Wednesday, 2 April 2003

Parliament met at 2.34 p.m. in Parliament House, Kampala

PRAYERS

(The Speaker, Mr Edward Ssekandi, in the Chair.)

(The House was called to order.)

COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIR

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, you know we started our third meeting of the second
session some time back but there is still a lot of business, which has not been done and this is the
last meeting during this session. It is important that we transact as much business as possible. I
am, therefore, appealing to various committees to complete their reports so that the business,
which is pending before us does not elapse because of prorogation of Parliament. I have also
received complaints about lack of attendance in committees. Please, I appeal to you to attend the
committee meetings so that the work of the committees is expedited.

In the Strangers gallery, we have our children, the pupils of Sir Apollo Kaggwa Boarding Primary
School in Old Kampala. You are most welcome our children! You also realise that we agreed that
our proceedings should be covered live and, therefore, if they are covering you and your
electorate sees empty seats, this may prejudice you. So please, try to be here so that your
electorate knows that you are attending.

MR AGGREY AWORI: Mr Speaker, during the deliberations of the National Movement

Council, one of the statements made by His Excellency the President and Commander-in-Chief of
the armed forces was to the effect that officers from the UPDF are not supposed to participate in
politics. As a matter of fact, he refused them to contribute during the deliberations. I see one of
the officers here. I am just seeking -(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, I don’t think this is the opportune time to deal with
what took place in NEC and the Movement Conference, which have just ended. I think we should
leave this. I was not there, but what I have read in the papers indicate that recommendations were
made. It was reported that these constitutional recommendations were going to be taken to the
Constitutional Review Commission to be considered. The Constitutional Review Commission is
not going to change the Constitution.

The purpose of the Constitutional Review Commission is to traverse the country asking the 24
million people what they think about the performance of the Constitution. They may opt not to
change the Constitution, or they may say change the Constitution. The commission is going to
gather and put these views in a document on behalf of the 24 million people, as
recommendations. If it is found that it is necessary to amend the Constitution, it is this Parliament
that is going to amend the Constitution.

Therefore, I do not really think that we should take the recommendations as the law. The current
Constitution allows the UPDF to be represented in Parliament, and until that law is changed, do
not say, “because the statement was made, therefore, we should not see members of the UPDF”.
Honourable members, we should know that there are people suggesting that the Constitution
should be amended. Yes, they are entitled to say so, but when these amendments come here, we
shall follow the procedure laid down in the current Constitution. There is no other way the
Constitution can be amended without following the procedure laid down in the current
Constitution. I think you should not bother the honourable members from the UPDF who are
here. They are here constitutionally.

DR STEVEN CHEBROT: Mr Speaker, many of us are in receipt of some of the documents of

the meetings, which were held by NEC members in the districts. And the recommendations that
they made to NEC or to those who came to Kampala are at variance with the recommendations
that were read in the NEC meeting and the Movement Conference meeting. In regard to all these
problems, what do we do?

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, we are not here to consider the minutes of the meetings
of the NEC conference. But if the NEC conference has made recommendations, these
recommendations will go to the Constitutional Review Commission. From there, they will go to
the Executive, because it is the Executive, which set up this Constitutional Review Commission. I
also suppose they will write a white paper, and in case they find it necessary to amend the
Constitution, the Constitution will be amended by presenting to us a bill. It is only then that the
Constitution will be considered amended. This is the same thing on any other matter.

MR MICHAEL MABIKKE: Mr Speaker, I rose yesterday on this particular point, and you did
not rule me out of procedure. I had risen to raise a very important matter - (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: I do not want to interrupt you but I think, honourable members, whatever is
raised after the communication from the chair must be a very urgent matter. Should you have a
very important matter that you think should be exhaustively dealt with, I think it is better that you
bring a fully-fledged motion and we deal with that matter. This time is to allow you to raise
something that requires an urgent treatment. It is not any other general matter.

MR MABIKKE: This is also very urgent, Mr Speaker. I would like to start raising this issue by
quoting the Constitution, Article 79, which clearly spells out the functions of Parliament. I would
like to quote verbatim.

“Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament shall have power to make laws on any
matter for the peace, order, development and good governance of Uganda.”

Sub-section (3) goes further to state that “Parliament shall protect this Constitution and promote
the democratic governance of Uganda.”

Mr Speaker, as you are aware, on Friday, 22 March 2003, there was a very important
development in Uganda. This was a verdict of the Constitutional Court on petition No 5, 2002.
The Constitutional Court of Uganda gave its judgement, which was as follows: I would like to
just quote one particular aspect.

“After considering the submissions of council for both Parties, the authorities cited the relevant
laws and we reached a unanimous decision on each of the above six issues as follows - and this is
important for our case today. “Section 18 and 19 of the Political Organisation’s Act do render
Political Parties and Organisations non functional and inoperative”.
Judgement number three says that: “Section 18 and 19 of the same Act in effect establish a one
Party State in favour of the Movement Political Organisation, not system, contrary to Article 75
of the Constitution.”

Mr Speaker, as Parliament, the onus and power lie entirely on us to guide the public. The general
public is very confused about the verdict of this Constitutional Court petition. It is important that
we come out to guide the public and even guide the organisations that are affected by the same
provision. With this kind of judgement, Mr Speaker, I would like to seek your guidance - ( Mr
Lukyamuzi rose_) can I finish?

THE SPEAKER: Yes, please, do.

MR MABIKKE: Mr Speaker, having read to you sections of the Constitutional Court verdict,
should we take it that with this verdict, the current Movement Political System has been toppled?
Should we take it that with this court case the status quo has been determined? That having
declared the Movement a Political Organisation, should we say that we are now operating under a
multi-party political system?

