Rationalism and prudence must precede public decision making..

Rationalism and prudence must precede public decision-making  

In these precarious times the question of whether rationalism and forethought are duly exercised by Government when making long-term decisions impacting on citizen’s welfare is debatable. Media reports recently revealed that MPs on the Public service and Local Government Committee were advocating for reinstatement of Graduated tax abolished in 2005, arguing that abolition of graduated tax had created a huge funding gap and massively constrained operations of local governments due to a revenue shortfall.

It was recalled that government used to collect over Shs 80billion before G-tax was scrapped and graduated tax alone had contributed 80% of local revenue to most local governments. Government replaced this tax with the local services tax and an annual Graduated tax compensation to districts. However, local government officials lament that the tax compensation cannot meet their expenditure and the amount transferred is well below the revenues generated by G-tax. This in turn adversely impacts on their ability to deliver quality social services to their people.

The Local Government Finance Commission noted a while back that only 5% of district and local budgets now come from local sources. Transfers from central government to districts are mostly conditional grants meaning that priorities are pre-determined from the Centre. Hence there is limited flexibility in the use of such grants and decision-making based on local priorities is equally limited. Further, the substitute taxes approved by parliament in 2008 mostly failed to meet the needs of local governments. The hotel tax boosts larger population centers but provides little income for towns and villages with few if any hotels. The local service tax works well with salaried people but raises little revenue from rural peasant populations.

Essentially, potential local revenue sources available to local governments are very limited in the funds collected or do not respond to the unique needs of communities. The questionable timing of abolishing the G-tax towards the 2006 presidential elections was considered by many a popularity gimmick aimed at appeasing the electorate, and time has proved that abolishing G-tax was decided without rational aforethought.

On the other hand, in 2009 the President announced government would start funding patriotism clubs in schools. A number of schools across the country started the clubs. Last month however, Lt Col. Henry Matsiko, national coordinator for patriotism secretariat, revealed that lack of funds has crippled many school programmes only a year after its launch. Mr. Didus Ngaya, the president of Jinja SS Patriotism club said that since inception the government has never given them funds, making it impossible to preach the patriotism gospel.

These scenarios demonstrate a significant disconnect between decision-making processes and actual implementation, which spells trouble for those charged with implementing government programs. Matters are worsened when policies directly impact on citizens’ welfare but implementation is frustrated by poor planning hence thwarting development interventions.
Similarly, the 1998 Land Act established a Land Fund to compensate absentee landlords and resettle those made landless by government action. However implementation has been mired by bureaucracies and delayed funds. More peculiar is that there are no comprehensive guidelines stipulating management of the Fund. This undermines transparency and accountability over how the Fund will be effectively monitored and leaders held accountable over it’s utilization.
The Land Act also provides that the accounts of the Land Fund shall be audited by the Auditor General who will report to Parliament. Further, the Uganda Land Commission shall submit to the responsible Minister bi-annually, a report on management of the Land Fund who will inturn submit progress reports to Parliament annually on the Funds’ performance. Whether all these provisions are being adhered to remains a mystery to the public who as the primary stakeholders deserve to be informed on utilization of the Fund.
Equally, the Government in June launched the national Job Stimulus Programme through which youth will obtain training and access funding for entrepreneurship to solve unemployment. From media reports, out of Shs44.5billion the Finance Ministry allocated towards Job creation, sh25b would be for the Youth Entrepreneurship Venture Capital Fund, sh3.5b to equip youths with business management skills while sh17b will offer market spaces for youth to engage in manufacturing and processing. Oddly, although funds are currently being expended, no clear policy guidelines exist detailing utilization of the funds. Considering the financially constrained times we’re living in, its high time government exercises rationalism when making long term decisions bearing on poverty reduction. Only posterity will judge whether citizen’s interests were duly put at the forefront of decision-making.