![]() |
|
LOCAL GOVT: Kabwegyere |
Last Wednesday Parliament went on a short recess after having approved the creation of another 20 districts. two more on the waiting list bringing the total number of districts to 78.
To Ugandans who were around at the time of independence in 1962, the number of these districts is truly mind-boggling considering that we had only 18 districts then. It is true the population has increased but Uganda has not changed either in size or configuration. On the contrary, with the recent fast improvements in communications by radio and mobile phone, it is arguable that the rationale to create more districts has receded rather than increased.
The creation of each new district means that the country will be saddled with greatly increased expenditure on the salaries, allowances and retirement benefits of Chief Administrative Officers, District Councillors, Chairpersons, Speakers, members of District Land Boards, District Service Commissions, District Tender Boards and d
istrict
ministers. These include the members of the district executive committees and the district army of public functionaries like clerks, book-keepers, store-keepers, drivers, messengers, askaris and other hangers-on.
There will also be a lot of capital expenditure to construct new district headquarters and purchase of office equipment, furniture and fittings. Finally, each new district will generate at least one woman MP, bringing the size of Parliament from 305 to 325 or 327 MPs!
There has been no objective study or assessment undertaken by experts to justify the proliferation of districts to double their number in less than 10 years from 39 in 1995 to 78 today! There has been no audit of the national production or productivity to show that the creation of these districts leads to better or increased production and poverty reduction.
On the contrary, Government is pursuing a centrally directed poverty eradication programme whose results are yet to be a
ssessed
and evaluated.
Judging by what is known from the past figures, the production of our two main cash crops, cotton and coffee, has not increased anywhere near the peak levels it attained in the 1960s.
On the other hand, the percentage of the poorest Ugandans namely, those living on sh2000 or less per day has increased from 34% to 38% over the past few years. Nor can the creation of these new districts be justified on the grounds that they are providing training grounds in the science and practice of responsible democratic local self-government. They are not doing so because virtually all the funds they use are provided by the Central Government!
Apart from Kampala, most of the other districts have been collecting less than 10% of what they spend from locally generated revenue.
The powers of the Central Government over their budgets, the making of bye-laws and the raising of local dues as enacted in the Local Government Act are such as to leave them
little
or no leeway for innovation.
Indeed, many of these districts are so lacking in local revenue that some of them have been petitioning the Central Government to take over responsibilities that should be theirs simply because they have no money to run them themselves. An example is Mukono District, one of the more prosperous and populous, which nevertheless petitioned the President that the maintenance of some roads be taken over by the Ministry of Works, Transport and Communications.
Some of the districts have been based partly on sub-tribal considerations. Thus the former single district of Bukedi must be broken up to provide separate districts each for the Ateso, Jopadhola, Banyole, Badama and Bagwere. One may therefore argue that one of the perhaps unintended consequences of this exercise will be must be to enhance ethnically-based sentiments, thereby weakening the cohesion of the people and national unity.
If, as it is always argued, the motive
and
reason for the creation of all these districts is to take services closer or nearer to the people, there is a better alternative to attaining this objective at little or no extra cost to the taxpayer. Under the Local Government Act, all subcounties (LC III) have been made into bodies corporate that can sue or be sued, that can own property and that can employ local staff - all on their own.
Therefore, if all we want is to take services closer to the people, there could be no better way of doing so than by decentralising from the 39 districts we had in 1995 to Gombolola Councils.
Extension staff like agricultural, veterinary, health, education, forestry and other officers could be posted and based at the sub-county headquarters, thereby making them vibrant and important centres of activity that they used to be, but are no longer so. If we did this, we would be able to take the services even closer to the people, but without incurring the additional expenditu
re on
salaries, allowances and other benefits already mentioned, and without adding to the size of Parliament which was recommended by the Ssempebwa Constitutional Review Commission to consist of 120 MPs, but will now have 327.
We would also be saving on the capital expenditure necessary to build new district headquarters and furnish their offices. So, why arent we following this cheaper and better route?
Because to do so would not satisfy the vocal local politicians who are expecting to eat all the new posts at the district level. By creating the districts, Government and Parliament have taken the easy way out for earning political and voting support.
The bribery that has been exercised on Movement MPs has so clouded their judgment and decision making that, in the words of the East African newspaper of July 11-17, should the Government draft a Bill outlawing Parliament, Movement MPs would be sure to pass it into law!
Published on: Tuesday, 26th July, 2005 |