You are all aware, Mr Speaker, that I am a member of a very vibrant political party in Uganda,
the Democratic Party of Uganda. With this constitutional – (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: I think you need guidance. You are talking about a case, what is the case
number?

MR MABIKKE: Constitutional Court Case No.5 of the year 2002.

THE SPEAKER: You are saying that the court ruled that the Movement political system
provided in the Constitution is a political organisation. If that is the case, the way you enforce a
judgement is to seek the execution of the judgement; this Parliament cannot execute a judgement.
What you can do is to go to court for an order to enforce a judgement of court.

MR MABIKKE: But, Mr Speaker, you are a lawyer yourself – (Interjection) – no I am not

allowing information as of now. Let me conclude – (Interruption)

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (Mrs Janat

Mukwaya): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I seek a clarification because he refused my
information. I want to find out whether my honourable colleague is not aware that the Attorney
General had already informed court that we are going to appeal against that judgement. Today,
we have requested for stay of execution of that same judgement in court.

MR MABIKKE: Mr Speaker, - (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Why are you really involving Parliament in this delicate matter? Because, as
you can see, the Constitutional Court said there is a Movement political system. Now you are
saying the judgement read that the Movement political system is a political organisation. The
Government is supposed to be run under a Movement political system. What do you think is the
consequence of this?

MR MABIKKE: Thank you very much for that information, honourable minister. I think the
Constitutional Court judgement establishes the status quo until a similar court, competent as the
Constitutional Court, rules otherwise – (Interruption)
THE SPEAKER: Now what is the status quo? Because when you say that is the status quo, it
means a Political Party is running the Government and others are not in. I think there is need to
interpret it. I do not really think Parliament itself will be in position to deal with this matter. But,
as I have said, the best way to reap the fruits of judgement is to seek for execution of the
judgement. Then we shall know how this will be executed so that the proper thing is obtained.
Because we are laypersons here, we are Members of Parliament, we are the ones who make laws
and it is the court to interpret and enforce its judgement. I think let us seek a remedy from the
proper court, namely, the Constitutional Court, which made that judgement.

MR ODONGA OTTO: Most obliged, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much. I just had a
reasonable issue to raise after the Communication from the Chair to this august House. On
Monday, while watching television, on a channel called Super Sports - this is what I would call a
very big national humiliation to see the five young Ugandans representing the country in the
world cross-country championship in Switzerland in a place called Lausanne. It was somehow a
very big embarrassment to this country.

Why would I say this? This is just on two grounds: I had wanted to understand thoroughly
through this House whether the team, which represented the country at an international forum had
been privatised. The last minute trip of the three Ugandans and one who brought us a silver medal
to this country survived missing a flight until they got handouts from an Air Travel Company and
several businessmen were giving Shs10,000, Shs30,000 as if someone was on drip dying because
there isn’t much money for buying enough blood; and yet the representation these particular
Ugandans were going for was to be on behalf of the country.

Now, to make matters worse, when this young Ugandan, a Kalenjin called Boniface Kiprop
earned the country a silver medal - they were giving the awards to the individuals. He got a silver
medal and the group got a bronze. When they were called to the platform to get the medals for the
country where they would sing the national anthem, it was a very big shame! First of all, they
were nearly naked; they did not even have a national jersey. In those stained attires of blue shorts
and white shirts was where – (Interruption)

DR KAPKWOMU NDIWA KAPKWOMU: Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you

honourable colleague for giving way. I actually witnessed a press conference, which was being
addressed yesterday when those young men came back. I had to ask a similar question. The
coach, the only Ugandan, who had accompanied the team, answered that all the clothes had been
kept in the dressing room. And at the end of the cross-country race, as they went to the finishing
yard, the people who were responsible for collecting the clothes and taking them to the finishing
yard actually forgot the kit for the Ugandans, and it reached there late. That is the answer the
coach gave at the press conference yesterday. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR ODONGA OTTO: Thank you for that information. Mr Speaker, my concern was that there
was even no national flag as they were climbing up to show that they are Ugandans. I thought
showing Uganda to the outside world of investors would have been a very good showdown in this
particular series!

I have passionate love for sports because I represented the Minister for Sports, and to see that
such becoming behaviours are becoming unbecoming - Mr Speaker, I would really expect your
office, at an appropriate time, to request the Minister of Sports to let us know who is responsible
for sending Ugandans abroad. Has it been privatised? Then why should they get medals on the
country’s behalf and not on their own behalf? Otherwise, we shall lose all our players to other
countries who are just ready to buy them with visas on those particular tournaments. Thank you
very much.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you very much, honourable member, but since I do not see the Minister
of Education, I do not know what the – (Interruption)

THE MINISTER OF STATE, PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (Mr Okot Ogong): Mr

Speaker, the matter, which is being raised by my good friend, hon. Otto, is actually very
important. But you all realise that the government has a full Ministry of Sports. We have
designed Sports Policy in this country and it will soon come to Parliament to be debated by
Members of Parliament. I think within that time, we should actually come out with a very clear
Sports Policy of our country.

I want to appeal to Members that when this policy comes on the Floor, we should give all our
views and concerns so that we come out with a very good policy. Now that you have raised a
very important point, I – (Interruption)

MR AWORI: Thank you, Mr Speaker and the honourable Minister for yielding the Floor. I
speak as somebody who has participated in international athletics on behalf of this nation. I also
speak as somebody who is familiar with the current situation.

I will also take this opportunity to inform my honourable colleague, Sam Otto, that this athletics
meeting he is referring to in Switzerland is actually a privately sponsored meeting of athletes who
compete for cash. It is not an international meeting of nations competing against each other as we
have in the Olympics or Commonwealth Games. Anybody can go there on his or her own to
represent him or herself. However, this does not mean that the country is totally excluded from
the onus.

