Ugandans
This is the kind of reasoning that defeats me on this so called Ugandan,
Read this statement and I directly quote You import Ssekabaka Mutesa into
your story as if he were the accounting officer at Mengo or that he had a
duty to check the books. That is as a cheap a shot as they come. Now that
is a very good argument. You see when Uganda government gets corrupt, Israel
Kintu blames only the minister of finance and he has never blamed Museveni
of corruption.
Yes to him that makes sense, a very reason the reasoning defeats me.
EM
On the 49th
Thé Mulindwas Communication Group
"With Yoweri Museveni and Dr. Kiiza Besigye Uganda is in anarchy"
Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi
"Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni na Dk. Kiiza Besigye Uganda ni katika machafuko"
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Israel Kintu
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:13 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: {UAH} [KINTU, MULINDWA, KHOLO] BY MAY 1966, BUGANDA KINGDOM WAS
PENNILESS; DEPOSED MUTESA DESTINED FOR PENURY
You were itching for a way in, weren't you? You have pushed this story many
times before and you had no takers. You believe that the cause of the 1966
crisis was financial. You do realise that it is your opinion and no more? It
is not worthy much in my view for it lacks objectivity as it is based on a
very subjective agenda. You import Ssekabaka Mutesa into your story as if he
were the accounting officer at Mengo or that he had a duty to check the
books. That is as a cheap a shot as they come.
You say that officials at Mengo extended themselves loans from the Buganda
Treasury, which concedes the point that they accounted for the money hence
your point is lost on me. You then make accusations that your alleged
financial mismanagement was fueled by the relationship between KY and UPC.
That argument is all over the place but to give it some relevance you
mention the Munster Report. What are you on about? The financial
relationship between Buganda administration and central government was spelt
out in Schedule 9. Your interpretation of that schedule will always be to
downplay it and I do not think that many lawyers will agree with you on that
slight of hand.
I don't know about your expertise on interpreting statute. It does not comes
across as informed for you do not cite any precedence or relate to the
administrative law.
You accuse Mengo officials of nepotism as if this was unique at the time.
Have you looked at the Tooro, Bunyoro, Busoga and Ankole officials of that
same era? Academics normally prefer making comparisons as a backdrop before
pronouncing themselves. Well? If you haven't, it was the practice which was
re-introduced by Museveni, namely one checks whether they is a relative that
can do the job before considering outsiders. At least unlike Museveni, they
did not create jobs for relatives and friends or turn thieves into senior
army officers and ministers.
You are full of it, what exactly was it that central government subsidised
outside the strictures of Sch 9? You are becoming another Mulindwa in that
anything where the law is silent you make up your own story then fish around
for argument to make it relevant in your view.
The showmanship in you that you are informed by your P4 grounding needs
revision otherwise, why should I waste my time dealing with arguments you
picked up in P4? Was your teacher an authority on finance or politics?
To make all this the more interesting you have reintroduced Buyaga and
Bugangaizi. I guess your intention is to recruit other people into this
discussion and good luck but please always bear in mind that Buganda and
Bunyoro did not have demarcated borders. This is some nonsense from the
colonialists and their Christian converts doing their business. Why didn't
they resolve this matter before handing over the instruments of
independence? Why did they hand this nonsense to Uganda, which had nothing
to do with the history of Buganda and Bunyoro? For some reason you are
gloating that it is good they did because it helped kill off a noisy Buganda
administration that was proving to be a thorn to central government. Whether
that is the neo-colonialist in you or something else I would want to know.
If, as you said, you are researching on the history of Buganda Kingdom, I
suggest that you act more honestly by asking direct questions and solicit
the assistance of anyone able and willing to help you, who you should
acknowledge in your dissertation. Otherwise whatever you are pushing is
becoming exceedingly tiresome. I have no urge to assist you beyond this.
IK
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM, PATRICK OTTO <[email protected]>
wrote:
Mr Mulindwa/Kintu/Muzigu/Kholokolo,
1/8 To fully appreciate Kabaka Mutesa's financial predcament in exile from
1966, we have to look back at the fiscal sources of the 1966 fiasco that led
to that exile. Let me try to give the facts as I was made to understand
them in my P4 civics classes. Initial troubles centred on the financial
position of Buganda, leading to protracted wrangles between Entebbe and
Mmengo over the interpretation of Article 1 of schedule 9 of the 1962
constitution (See pp. 173-4 1962 Constitution at compatriotto,
<http://www.scribd.com/doc/20262240/Uganda-Constitution-1962>
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20262240/Uganda-Constitution-1962). The Central
government sought to deduct from its grants to Mmengo additional revenue
accruing to Buganda from graduated tax on non-Africans, rents received from
public land, leases to urban authorities etc.
2/8 Earlier on, the Relationship Commission (Munster Commission) had laid
out the means through which the central government would maintain firm
financial discipline over local authorities but curiously, Mmengo did not
think that those stipulations applied to Buganda insisting that its
relationship with the centre was special and different from that of other
local authorities. This (mistaken) view was largely informed by the
leverage Buganda had over the UPC government, having eased it into power
through the UPC-KY alliance. In spite of that, though, AM Obote is
remembered to have insisted that, "we refuse to sign a blank cheque to the
Buganda Government".
3/8 For all its feeling of being special, Buganda was however not assisted
by the never-ending financial misdemeanours by the Michael Kintu ministry
(Kintu was the Katiikiro until he was deposed in 1964 after Buganda lost in
the referendum over the "lost counties"). While Buganda had £1 million in
its coffers by the end of 1958, this had dwindled to a mere £465,000 in
1960. In 1963, it was in the red by £226,863.
4/8 In 1965, the Planning Commission of the Buganda Government warned that
the Kabaka's government was on the brink of bankruptcy and that the
ministers whose nepotism had reached new limits were the worst offenders.
The report also sent out danger signs on the state of morale of the Buganda
civil service which it warned, had reached a very low ebb. Another report
of a committee led by a Makerere academic, DP Ghai warned that the feeble
control by the central government on public expenditure in the kingdom had
resulted in a perilous financial situation at Mmengo.
5/8 In 1965, Buganda finances were already in a considerable overdraft but
even then, Mmengo went ahead to craft a budget that right from conception,
suffered a deficit of £430,000, all this on top of a sum of £200,000 loaned
internally to key officials at Mmengo for personal use.
6/8 Through all this, the services that had been transferred to the Buganda
government as a federal authority were being heavily subsidised by the
central government. Even in the face of that reality and evidence of
financial indiscipline, Mmengo wanted the payer of the piper not to have
anything to do with calling the tune: the Kabaka Government insisted that in
spite of Central government subsidies, Mmengo was entitled to spend
according to its own policies and legislation. Entebbe on the other had
insisted that it was not obliged to subsidise schemes over which it had no
control, particularly in light of reports of serious financial impropriety
on the part of the Kabaka Government.
7/8 All this tussling was happening against the backdrop of the pending
resolution of the thorny question of the "lost counties" (Buyaga and
Bugangaizi) of Bunyoro; which the 1961 Constitutional Conference, attended
by Buganda, was supposed to be resolved by a referendum to be held by the
central government on a convenient date not earlier than two years after
independence, i.e., after 8th October 1964.
8/8 Thus the stage was set for a serious political stalemate between
Entebbe and Mmengo......the rest is....as much of history as it is hysteria.
Lance Corporal (Rtd) Patrick Otto
"THE SAME HEAT THAT MELTS THE BUTTER HARDENS THE EGG"
--
--
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2441/5317 - Release Date: 10/08/12
_______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet
UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
