Liberalisation of services in EA needs a proper plan
Jun 10, 2008
REFERENCE is made to your opinion on freedom of movement of services in the New Vision, Page 16, June 6, 2008. You propose full and immediate liberalisation of services in the East African Community (EAC) Common Market. You also mention that the Private Sector Foundation (PSFU) is advocating full li
REFERENCE is made to your opinion on freedom of movement of services in the New Vision, Page 16, June 6, 2008. You propose full and immediate liberalisation of services in the East African Community (EAC) Common Market. You also mention that the Private Sector Foundation (PSFU) is advocating full liberalisation of services in the EAC.
On the contrary, the PSFU strongly demands “progressive and significantly less than full liberalisation†of services within the EAC. This position is sandwiched between the 1999 treaty, which established the EAC based on the principles of variable geometry, asymmetry, mutual and equitable benefits.
A progressive approach empowers Uganda to advocate an in-built moratorium, which would enable her improve the deficient domestic policy framework that guides trade in services. This moratorium, which should exceed 10 years, as proposed by PSFU members, will allow implementation of Uganda’s first construction, re-insurance and standards policies, intellectual property rights project, national export strategy for tourism and education and other new and upcoming government initiatives. A moratorium is compulsory to enable the Ministry of Education improve its ability to maintain high standards in the sector. Before liberalisation, it is obligatory to address the significant rift that exists between Uganda’s education system and the private sector’s skill requirements. In other words, it is dangerous to push for immediate and full liberalisation of services.
Delayed and progressive non-blanket liberalisation is the way forward. There are service sectors where Uganda requires more foreigners like provision of financial services. Access and the cost of finance are still huge hindrances to the private sector’s competitiveness. However, there are sectors where Uganda has built strong capacity in quantity and quality and experiences high, disguised, under and unemployment – such as legal services. History will judge us cruelly if we vouch for blanket liberalisation in sectors where we have achieved desired capacities.
It is necessary to pay attention to sensitive service sectors like the civil service. What would happen if the Ministry of Trade were dominated by Kenyan trade experts? Would they worry about a trade deficit with Kenya? This has been catered for in the Common Market draft protocol by restricting employment of Kenyans in Uganda’s civil service. Similarly, there is need to accord the same protection to sensitive sectors like insurance, re-insurance and human resource recruiting agencies.
Although the free movement of services is inevitable given the sizzling global wave of industrialisation, the immediate and full liberalisation of services may counter the Government’s mission of poverty eradication while employment opportunities within the economy are gobbled by Kenyans. Asante Sana.
The writer is the PSFU’s director for trade development
On the contrary, the PSFU strongly demands “progressive and significantly less than full liberalisation†of services within the EAC. This position is sandwiched between the 1999 treaty, which established the EAC based on the principles of variable geometry, asymmetry, mutual and equitable benefits.
A progressive approach empowers Uganda to advocate an in-built moratorium, which would enable her improve the deficient domestic policy framework that guides trade in services. This moratorium, which should exceed 10 years, as proposed by PSFU members, will allow implementation of Uganda’s first construction, re-insurance and standards policies, intellectual property rights project, national export strategy for tourism and education and other new and upcoming government initiatives. A moratorium is compulsory to enable the Ministry of Education improve its ability to maintain high standards in the sector. Before liberalisation, it is obligatory to address the significant rift that exists between Uganda’s education system and the private sector’s skill requirements. In other words, it is dangerous to push for immediate and full liberalisation of services.
Delayed and progressive non-blanket liberalisation is the way forward. There are service sectors where Uganda requires more foreigners like provision of financial services. Access and the cost of finance are still huge hindrances to the private sector’s competitiveness. However, there are sectors where Uganda has built strong capacity in quantity and quality and experiences high, disguised, under and unemployment – such as legal services. History will judge us cruelly if we vouch for blanket liberalisation in sectors where we have achieved desired capacities.
It is necessary to pay attention to sensitive service sectors like the civil service. What would happen if the Ministry of Trade were dominated by Kenyan trade experts? Would they worry about a trade deficit with Kenya? This has been catered for in the Common Market draft protocol by restricting employment of Kenyans in Uganda’s civil service. Similarly, there is need to accord the same protection to sensitive sectors like insurance, re-insurance and human resource recruiting agencies.
Although the free movement of services is inevitable given the sizzling global wave of industrialisation, the immediate and full liberalisation of services may counter the Government’s mission of poverty eradication while employment opportunities within the economy are gobbled by Kenyans. Asante Sana.
The writer is the PSFU’s director for trade development