Furthermore, it does not mean that the country does not support the athletes. In this case, as a
matter of fact, that medal my honourable colleague is referring to is given to you as an athlete;
there is no mention of your national athletics association, government or country per se.

However, I would like to support you that the government needs to take interest in supporting our
athletes. But the main thing there is that this particular meeting was a privately organised meeting
of athletes who could be sponsored, for example, by the manufacturing organisation –
(Interruption)

MR KASSIANO WADRI: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and I wish to thank hon. Aggrey
Awori for kindly accepting to receive this issue on which I am seeking some clarification. Much
as he said that the athletes went there in their individual capacities, but in the same event, national
anthems were sung and various countries that had people who participated had their flags flying.
Was it only the case for Uganda that the national anthem would be sung and that the flag would
not be there because these athletes went in their individual capacities? Can hon. Aggrey Awori
please enlighten me on that? Thank you.

MR ABURA PIRIR: Thank you Mr Speaker. On the point of representation of the country, I am
one of the veteran athletes for this country. There are three events where a country caters for the
athletes: the Olympics, Commonwealth and International Games. These three are the ones for
which the Government gives the attire. For the other competitions where individuals are invited,
the country does not cater for their uniform.
On the issue of the athletes going there naked, it is a blame for all of us that the government has
never released enough money to cater for the sporting activities in this country. Even though
there is a sound policy on the ground, up to now, the council is still begging here and there to
hold even the league. About going outside individually, every four years, there is a uniform the
government gives the athletes for that game.

About the national anthem of any country that brings honour to their country, it is sung only if
you win a gold medal. Remember in 1972, when the late Akii Bua won a gold medal, there were
other Ugandans who also won silver medals, but only the gold medal winner is honoured by the
national anthem of their country. Thank you.

MR OKOT OGONG: I thank you very much for that information. Mr Speaker, sport actually
gives a lot of honour to our country. I would like to appeal also to Members of Parliament that
actually, the budget of government is presented to Parliament and it is Parliament that provides
money for sports. So, when we present this budget to the Budget Committee for consideration
and also on the Floor, I would like to urge you to support and give more money to sports. I thank
you very much.

MR KEN LUKYAMUZI: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I am standing on a very

important point regarding the procedure of today.

Yesterday, in my capacity as a Member of Parliament representing Lubaga South, I stood up to

express concern over a motion that I have floated together with my colleagues from Mukono
District. This regards the need to review the forest reserve allocations done in the recent past.
You signalled me with an impression that the motion would feature on today’s agenda, but when
I look around I do not see it. How can I continue deliberating when my wishes are disregarded?
(Laughter)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, I do not think I said what you have quoted. I told you
yesterday that we have many motions and business that is not on the Order Paper. However, I
said that soon the Business Committee is going to meet and make a programme and the pending
business, including your motion, will be the subject of discussion. I intend to convene a meeting
of the Business Committee on Monday. That is the position.

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

QUESTION 10 OF 2003 TO THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES

MR WILLIAM NSUBUGA: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Hon. Badda will be coming –

(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: No, unless you have instructions from him, how do you stand in for him? At
the same time you say hon. Badda is coming –(Laughter).

MR WILLIAM NSUBUGA: Mr Speaker -(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: I quite appreciate you come from the same environment but unless you have
instructions from him, we shall deal with it next time.

MR FRED BADDA (Bujumba County, Kalangala): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and the House at
large. The question -(Interruption)
THE SPEAKER: Incidentally, where were you? (Laughter)

MR BADDA: I was getting more information to help me ask supplementary questions. I

apologise for being late.

The question goes to the Minister of State for Fisheries. It says –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: You just say out the number of the question.

MR BADDA: Question 10 of 2003.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FISHERIES (Dr Fabius Byaruhanga): Thank you, Mr
Speaker. Honourable members, the gazetting of landing sites is the responsibility of the
Commissioner for Fisheries, as stipulated in rule 12 of the Fish Quality Assurance Rules of 1998.
The rule states:

“The Commissioner may approve official landing sites, which meet such conditions as may be
prescribed in guidelines issued by the Commissioner.”

The guidelines issued by the Commissioner for Fisheries are found in the Manual of Standard
Operation Procedures -(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable minister, in future I intend to have many questions directed to
you. I intend to list about ten questions all on one day, so that you answer all of the ten questions
at once. The question is: "would the honourable minister inform the House when he intends to at
least gazette one landing site as a fish market in the district?" We are interested in whether you
intend to do that, and when.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FISHERIES (Dr Fabius Byaruhanga): As of now, two
landing sites in Kalangala District, namely Mulabana in Bujumba sub-county and Mwena in
Kalangala Town Council, have been gazetted. Hopefully in the near future the government is
going to develop Lutoboka and Kitubulu. Once they are developed they will also be gazetted.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you very much.

MR FRED BADDA: The supplementary question is: could the Minister tell us when these
landing sites were gazetted? How do the fish dealers know that these landing sites have been
gazetted so that they can pass on their commodity to be approved by those landing sites?

THE SPEAKER: Could you answer the question? Please, answer it if you can.

DR FABIUS BYARUHANGA: The two landing sites were gazetted on 10 January 2003, after
the due process.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you.

MR AWORI: Mr Speaker, I am wondering whether the minister answering these questions is the
responsible one. There are two items here; that is the landing sites and the fish market. Landing
sites do not fall under his portfolio; they fall under the Minister of Works, Housing and
Communications - (Interruption) - Yes, they are responsible for that.
Gazetting the market place is what would fall under his ministry. Mr Speaker, if I am wrong in
my assumption, we have a minister from the Ministry of Works to clarify that matter.

THE SPEAKER: The clarification, therefore, if it is as you say, should have been directed to the
person who asked the question. The question was framed and directed to the minister and,
therefore, he is answering it.

