In Uganda eradicating poverty and implementing the 50 year master plan are mutually exclusive

Let me end 2011 with this short message in part as a response to Museveni’s end of year message.

First, Ugandans must understand the simple truth: Museveni is committed to implementing Bahororo 50 year Master Plan which was adopted at his Rwakitura residence under his chairmanship on March 15, 1992.

To realize the Master Plan, non-Bahororo Ugandans must be kept poor economically, socially and politically by denying them what would empower them such as quantity and quality education, jobs, nutrition and access to resources. It is a zero-sum game. Because of this game, poverty has remained very high – over fifty percent – and some 20 percent in the lowest income bracket have got worse.

To explain high levels of poverty, youth unemployment, hunger, disease etc, Museveni has always blamed external forces and “Acts of God” beyond NRM’s control or the opposition. And he gets away with it! It is mainly NRM’s commissions and omissions that are overwhelmingly responsible for too much suffering in Uganda – a country so well endowed to make everyone happy with a surplus. In true democratic countries Museveni and NRM would have been voted out of power a long time ago.

Uganda needs a human rights approach to address poverty

In her article on “Using Human Rights to Reduce Poverty”, Louise Arbour stated that “Poverty is the greatest human rights scourge of our time. Human rights violations are both a cause and consequence of poverty. Human rights are increasingly accepted as part of the definition of what is to be poor, as well as offering pathways out of poverty” (Development Outreach October 2006).

Although Uganda is well endowed in human and natural resources and has received generous international financial and technical support especially since 1987, the poverty level has remained unacceptably high – over 50 percent. One of the arguments for failure to adequately address poverty is that Uganda’s development model has not paid enough attention to human rights issues provided for in various national and international instruments.

In Uganda as in many other countries, focus has since the 1980s largely been on economic growth and price stability hoping that human rights issues such as poverty, food, education, shelter, clothing and health care as well as decent employment would be realized through trickle down mechanism. Sadly, the mechanism has not worked.

How will Uganda get out of the poverty trap?

The 2010 UNDP’s Human Development report has recorded that between 2000 and 2008 51.5 percent of Ugandans lived below $1.25 a day with an index ranking of 143 out of 169. This high level of poverty and associated ills is unacceptable. So, what should be done to get Uganda out of this poverty trap?

First and foremost, Uganda leaders and senior civil servants must genuinely admit that the development model pursued in since 1987 did not work as expected for inter alia the following reasons.

1. The average economic growth rate did not reach 7 or 8 percent essential as minimum for achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015.

2. Excess capacity inherited in 1986 contributed more than economic reforms to economic growth and that that excess capacity is almost exhausted, calling for other sources of growth.

3. Trickle down mechanism failed to distribute the benefits of economic growth equitably resulting in skewed income distribution in favor of rich few families and spreading and deepening poverty.

4. Excessive obsession with macroeconomic stability especially inflation control to 5 percent and balanced budgets constrained investment and job growth because of very high interest rates and starved agriculture and social and infrastructural sectors of essential funding.

Poverty and wealth distribution in the Gt. Lakes region is not an act of God

Some years ago I attended a panel discussion on poverty in Geneva, Switzerland. One of the panelists argued that in any community in time and space you will find a group of poor and another of rich people living side by side. This happens, the panelist argued, because those who become rich exploit, marginalize and impoverish those who ultimately become poor. This argument has presented an analytic framework for understanding the co-existence of poverty and wealth in the great lakes region (Burundi, Rwanda and southwest Uganda).

By way of introduction, by and large, in colonial Africa the whites became rich while the Africans became poor because the whites occupied the best land, got the best education and the best jobs and received government assistance in their development efforts. On the other hand, Africans were pushed onto marginal land, prevented from growing export crops, became cheap laborers, lacked good education and could not get good jobs. In areas where Africans as in Uganda were allowed to own land and grow export crops, they obtained low prices and were heavily taxed.

