There is no reason to divide up Arua
Letter of the day<br><br>SIR — I wish to comment on a recent article which appeared in the press about the division of Arua into more than one district.
Letter of the day
SIR — I wish to comment on a recent article which appeared in the press about the division of Arua into more than one district.
Most often, arguments about fragmentation of districts in Uganda are based on the fallacy that it enhances delivery of service nearer to the people. The reason given is that some of the areas are very far from the district headquarters.
In the case of Arua, I disagree with the perpetrators of the scheme because there isn’t any area in Arua district which is very far from the district headquarters. The furthest parts are Koboko, Lugiri, Inde, Okollo, Offaka, Rhino camp and Otuambari, none of which is more that 50 miles from Arua town.
By any standards, any area within a radius of 40 miles can be covered adequately in terms of service delivery. Article 179(4) of the constitution spells out clearly the conditions for altering the boundaries of or creation of districts namely:
The necessity for effective accommodation and the need to bring services closer to the people taking into account the means of communication, geographical features, population density,
economic liability
and the wishes of the people. One wonders which of the above conditions in Arua can convince parliament to divide up Arua.
While there may be a bit of communication problem with access to Ewanga from Rhino camp during rain seasons, on the whole transport in Arua district should not be a bottleneck to service delivery unless the problem is with the management of the service delivery itself.
On the contrary, districts like Mbarara and Bushenyi with 12 and 10 counties respectively, compared to Arua with seven have not applied to be fragmented. Furthermore, Mbarara and Bushenyi have a more difficult geographical terrain, denser population and are economically more developed that Arua.
If both local and national Arua politicians behind this fragmentation want it so as to remain ‘big fish in small ponds’ or have nothing to show as 2006 draws nearer, then their politics is not in the interest of the people of Arua. Over-fragmenting districts serves no useful purpose.
Arua as one district stands to benefit from economies of scale since small districts may not be economically viable and have no bargaining power. That partly explains why the government came with the idea of the “Regional Tierâ€. It was meant to accommodate those pushing for balkanisation. Fragmenting districts increases administrative costs which donors are already querying.
Santos Alima
Arua
SIR — I wish to comment on a recent article which appeared in the press about the division of Arua into more than one district.
Most often, arguments about fragmentation of districts in Uganda are based on the fallacy that it enhances delivery of service nearer to the people. The reason given is that some of the areas are very far from the district headquarters.
In the case of Arua, I disagree with the perpetrators of the scheme because there isn’t any area in Arua district which is very far from the district headquarters. The furthest parts are Koboko, Lugiri, Inde, Okollo, Offaka, Rhino camp and Otuambari, none of which is more that 50 miles from Arua town.
By any standards, any area within a radius of 40 miles can be covered adequately in terms of service delivery. Article 179(4) of the constitution spells out clearly the conditions for altering the boundaries of or creation of districts namely:
The necessity for effective accommodation and the need to bring services closer to the people taking into account the means of communication, geographical features, population density,
economic liability
and the wishes of the people. One wonders which of the above conditions in Arua can convince parliament to divide up Arua.
While there may be a bit of communication problem with access to Ewanga from Rhino camp during rain seasons, on the whole transport in Arua district should not be a bottleneck to service delivery unless the problem is with the management of the service delivery itself.
On the contrary, districts like Mbarara and Bushenyi with 12 and 10 counties respectively, compared to Arua with seven have not applied to be fragmented. Furthermore, Mbarara and Bushenyi have a more difficult geographical terrain, denser population and are economically more developed that Arua.
If both local and national Arua politicians behind this fragmentation want it so as to remain ‘big fish in small ponds’ or have nothing to show as 2006 draws nearer, then their politics is not in the interest of the people of Arua. Over-fragmenting districts serves no useful purpose.
Arua as one district stands to benefit from economies of scale since small districts may not be economically viable and have no bargaining power. That partly explains why the government came with the idea of the “Regional Tierâ€. It was meant to accommodate those pushing for balkanisation. Fragmenting districts increases administrative costs which donors are already querying.
Santos Alima
Arua