MR WADRI: Mr Speaker, one thing that we need to appreciate is that many Ugandans get their
animal protein from fish –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, would you like to ask a supplementary question to the
one asked by hon. Badda?

MR WADRI: Yes, thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I was just trying to make a small
preamble so that the minister gets the point quite right. As I was saying, many Ugandans depend
on fish for their animal protein because they cannot afford meat. However, of late you realise that
when you go to the shores of Lake Victoria, especially along Mayuge District, you find that
certain parts of the waters have been sealed off. The ordinary fisherman is barred from carrying
out fishing activities –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, you have a point but the question is in respect of
Kalangala District and, therefore, any supplementary question must be directed to the same. If
you have your own question, you could always frame it, and then it will be answered.

MRS MUKWAYA: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I note that for some of us our ears are
being “environmentally disturbed”. Could members use the microphone from a distance, as being
too close to it is not “environmentally friendly”?

MR WADRI: Mr Speaker, I thought I was still on the Floor and still had the chance to ask the
question? Whether it is Kalangala or Lake Victoria, we all stand to benefit from the fishing
industry and from the question that I want the minister to clarify on.

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, I have said that you have a valid point but I think we
have to be relevant. The question was in respect of Kalangala District. That is the main question
and, therefore, if you ask a supplementary question, it must be supplementary to the answer given
in respect of Kalangala District. However, if you have a different question, you could frame it,
hand it in and it will be answered.

MR WADRI: Most obliged, Mr Speaker.

MR WILLIAM NSUBUGA: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to thank my colleague who
raised this question. I would also like to ask a supplementary question regarding the net size
required for fishing. Of recent, most fishermen use sticks, approximately one foot long, to
measure the required fishnets and to avoid being interrupted on the way to the market.

I want the hon. Minister for Fisheries to actually tell us whether there is a gazetted or
recommended net size to be used on Lake Victoria. If we do not have that information, our people
will keep on buying the undersize nets. I have been contacting some officials from the ministry
and they are not informed themselves. So, I urge the minister to come up with the required size so
that our people can really be sensitised, be informed and buy the required size. This business of
using sticks to measure the required length is not called for. I thank you.
DR FABIUS BYARUHANGA: By statutory instrument, the smallest net size allowed on Lake
Victoria is five inches. At the same time, there is a statutory instrument that defines the minimum
size of fish to be caught.

In the case of the Nile Perch, it is 50 cm, and in the case of the Nile Tilapia it is 25 cm. The
fishermen will tell you that using a five inch mesh size net will lead you to catch fish that is
smaller than the allowed smallest size. Therefore, we have been recommending to the fishermen
that when they want to catch Nile Perch they should use a minimum mesh size of seven inches.
And usually the Tilapia and the Nile Perch are not in the same waters. So, one could use the five-
inch for the Tilapia in the shallow waters, and then use the seven-inch for the Nile Perch in the
deep waters.

MR WILLIAM NSUBUGA: Mr Speaker, I would like to tell the honourable minister that the
information he has is not on the ground. You should, perhaps in the coming budget, pass a vote
for publicity such that this information could actually reach the people. Our people continue to
buy the under-size nets because they are not informed.

You have said the five inches’ net is allowed and you even went on to say that the six inches’ net
is also allowed. You ended up by saying that the seven inches’ net is also allowed. So, Mr
Speaker, you should actually sympathise with the fishermen. You cannot actually segregate that,
“here I am casting my net to catch Nile Perch”; you cannot! Fish keep moving. So, it is better you
come up with a recommended size, which could be moderate, to stop catching the young Nile
Perch and even catching the grown-up Tilapia. Otherwise, if we keep on speculating that when
you go to these waters you target the Nile Perch –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: I think the question should have been; “What measures are you going to take
to prevent people buying illegally caught fish?” That is the question.

MRS MUKWAYA: Mr Speaker, I represent Koome, which neighbours Ssese and also Buvuma.
I do not agree with my colleague that our fishermen do not know what to do. Our fishermen know
where the Nile Perch is; that is in the deep waters. Normally when you are riding back home in
the evening, you find that those who want Tilapia have targeted close to the shoreline. So, these
people know.

Probably it is only in Buvuma where people do not know what to do. But my people in Koome
know. They deliberately go to use wrong nets for different purposes, but at least they know what
they should be doing.

MR MABIKKE: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. As you may be aware, my constituents
enjoy very special links and bonds with the people of Kalangala. I have got a fishing village
called Gaba and my constituents normally leave Gaba to go and fish deep in the waters of
Kalangala.

My constituents have actually brought me very disturbing information, to the effect that they have
established from fisheries officials that the fishing grounds of Lake Victoria are about to be
privatised. Mr Speaker, I would like to use this opportunity to seek clarification from the minister
himself. Is it true that the waters of Lake Victoria are going to be privatised? If so, how are you
going to do it? Thank you very much.
THE SPEAKER: I think this question need not be answered now because not long ago hon.
Kezimbira Miyingo explained it. This issue was raised here and we have on record an answer in
respect of the same.

MRS NYOMBI: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to know from the Minister; how does he
intend to prevent the smell that comes out of the bones, the so-called fillet? It is really disturbing
people in Kayunga, and I believe even the people in Kalangala have the same problem. Thank
you.

DR NKUUHE: Thank you, Mr Speaker, I would like the minister to clarify this to me. Recently I
was in Kisumu on a different mission, and learnt from the people of Kisumu, and Kenya
generally, that their fishing industry is almost closing down. I am wondering, what is happening
to our fishing industry? I thought it was secure but they assured me that the pollution is so much
so that actually, a lot of factories in Kisumu have closed down. Could the minister reassure us
that what is happening on the Kenyan side is not going to happen on the Ugandan side?

