How to cut fights, duplicity and waste in gov't

By Jim Mugunga

It is a good thing that at times within the wider government-sphere, a fight erupts. We get to see and hear of one agency of government accusing the other of interference, failure to perform or outright sabotage.

Some of these fights have far reaching implications, but healthy as long as at the root of them all is better service delivery.

The frustrating part sadly is that, these fights are often about control of chiefdoms. Some people merely want to strengthen their control of a certain budget, their sphere of influence, while others are out rightly selfish.

As a result, we are now immune to the headlines in the local press about mismanagement anywhere in the public realm. Ugandans read the stories but hardly get carried away by the publicised fights. The citizens are resigned to watching the unfolding drama, hardly surprised.

So, when NSSF and UBRA fight over the pension sector; UEGCL and Ministry of Energy over dams, NDA and the Cancer Institute over drugs and their pricing, UCC and UBC over digital migration, CIID and NCHE, DPP and Police, Works Ministry/URC and Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) or indeed multiple security agencies and the Police; no one seems to care.

Taxpayers, who should be demanding accountability now numbly watch on as self-seekers play out the daily unfolding drama, for personal gain. The main actors are power brokers, political middle men, who benefit from inter and intra government agency ping-pong. They position for "the kill" by allegedly promoting the fights and turn around to back-up one of the wrangling parties for a fee.

Conspiracy theories aside, as a nation it is important that we rethink our approaches to regulatory endeavours. We need to engage in a candid discussion of the possibilities of adopting an organised and efficient approach to multi as opposed to uni-sectoral regulatory framework so as to deny those trying to stifle public service delivery fertile ground to operate.

A multi sectoral regulatory framework would serve as the antidote to fragmentation, duplicity, resource wastage, chiefdoms, lack of strategic and operational coordination and ultimately curb the current fights amongst related sectors.

It is an obvious, powerful dose, which, when administered, will help the executive deal with miscommunication and poor implementation of policy. It will also eliminate what Odrek Rwabwogo refers to as "stand-alone/silo systems" of our governance structures.  

Why, for example, do we not seriously consider a multi-sector regulatory system, all-encompassing for related utility companies? In this category, one would have energy (electricity and gas); telecommunications, ICT and the railway services (now that the Standard Gauge, RVR and promised mono-rail are destined to operate side by side).

Politically, it probably makes sense to segment the four local governments of Kampala, Entebbe, Mukono and Wakiso. However, is it logical to further segment service provision in the above interlinked and fast growing urban settlements that are hugely intertwined? Why is a single, local government agency not assigned to plan, guide, supervise or co-ordinate municipality-level water supply; sewage and garbage collection, as well as transport services? Can the road redevelopment in Kampala not be done in tandem with that of Wakiso?

The current disconnect is allowing a KCCA road improvement project for Kisasi-Kyanja, which delivers street lights; tarmac and paved walk ways, to feed into a wasted gravel road just because the latter "belong" to Wakiso! And that is just a minute illustration of the chaos in the management of our towns. Other examples abound in the areas of waste management, and the list goes on.

The advantages of multi-sector regulation far outweigh the disadvantages that some prop up as excuses. These include capacity to evolve credible long-term strategies for predictability and unified progression and growth.

Across the border in Rwanda, there is the multi sectoral Rwanda Development Board. Its achievements are well documented. It is not the equivalent of our UDC as it is currently but a real one stop centre for investment, licensing and all matters of development. The ICT sector is wholly regulated by Rwanda Utilities Regulator Authority (RURA).

Its mandate, among other things, is to license, monitor and enforce license obligations, manage scarce resources, advise policy makers on ICT related issues and represent Rwanda in international organisations on issues pertaining to ICT. The ICT sector regulation in Rwanda covers media and postal regulation, ICT standards and quality of service regulation and ICT scarce resources management and monitoring. The Authority reports to the Office of the Prime Minister and it coordinates with line ministries responsible for each regulated sector in executing its functions.

Compared to Uganda, our ICT sector - until the arrival of Frank Tumwebaze, was all over the place. Tasks such as ICT security and oversight may be exercised by UCC; NITA Uganda; Media Council and at the Uganda Police's recently established cyber-crime unit. The result is unco-ordinated efforts, with scattered resources that have minimal impact.

The multi-sector approach for regulation enables better evaluation of possible impacts on the sector concerned. Experiences will be shared and benchmarked to the entire economy. That way, the push for middle income status will not be one for the centre alone, but felt nationwide, with all participating and none spectating.

The writer is the spokesperson of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development