Uganda has no welfare state to cushion the poor
Feb 26, 2009
ONCE upon a time the global economy was in a boom, we all partied like there will never be a crunch. Donors pumped dollars into Uganda through budgetary support and the NGO sector. There was the global fund, the GAVI fund and many other financial cock-tai
By Robert Shaka
ONCE upon a time the global economy was in a boom, we all partied like there will never be a crunch. Donors pumped dollars into Uganda through budgetary support and the NGO sector. There was the global fund, the GAVI fund and many other financial cock-tails. We had a breeze of optimism and forgot our country.
Unfortunately, every good thing comes to an end. Now that the party is over as the credit crunch bites and we are still in our green Uganda, it is time to wash the dishes. Do you realise the missed opportunities in those good years gone-by?
Proponents of large populations like the President and Alhaj Naduli based their arguments on this financial euphoria. UPE came around this time.
Many ecologists will agree there is some beef in the President’s argument of a large population due to its response on environmental pressure but of course there are also alternative demographic development approaches relevant to Uganda.
Countries with a progressive human capital investment like Malaysia and Singapore coupled with a big population have incentives for development as China and India have proved to the world. Uganda’s momentum is a case that requires a more revolutionary approach that is progressive.
Many young people are unemployed and redundant and we seem to have more domestic challenges than we anticipated.
There is growing public discontent and frustration as inflation sky-rockets with a large section of the population highly dependent through the family extension system. The conditions for productivity in the private sector are riddled with policy as well as structural challenges that can only be dealt with by a forward looking government.
To many hard working Ugandans, it is now clear their efforts to fight off poverty cannot bear fruits with a combination of policy and environmental factors that disadvantage their efforts among which is a harsh tax regime and the burden of an extended family system.
A 30% PAYE tax, local government tax, indirect tax on all consumer and utility goods and services, high transport and food costs and the general inflationary rate of 14% without tax-incentives as many countries have done is certainly a case of the Dracula taking over the blood bank.
The proposed compulsory 4% health insurance fee, 5% pension pay-out to NSSF in sectors that have lacked transparency and public confidence do not inspire many. This excludes a 10% gross due to the church as tithe for the Christians. And what do we have in return, a massive government chocking on almost 30% of our GDP.
Uganda has no welfare state to cushion the unemployed and vulnerable. Village communities that formed a safety net are being destroyed by a politically connected pseudo-bourgeoisie.
This elite group has manipulated the rural poor to sale off their land cheaply thus sinking them deeper into poverty as landless and internally displaced people. Access and affordability to power has been hampered by lack of institutional long term plans to anticipate demand and the need for infrastructural upgrades.
Load-shedding therefore render rural electrification more of a political pipe dream accelerating environemtnal degration in rural communities. As a consequence many factories and businesses have closed shop in urban centres where 14% of Ugandans live. UMEME, the national distributor of power is proposing increasing an already high unit cost of power by 100%.
Where is the source of power for the rural poor in the country side who live on less than $1 a day going to come from? Power theft and distribution inefficiency is a function of the cost of power in Uganda. The cost of alternative sources of energy is still astronomically high. Strategically, we are not addressing our national energy challenges as a security issue.
While there is increasing urban poverty, the majority are rural based, tilling their land since agriculture has become uncompetitive over the years. They live on less than a dollar a day half the livelihood of a subsidised cow in France.
The poor’s only possession is their land but they also need access to information and ideas in order to harness their environment in a sustainable way through their modest means as a community.
The rural poor need to know that Kampala is not “a land where dreams automatically become a reality.†If poor people sell off their land then what? They jump on a boda boda to Kampala to start a business. What is the failure rate of business in Uganda? 90% of all start-up businesses collapse in their first year.
The social effect of this rate of failure alone is a public policy matter rather than a rule. NAADS which recently became the vehicle to carry the President’s Bona Bagagawale burden was a consequence of this observation that agriculture was a strategic sector that needed more than lip service.
However, many Ugandans like development partners rightly have concerns over the ability of NAADS to actually deliver the required services to the smallholder farmers since the project has been swamped by many political actors with linear rather than strategic interests.
Where are the land reforms? You cannot easily develop agriculture with the current level of land fragmentation in rural Uganda.
We also cannot allow the rural poor lose their only possession, land, to the privileged few unless there are enough factories in which their children will provide labour as a source of livelihood.