MR OMODI OKOT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The question of gazetting landing sites is the
prerogative of the Government. It is true that government gets money by way of taxes arising
from these areas. What I want to know from the minister is; what are the expected services that
the government should give to such areas? At the moment we pay tax and do not get anything
from it.

As far as medical amenities are concerned, people do not get services. Even mere control of
cleanliness of landing sites is lacking. So, I would like to know from the minister: one, what
constitutes a landing site? Two, what are the services, which the Government should give to such
areas, that have been proclaimed landing sites? Thank you.

DR CHEBROT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to know from the minister whether the
nets he is talking about are standardised for the whole region, that is the countries in East Africa?
Are they the same for Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania? What I do know is that the fish do not carry
any flags, they do not carry any passport, they are only moving up and down between the
countries. So, are these net sizes standardised for the whole region or is this only applicable to
Uganda?

MR BADDA: One other question, Mr Speaker, concerning the nets. In Uganda, nets called
double nets are manufactured and are on the market. But when fishermen in Kalangala buy them
and start using them, they are caught. They are then told that these are illegal nets, although they
are manufactured in Uganda and are allowed on the market. Is it illegal for fishermen to use these
nets that have been legally manufactured in Uganda?

THE SPEAKER: Can you answer the questions, please?

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FISHERIES (Dr Fabius Byaruhanga): Mr Speaker, there
are quite a number of questions that the members have raised. I will answer them one by one, but
very quickly.

What she called the bones, or the scrap, is in richer countries turned into fishmeal. After they
have taken off the fillet, they push the bones into another machine, which grinds it into fishmeal
for animal feed. Unfortunately, as you know, we are still very poor and these things still find a
market for human consumption in our population.
To make it worse, in fact it is not just this scrap but also the skins that are consumed. The skins
are rolled and smoked and people eat them even outside our borders. They are even exported to
other countries. Now that you have mentioned this environmental problem, I will try to discuss it
with NEMA and we see what to do.

Two is about our fishing industry. Kenya in the first case has only six percent of Lake Victoria
but they over-invested in processing facilities. Without smuggling they cannot actually feed their
factories enough, and that is the biggest problem there.

Of course you have also mentioned the problem of pollution. It could be affecting their small
fisheries industry, but we carry out residue analysis on our lake every three months, and we
collect samples every three months. I can assure you that the state of our water is still good.

Three, what are the expected services at the landing sites? I wish to clarify to hon. Omodi that
actually the central government does not get any money from these landing sites. Whatever fees
you see being collected at landing sites go to your local government. Unfortunately wherever you
go, and this has been the complaint from the local authorities, although they collect this money
they do not seem to plough anything back. Whichever fish landing site you go to, they are
begging the centre to provide this and that. The local government should, in the first place,
provide all these things.

What should one expect on a landing site? On the ones we gazette, even when it has been
developed by the private sector, we insist on the following facilities:

1. Good and sufficient toilet facilities.

2. A shade with an easily cleaned and raised platform to enable fishes sorting, weighing and
loading.
3. Clean water source.
4. An office for the inspector.
5. A landing jet facilitating the docking and transfer of fish.
6. Clean containers for the transfer of fish.
7. A good wastewater drainage system.
8. A fence around the facility where the fish is received.
9.
We also wish to have a fisheries inspector, if the site is going to be receiving fish.

About the net size, it is standardised. There have been efforts at harmonisation, especially with
the recreation of the East Africa Community, and the net size for Lake Victoria is harmonised for
the three East Africa countries. Even the size of fish to be caught is standardised. For the Nile
Perch, the minimum is 50 centimetres and the maximum is 85 centimetres. That is harmonised for
the entire East Africa. But as you will note, in Uganda we have more than one lake and they do
not contain the same type of fish. For example, we allow 4-inch nets on Lake Albert because
there are some small fish there. We allow 4.5-inch fish nets on Lake Edward and Lake George,
but we only allow a minimum of 5 inches on Lake Victoria, Lake Kyoga and Lake Wamala. I
believe that is what arose. Thank you very much.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you very much, honourable minister.

MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE REPORT ON THE

NATIONAL BUDGET PERFORMANCE FOR THE FIRST HALF OF THE FINANCIAL
YEAR 2002/2003
THE VICE CHAIRPERSON, BUDGET COMMITTEE (Mr James Mwandha): Mr Speaker,
when we presented our report, especially with regard to the impact of the 23 per cent budget cuts
on the various sectors of Government, some of the committees had not reported to the Budget
Committee. Since that time, the Committee on Social Services has submitted its report, and I
think it is important that I report to the House the impact on the sectors, which are covered by the
particular committee, for members to appreciate the gravity of the cut.

Mr Speaker, with regard to the Ministry of Education, the following activities and programs were
affected: They are so many and I will not read them all. I have requested for this additional report
to be circulated. But I want to mention some of them.

Allowances other than salaries are being affected. Travel of persons overseas and inland, staff
training, office expenses, telephone, telefax, Internet and e-mail services, maintenance of office
equipment, vehicles, buildings and grounds, fuel, lubricants and oils and material supplies and
manufactured goods. Twenty three percent of the materials will not be delivered to secondary
schools and other institutions.

Contributions to international and local organizations are going to be affected. Participation in

other programs, for instance, the fourth and fifth residential training programs and other programs
will be affected. Committees, councils and meetings, medical treatment abroad, industrial training
and payment of living out allowances under the business, technical and vocational education,
were scaled down.

Out of the 12 private universities, only two will receive funding. The regional education sector
review workshop will not take place. And of course, inspections of NTCs, PTCs and other
schools will be scaled down quite considerably to the extent of at least 23 percent.