Rural electrification in Rukungiri raises questions

Ronald Kalyango reported in New Vision on June 17, 2010 that government plans to provide rural electricity to Bushenyi and Rukungiri districts to boost agriculture and eradicate poverty. The reporter added that the electricity will cost money and users will be trained on how to use it efficiently. He added that installation will destroy land, crops and trees. The announcement was made by candidates running for re-election in Rukungiri district. The areas to be covered include Kyatoko, Kagunga and Kyaruyenje. These are areas that parliament voted to include in Rukungiri municipality two or so weeks ago.

In conversation with a senior official in Rukungiri Town Council a year or so ago, I was informed very clearly that once the area is incorporated into the municipality, the authority will divide it up into plots for sale to the highest bidder to generate resources with which to develop the area, meaning that peasants will have to be dispossessed.

The decision by Rukungiri district council to upgrade Rukungiri town into a municipality was taken in an emergency session without consulting the people involved. The entire Kagunga sub-county where some of the poorest people in Rukungiri district live has been incorporated into the municipality. The moment the municipality comes into force land will automatically be owned by the Municipal Council and former owners will become tenants on terms and conditions set by the municipality.

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.

Response to a reader on my comments

A reader made comments on my response to Jim Muhwezi’s statement (published in Observer June 2010) about alleviation of poverty in his constituency of Rujumbura.

The reader’s observations, if I understood them correctly, are that:

1. I have dwelt on the ethnic divisions of Bahororo and Bairu of Rujumbura.

2. Jim Muhwezi, Rujumbura’s MP, is popular in because he has done a lot for the people in his constituency.

3. Focus should be on improving household incomes rather than dwell on the Bairu/Bahororo divide.

Let me explain why an understanding of the plight of Bairu in Rujumbura cannot be achieved without considering a historical interaction between Bahororo and Bairu. A good doctor traces the history of his patient’s illness, disaggregates the possible causes, conducts lab tests and finally identifies the cause before prescribing appropriate medication to heal the patient.

Similarly, a good political economy analyst traces the history of the problem in a particular area, disaggregates possible causes, conducts research and identifies the cause or a combination of causes before recommending solutions.

You cannot adequately analyze the poverty of Bairu in Rujumbura without understanding the 210-year interaction between them and Bahororo. Therefore a brief history of their interaction is in order and here it is for easy reference.

Democracy in a corrupt society is a liability

Under President Yoweri Museveni, the philosophy of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) is that to rule you must impoverish, divide and corrupt the people. The NRM is implementing that philosophy through a combination of impoverishment, division and corrupt practices and tactics. The donor community has unintentionally – one would guess – assisted NRM in achieving its philosophy through structural adjustment, decentralization and massive donations. There are stories that the NRM is determined to rule Uganda uninterrupted by Museveni family for at least fifty years.

The NRM government adopted the adverse and extreme version of structural adjustment program – shock therapy – which has, inter alia, three major elements: retrenching public servants, reducing or eliminating subsidies and applying the full force of labor flexibility.

Retrenchment was applied selectively targeting non-NRM supporters and/or used to settle scores. Non-supporters of NRM were removed from public service en masse as the staff had to be reduced roughly in half and NRM made sure the retrenched servants did not get jobs anywhere else. For example, interest rates were set so high supposedly to control inflation that starting a small business was virtually impossible. Either you joined the NRM or you wallowed in poverty with your family and relatives that depend on you!

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.

Uganda’s diseases of poverty may worsen under the dev plan

The NRM government was unable to detect the diseases of poverty (jiggers, scabies, trachoma, cholera, under-nutrition, pneumonia, insanity and malaria etc) – which have embarrassed the development partners and damaged the image of the government (as it prepares for presidential and parliamentary elections in early 2011) that had presented Uganda as a success story in neo-liberal economic growth and poverty reduction – for the following principal reasons.

First, the government followed strictly foreign advice that focused on inflation control, economic growth and per capita GDP without paying attention to the equity aspects. The distribution of the benefits of economic growth by class and region was left entirely to the invisible hand of the market forces which would not be interfered with at all.

Second, the government focused on producing excellent blue prints such as the modernization of agriculture, poverty reduction action plan and universal primary education with the assistance of renowned development experts from around the world. These blue prints were received by the international community as a model of success story before they were even implemented. The government was satisfied with that assessment which boosted its international standing and did not bother with implementation as long as the donors and the media were happy with what they were marketing on behalf of the NRM government.