There are not enough homes in urban centres for the rural poor and there is no welfare state for those who fail to break through to be cushioned. In other words, we need a more coordinated policy approach rather than this uncoordinated movement of resources in the public and civil service.
The writer is a political analyst
ONCE upon a time the global economy was in a boom, we all partied like there will never be a crunch. Donors pumped dollars into Uganda through budgetary support and the NGO sector. There was the global fund, the GAVI fund and many other financial cock-tails. We had a breeze of optimism and forgot our country.
Unfortunately, every good thing comes to an end. Now that the party is over as the credit crunch bites and we are still in our green Uganda, it is time to wash the dishes. Do you realise the missed opportunities in those good years gone-by?
Proponents of large populations like the President and Alhaj Naduli based their arguments on this financial euphoria. UPE came around this time.
Many ecologists will agree there is some beef in the President’s argument of a large population due to its response on environmental pressure but of course there are also alternative demographic development approaches relevant to Uganda.
Countries with a progressive human capital investment like Malaysia and Singapore coupled with a big population have incentives for development as China and India have proved to the world. Uganda’s momentum is a case that requires a more revolutionary approach that is progressive.
Many young people are unemployed and redundant and we seem to have more domestic challenges than we anticipated.
There is growing public discontent and frustration as inflation sky-rockets with a large section of the population highly dependent through the family extension system. The conditions for productivity in the private sector are riddled with policy as well as structural challenges that can only be dealt with by a forward looking government.
To many hard working Ugandans, it is now clear their efforts to fight off poverty cannot bear fruits with a combination of policy and environmental factors that disadvantage their efforts among which is a harsh tax regime and the burden of an extended family system.
A 30% PAYE tax, local government tax, indirect tax on all consumer and utility goods and services, high transport and food costs and the general inflationary rate of 14% without tax-incentives as many countries have done is certainly a case of the Dracula taking over the blood bank.
The proposed compulsory 4% health insurance fee, 5% pension pay-out to NSSF in sectors that have lacked transparency and public confidence do not inspire many. This excludes a 10% gross due to the church as tithe for the Christians. And what do we have in return, a massive government chocking on almost 30% of our GDP.
Uganda has no welfare state to cushion the unemployed and vulnerable. Village communities that formed a safety net are being destroyed by a politically connected pseudo-bourgeoisie.
This elite group has manipulated the rural poor to sale off their land cheaply thus sinking them deeper into poverty as landless and internally displaced people. Access and affordability to power has been hampered by lack of institutional long term plans to anticipate demand and the need for infrastructural upgrades.
Load-shedding therefore render rural electrification more of a political pipe dream accelerating environemtnal degration in rural communities. As a consequence many factories and businesses have closed shop in urban centres where 14% of Ugandans live. UMEME, the national distributor of power is proposing increasing an already high unit cost of power by 100%.
Where is the source of power for the rural poor in the country side who live on less than $1 a day going to come from? Power theft and distribution inefficiency is a function of the cost of power in Uganda. The cost of alternative sources of energy is still astronomically high. Strategically, we are not addressing our national energy challenges as a security issue.
While there is increasing urban poverty, the majority are rural based, tilling their land since agriculture has become uncompetitive over the years. They live on less than a dollar a day half the livelihood of a subsidised cow in France.
The poor’s only possession is their land but they also need access to information and ideas in order to harness their environment in a sustainable way through their modest means as a community.
The rural poor need to know that Kampala is not “a land where dreams automatically become a reality.†If poor people sell off their land then what? They jump on a boda boda to Kampala to start a business. What is the failure rate of business in Uganda? 90% of all start-up businesses collapse in their first year.
The social effect of this rate of failure alone is a public policy matter rather than a rule. NAADS which recently became the vehicle to carry the President’s Bona Bagagawale burden was a consequence of this observation that agriculture was a strategic sector that needed more than lip service.
However, many Ugandans like development partners rightly have concerns over the ability of NAADS to actually deliver the required services to the smallholder farmers since the project has been swamped by many political actors with linear rather than strategic interests.
Where are the land reforms? You cannot easily develop agriculture with the current level of land fragmentation in rural Uganda.
We also cannot allow the rural poor lose their only possession, land, to the privileged few unless there are enough factories in which their children will provide labour as a source of livelihood.
There are not enough homes in urban centres for the rural poor and there is no welfare state for those who fail to break through to be cushioned. In other words, we need a more coordinated policy approach rather than this uncoordinated movement of resources in the public and civil service.
The writer is a political analyst