With regard to Mbarara University, this will affect the students’ welfare, including food supplies,
maintenance and repairs of students’ halls of residence, recreation, games and sports
programmes. Academic programmes such as teaching practice for teaching students, science
practical lessons, trips, community/field-based training, research projects and students’ faculty
allowances were all scaled down. The construction of a physics laboratory and stocking of the
book bank and library were suspended altogether.

When it comes to Makerere University, students’ living out allowances, computer charges, school
and books and special faculty allowances, travel and other expenses are going to be affected. Due
to financial constraints, the sustainability of the commitment control system went into jeopardy
since the upkeep of the students was paramount, despite the inadequate funds committed.

Mr Speaker, we have a table there. I hope members are now receiving this particular document,
which gives you the situation in terms of figures, and I will not go through those figures.

When it comes to the Ministry of Health, the material supplies and manufactured goods such as
medical drug supplies and their related services for Community health, clinical services and
national disease control programmes are going to be affected.

The general repair and service of hospital equipment, allowances other than salaries, travel and
transport of persons inland and abroad, recreation, welfare and entertainment, office expenses,
internet and e-mail services, vehicle operations and maintenance, fuel and lubricants, research
projects and participation and other programmes are all going to be affected.
When it comes to Mbarara Hospital, patients are only provided with lunch, yet meat and matooke
were deleted from the menu. Maintenance of vehicles, buildings and grounds were affected.
Purchase and service of hospital equipment, utility bills of water and electricity accumulated to
the tune of Shs 52 million, inland travel of officers on official duties and meetings, supply of
stationery and cleaning materials were all affected. Again we provide a table to give you the
picture in terms of figures.

Under the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, the affected activities include:
Delayed compensation of Ebola victims; partition of the offices of the Ministry of Gender,
Labour and Social Development; travel of persons inland and abroad; staff training; recreation;
welfare and entertainment; office expenses and supplies; operation and maintenance of vehicles;
allowances other than salaries for entitled officers; installation of internet and local area network
for the ministry and failure to buy food for children in the remand homes. Can you imagine, Mr
Speaker!

Annual subscriptions to international organisations, inspection of work places and monitoring of

ministry activities, are all going to be affected. Again we give a table to show this in terms of
figures.

Mr Speaker, some of the money that was recovered from the cuts, one of the beneficiaries was the
Prime Minister’s Office. And, at the time when we reported, the Prime Minister had not showed
us the way he used the money that was allocated to him from the 23 percent cut. Now, the office
of the Prime Minister has now submitted to our Committee, and the funds released to that office
was utilized as follows:

(a) Disarmament exercise in Karamoja took Shs 1 billion. This money was passed to the
Ministry of Internal Affairs to implement her activities under the disarmament
programme.

(b) Food for Northern Uganda took Shs 0.96 billion. Office of the Prime Minister has so far
received Shs 0.9 billion in three equal installments to be used for procuring and
distributing of foodstuff for internally displaced persons in camps of Northern Uganda
and Katakwi District.

(c) Other activities in the office of the Prime Minister took Shs 0.57 billion and this has been
used. I gathered it had been planned that this money would enable MPs from the war-
ravaged areas to receive Government assistance in form of benefiting from a pool of
transport coordinated by the office of the Prime Minister. However, this scheme never
took off and funds were never released to the office of the Prime Minister. So, Sir, those
are the additional areas affected by the budget cut.

With this information, we have only now the committees of Defence - of course they were the
beneficiaries, but still we would be interested to know how the money they got was utilized.

The Committee on Finance, Planning and Economic Development, the Committee on Natural
Resources never reported and the Committee on Public Service and Local Government also never
reported. So, we still do not know to what extend these various ministries were affected by the
budget cuts. I thought I would better provide that information to enable members who may be
interested in some of these sectors to contribute appropriately. Thank you, Mr Speaker.
THE SPEAKER: Thank you very much.

MR WAGONDA MUGULI (Buikwe County North, Mukono): Mr Speaker, I wish to thank

you for offering me this opportunity to make a contribution to the report of the Budget
Committee.

First and foremost, I would like to thank the Budget Committee for the work very well done. I
think they have proved that the parliamentarians who passed the Budget Act had a point to make.
Indeed, the import of the Budget Act was to involve Parliament so that Parliament is never taken
by surprise. I think to a reasonable extent, that object has been achieved.

In examining the report of the Committee, a number of issues have come to light, and one of
them is that although the Ministry of Finance has shown its full co-operation, there is still a lot of
room for improvement. And one of them is to ensure that the routinely presented certificates to
the Floor of this House in support of bills of various ministries actually are certificates worth their
salt.

I note from the report of the committee that despite the offering of the certificates supporting the
availability of funds for the IGG for the Leadership Code, these funds were actually not available
to the IGG for timely implementation of this vital Act.

The report has also exposed that our economy, despite all efforts to make it a self-sustaining
economy, has not quite got there, and that is why you see, Mr Speaker, that when the Budget
Support Grants are withheld, the budget is definitely adversely affected. This is made even worse
in terms of service delivery with the measure to reduce across the board by 23 percent.

Mr Speaker, I was an accounting officer in several ministries. One of the objects of introducing a
cash budget was to instill discipline in all ministries. Secondly, the introduction of the mid-term
expenditure plans was to ensure that all ministries would have a reasonable degree of
predictability in the execution of their plans. But the Ministry of Finance unilaterally cutting
across the board, this has affected the service delivery as has been ably demonstrated by the Vice-
Chairperson of the Committee.

Now, when it came to the appropriation of the proceeds of the budget cuts, vital institutions were
left out. We are aware about the outcry labeled against the Judiciary. The Executive has raised
concerns time after time that cases have not been disposed of timely and, definitely I would have
thought that that was a sector that also required urgent attention. Unfortunately, this was not to
be. I would therefore like to appeal as a Member of the Committee that oversees - the Legal and
Parliamentary Committee - that the Judiciary as the third arm of Government must be given due
consideration even where the resources are deemed to be scarce.

