I have had the opportunity to read the president’s annual addresses and other policy statements and have made critical comments on them.

To understand fully the state of the nation, one needs to read the president’s address very carefully to find out what was omitted. The president has mustered the art of summarizing selectively macroeconomic developments such as economic growth, per capita income and inflation control without saying much about their impact on the welfare of Ugandans.

On economic growth, the president has generally given figures higher than other reporters raising questions about his source of information. With an economy growing at the reported average of 8.4 per cent over the last five years, one would have expected the president to also report its positive impact on poverty level and jobs created. The diseases of poverty that cannot be hidden anymore have made it difficult to report on the level of poverty which is omitted. It must be stressed that economic growth is not an end in itself but a means to bring about qualitative improvements in the lives of Ugandans. Regarding mobile phones, questions have been raised about their contribution to investment, capital accumulation and improvement in the quality of life of the majority of users.

Donors are partly responsible for Uganda’s underdevelopment

Uganda’s economy since independence in 1962 has been driven by donors. Reports from the World Bank, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and Commonwealth etc made recommendations that have driven Uganda’s economy and society. Dependence on donors for advice, funds, technical assistance and supervision has been particularly strong since the 1980s coinciding with the launch of the Washington Consensus or structural adjustment programs except for a short period between 1985 and mid-1987 when major donors withdrew support because of human rights violations, non-compliance with IMF conditionality and ideological differences. Therefore the donor community has been an integral part of Uganda’s development equation. It should therefore accept praise or constructive criticism as appropriate.

Contrary to popular belief based on GDP and per capita growth rates and macroeconomic stability, Uganda has become an underdeveloped country meaning that the standard of living of the majority of Ugandans has declined. Here are a few illustrations.