It is that season again, especially in concern that National Resistance Movement (NRM) is trying its best to fit a new demographic and look like its sincere with their policies towards them. That’s what they do, when a new front and a opposition is fielded. This time the NRM and President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni are working hard to be viable for the Ghetto.
The Minister in Charge of General Duties in the Office of the Prime Minister Mary Karooro Okurut have written the piece in New Vision Newspaper, which was published yesterday. Today, I am breaking down the vital parts of this. As I have done similar in the past.
On the Ten-Point Programme:
“These are the very same issues that motivated NRM’s liberation struggle, and formed the original blue-print of its governance agenda once it emerged victorious in 1986. Indeed, the restoration of democracy to enable popular political participation, the building of an inclusive, integrated self-sustaining economy to enable equitable access to economic opportunities for all, and the fight against of all forms of corruption that eat away at the State’s ability to provide social services were all high-ranking action points on the NRM 10-point programme” (Mary Karooro Okurut, 2020).
The first breakdown can be read in my old piece from 2014:
This one here describe the shortcomings of the NRM and their lacking results in concern of that. The sort of issues, the NRM will never tell. A year later I made a newer and a fresher edition.
This is the second breakdown of the Ten Point Programme:
Here I could easily assess that the NRM only could after 29 years in power say they had achieved 2,5 points. Which is a disgraceful attempt of doing their flag-ship operation and their mission for governing.
Now, I will go off on two themes from the Minister and address them. First her statement in the piece, than some evidence and my little comment. After those, I will end with a short final thought. Just take a look.
Statement today on HIV/AIDS:
“In terms of social outreach, the biggest beneficiaries of President Museveni’s bold awareness campaign against HIV/AIDs in the early 90s that won him international acclaim were the poor and uneducated, who were either ignorant about the causes of the disease or unable to afford the scarce and expensive treatment at the time” (Mary Karooro Okurut, 2020)
“The severity of HIV/AIDS was driven home to Museveni even before he came to power in 1986.50 Within months of taking power in Kampala, Museveni’s first Minister of Health, Dr. Ruhakana Rugunda, was sent to the World Health Assembly in Geneva where he announced the HIV epidemic facing the country.51 This was in marked contrast to the attitude of other African leaders when confronted with the first hard evidence that HIV/AIDS threatened an epidemic” (…) “The donor community clearly played a role in this process. UNICEF was present at the inauguration of the NCPA and, in January 1987, the World Health Organisation sent a mission to lay the groundwork for cooperation with the government. In February, an issue of the Health Information Quarterly was published documenting the severity of the epidemic, which was followed by the publication of articles in the international press. That month, a second WHO team arrived, including Robert Downing who had played a role in identifying the presence of HIV/AIDS in the country, which assisted in drawing up a five-year action plan, published on 2 April 1987. This formed the basis for a donor conference organised by the Ministry of Health and WHO in May 1987 and the launching of the first AIDS Control Programme in Africa, which was based within the Ministry of Health. Donors pledged $6.9 million to fund it through its first year, with $14 million for the following four year” (Dr. James Putzel – ‘‘HIV/AIDS and Governance in Uganda and Senegal’ May 2003).
Comment: The donors brought this, the donors paid for the HIV/AIDS. Yes, the state was positive to do it and tried to forge a plan. So, the NRM has done a lot here and the numbers are getting better. Both with the amount of people dying per year and the progress of more people getting the treatment they need. But that would not be possible if the donor community, Multi-National Aid Organizations and the UN stepped in to intervene. The NRM would never say that, they would take the whole credit. Just like the Minister is doing and that is insincere. Like the GoU footed the whole bill. PREFAR states this: “Uganda has almost met its HIV resource need for the current (2014/15) fiscal year, with an estimated resource gap of only US$10-12 million (not including household financing sources). Under both scenarios, where the value of estimated available resources is assumed as constant over the next five years, the financial gap grows steadily over that period. By FY 2019/20, the resource gap under the NSP scenario is US$346 million, or an additional 60 percent of total estimated available resources (Figure 7). For the same year, the resource gap for the 90-90-90 scenario is US$409 million. In other words, the total value of committed resources for FY 2014/15 will only meet 62 percent of the total resource need under the NSP scenario and 58 percent under the 90-90-90 scenario by FY 2019/20. Over five years, the total resource gap will amount to US$964 million under the NSP and US$1.09 billion under the 90-90-90 scenario“ (Koseki, S., T. Fagan, and V. Menon. 2015. Sustainable HIV Financing in Uganda. Washington, DC: Futures Group, Health Policy Project, P: 9). So, we can see the lack of funds needed to fund the works still are coming elsewhere from. The state still lack it, but the Minister wants to take the credit for that.
Today’s UPE statement:
“So were the beneficiaries of Universal Primary Education. In spite of the challenges, the now more than two-decade policy has been able to grow literacy levels in the country, from about 57% in 1997 when it was introduced to now an impressive 76%, according to the Uganda Bureau of Statistics” (Mary Karooro Okurut, 2020).
In the Ministry of Education, early NRM it was 13,7%, while the rise in budget facilitation in 1998 it became 24,7%. By the time of 2017/18 it turned down to 11,37% and by 2018/19 it declined to 10,87%. While UBOS claimed this not so far ago: “However, the education facilities including classrooms, teachers’ houses and libraries have not matched the upsurge in the number of pupils. In 2004, provision of classroom space remained an enormous challenge. Table 2.2.2 shows that, only about half of the pupils had adequate sitting space” (UBOS, 2006).
Will not dig deep into this one. Even at one point during the last two years, the President said. If you wanted your kids to succeed with their education, send them to private school. Therefore, the state has given up this project. It is to costly and the state doesn’t want to invest in it. They tried to a point, but somewhere they didn’t want to foot the bill or continue to fund the expensive school programme for all citizens. She cherry picks the good numbers, but not showing the reality of what the state has done. It is like they are living on past glories. Because that makes the NRM look better today. Which it doesn’t, because it has given up on the UPE. At least not worked sincerely to deliver it.
Enough of this nonsense from the NRM. Therefore, do yourself a favour and aluta continua. Peace.
Mary Karooro Okurut – ’The NRM is no stranger to the Ghetto’ 27.01.2020 link: https://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1514072/nrm-stranger-ghetto