Mr Speaker, we are a banana republic, there is no doubt about that – (Interruptions)- you will
have your time to say what you want to say, but I think we are a banana republic! And in doing
so, I think we should be bold enough to appreciate that we still need external support to balance
our budget. I am however constrained by some of the utterances by some members of the
Executive who have even told the donors to pack their bags and go, and then they come around
and say, they are short of funds. I think we should be bold enough. I have read in the paper that
we are getting oil, but even if we get oil, we shall still need allies in the world. America is rich
but when it has come to fighting the Iraq war, they are looking for support even from weak
countries like Uganda. So, we should not become arrogant because of a prospect of maybe
sometime striking oil in the future.
Mr Speaker, I have noted also from the report that there are omissions in reporting, particularly
on appropriation-in-aid. In my view, the Ministry of Finance cannot escape its cardinal
responsibility of issuing treasury instructions to the affected ministries to ensure that they account
to Parliament. I would therefore like to appeal to the committee to ensure that actually they obtain
compliance on this matter.

Finally, Mr Speaker, as we go to discuss the coming budget, and as for sure we shall be
examining a number of bills which are on the Floor of the House, we shall expect that the
Ministry of Finance will from now onwards utilise the exactitudes, which they have been
presenting on the Floor of the House less extravagantly. I thank you, Mr Speaker.

MS MARY AMAJO (Woman Representative, Kaberamaido): Thank you very much, Mr

Speaker. I thank the Budget Committee very much for the job well done. I would like to ask a
specific question related to the Ministry of Education. When we were approving this budget,
there was development budget for the Ministry of Education for the construction of at least four
PTCs to be upgraded into core PTCs. I think those PTCs include Lodonga TTC in the North,
Busubizi TTC in Central Uganda, Ngora, St. Aloysius TTC, Ibanda in the west and I think
Shimoni.

Observations on the ground indicate that there has been no physical development in those TTCs
since the budget was implemented. You can tell the difference between what is a core TTC and
what is an ordinary TTC. I have also taken note that even with the supplementary submission
today, there has been no mention about the capital investments on core TTCs being cut. What is
submitted today is more on the services to core TTCs, which have been affected by training, like
inspection. My question, which goes to the Minister of Education, is therefore, what is happening
to the TTCs, which were supposed to be up-graded? Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR PATRICK APUUN (Bokora County, Moroto): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not

appreciate the presentation by hon. Mwandha, the Chairman of this Committee. In his first
remarks, he said some sectors have not been covered. I would like to refer, particularly, to some
sectors, which I want to be very specific on.

Normally when we present reports on the budget to the House, I do not see where we feature to
discuss money, which has been given by our development partners in relation to some areas in
this country. I am referring to one sector in Karamoja. We have a Ministry for Karamoja Affairs
in the Prime Minister’s Office and we have also within that Ministry the European Union, which
has donated to us some money. That money should have been reflected so that we could see how
that money has been utilized.

In the first phase, Mr Speaker, the European Union gave us 614,060 Euros and the project has
just been completed; it has had a lot of impact. We have had very many schools in our sub
counties in Karamoja region. We also have so many health centres in Karamoja region.

In this second phase, we have received so many problems, Mr Speaker, and I would like to put
this matter to the Minister of Finance to rectify the anomalies, which have arisen. It is our
concern that in the May 2002 budget to January 2003, European Union gave us 117,752 Euros.
This phase has not been implemented. It is just going to be implemented. But the problem has
arisen and I would like investigation on this matter.
I would like, with your permission, Mr Speaker, to table a report which I have just received,
which most of my colleagues have also received, from Andrew Foyle, the Chief Programme
Advisor of Karamoja Programme Initiative Unit (KPIU) operating in the Ministry of Karamoja
Affairs. This matter has arisen and it has blown off all our expectations in Karamoja. There are a
lot of crises; the KPIU is in stalemate. The staff members have been suspended; the chief
programme advisor is also in the process of being sacked!

So, Mr Speaker, because of the fraud, which has been detected in this sector, it has made the chief
programme advisor unstable and some people in the Ministry of Finance are in the process of
dismissing him. I am sure the Minister of Finance has been sidelined and this actually has a very
bad impact to our Government. I do not know what the European Union will see on this one if
this very little money, which is supposed to benefit the poor communities in Karamoja will be
curtailed by the disappointment of the European Union.

So, Mr Speaker, because of the fake payment vouchers, fraud was detected to the tune of
20,107,000. Therefore, I would like to put this on the Table for investigation so that the Minister
of Finance, the Minister of State for Monitoring, the Minister of Integrity can come in and
investigate this matter and bring - (Interruption)

MR JOHN AACHILLA: I thank you my honourable friend for Bokora County. The information
I want to avail to the House is the concern of the districts of Karamoja over the desperate state in
which Karamoja Projects Implementation Unit (KPIU) is about to be buried. Right from the start,
the achievements of the KPIU have been that capacity of local governments, especially local
government III’s to undertake bottom-up planning. These are the basics of the system of planning
that we are undertaking.

The provision of specific services and investments, according to the district development plans,
were also initiated under this project. Capacities of local governments to deliver and manage
services, to facilitate out-sourcing of services from the private sector were also initiated.

With all these frustrations encompassing the KPIU, some people have been stealing the funds.
The European Union funds intended to facilitate development in Karamoja are being “eaten” by a
racket of a few people to the extent that even the Chief Programme Officer, as my honourable
friend has said, is about to be fired in order to allow other people to eat. So, it would be very
important that as we discuss this budget, some of these anomalies of corruption should be
exposed to the Minister of Finance. I thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR APUUN: Mr Speaker, I thank my colleague for expounding this point on the extent to which
Karamoja is suffering. It is suffering from poverty, insecurity, illiteracy and backwardness. So, it
is only through these donors that we can be uplifted to the status civilization has taken place in
this country.

Mr Speaker, as I said, I would like this matter to be probed. I would like to table this report to
Parliament for the appropriate ministers to take action and report to this House so that we can
know to what extent we are going in Karamoja. This is the report, Mr Speaker. I will shortly lay it
on the Table.

CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA (Ibanda North, Mbarara): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving
me this opportunity (Interjections).
MR APUUN: Mr Speaker, as I said earlier on that it is our concern, the elders from Karamoja
have written a letter to this effect because they are extremely disappointed by some people who
are sidelining our ministers in their offices in the form of commissioners. These commissioners
are in the Ministry of Finance; they are sitting on that desk. I think there is a desk for monies we
receive in this country through donors – (Interjection) – I will name them with your permission,
Mr Speaker. I would like to name one – (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: But honourable member, have you not finished your contribution?

MR APUUN: Mr Speaker, I think the Minister of Finance knows his staff. He can bring us the
report here – (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, to who was the letter addressed?

MR APUUN: I beg your pardon?

THE SPEAKER: Whom is the letter addressed to?

MR APUUN: The letter is addressed to the European Ambassador, His Excellency, Sergad
Hailie, with copies to hon. Peter Lokeris, Minister of State for Karamoja Affairs, hon. Gerald
Ssendaula – (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable member, this is a letter which is written to somebody and we do
not know whether what is there is correct or not. Don’t you think we should leave it? Because it
is written to the Head of Delegation, European Union and just copied for information. Do you
have to read it?

MR APUUN: Mr Speaker, it was just the concern of our people to show the extent to which the
elders in Karamoja have expressed their depression on this issue. This is what I wanted to express
here. I thank you, Mr Speaker, for that matter.

CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA: Mr Speaker, this Budget Committee document is headed

“BUDGET PERFORMANCE FOR THE FIRST HALF OF 2002/2003 FISCAL YEAR”. In my
view, this is one of the areas where Members of Parliament should be spending a lot of our
energies in order to dissect and get the anatomy of what is happening, because everything else
hinges on the good or poor performance of the economy.

The other day when we were discussing the report of the ad hoc committee on UCB, all ministers
were here. Now I cannot see anybody from the sector of Agriculture where 80 per cent of our
people derive their livelihood. What does this tell us, Mr Speaker? It tells us that matters that are
critical to this country are not given the sufficient attention that they deserve – (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable Leader of Government Business, can you tell us why the ministers
are not here?

THE MINISTER, OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER (Prof. Mondo Kagonyera): Thank
you, Mr Speaker. I frankly and honestly cannot tell you why the ministers – except Dr
Byaruhanga was here, I do not see him. So I do not know why the Minister of Agriculture is not
represented – (Interruption)
THE SPEAKER: Hon. Prof. Kagonyera, it only happened that they mentioned the Ministry of
Agriculture because another member will stand and mention the other minister. The question was
general; why is it that they are not here?

PROF. MONDO KAGONYERA: Mr Speaker, there is an honourable member who is trying to

put words in my mouth. The Front Bench is supposed to be very well represented. In my
considered opinion, there is very reasonable representation now. We obviously could do better,
Mr Speaker. I therefore take your concern once again and I am going to raise it with my
colleagues. Thank you, Sir.

CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA: Mr Speaker, everyone of us here ought to know that matters
concerning the performance of an economy, especially ours that needs daily monitoring like a
patient on a drip, is very critical. I can see hon. Isanga Musumba alone here. He is a technical
economist. Maybe they are up in the gallery. But they normally sit around. I do not see anybody!
These are very important matters honourable members.

This economy has been growing from 1986 to 1995/1996. There has been what economists call
real growth, and real growth is the GDP minus population growth. There has been some real
growth from 1986 to 1995/1996. From 1996 to today, most of the figures are flowery, and I will
explain. They are flowery, defective and to say the least, they do not reflect the reality on the
ground, or most of the statistics.

From 1986 to 1995, we saw FDIs (Foreign Direct Investments) on the increase. You would move
in the countryside and see rehabilitation of many valuables that constitute an economy that is
recovering. You would even see in the conception style the way of life. All these were discernible
aspects of a recovering economy from 1986 to 1996.

This single digit inflation, which the planners of this country have been telling us, is a defective
inflationary rate, Mr Speaker. Defective in the sense that if you subtract the food crop component,
the inflation inevitably goes in double digit. So, what does that imply economically to the
majority of our people, the 80 per cent who live in the countryside? It means that the majority of
our people are producing goods and services whose terms of trade are not in their favour, year in,
year out.

The terms of trade of goods and services of the majority of Ugandans are not in their favour, and
I can further explain that this is shown by the absence of what they call “saving deposits”. It is
even shown here in the committee’s report – Saving Deposit rate - 2 per cent. An economy that
has been growing at least at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, next to China in the entire globe,
cannot have a saving rate of 2 per cent; there should be an increase at least!

I want to point out that everybody knows, including those who have never gone to school, that
there has been a continuous depreciation of our shilling vis-à-vis these hard currencies, especially
the dollar. Of course, the Iraqi-US War has exacerbated it. Nevertheless, even the variable of the
war is out of the question; there has been a continuous depreciation of our shilling vis-à-vis the
dollar. But it will be interesting for you to note that in spite of - because, when a shilling
depreciates versus a hard currency, which we use to get all consumer goods into the country;
guns, vehicles, suits and everything, you notice that there is no inflation. That inflation remains
more or less, and that is a very serious defect in an economy -(Interruption).
MR JOHN BYABAGAMBI: Mr Speaker, I thank the member for giving way. I would like to
inform my colleague and neighbour, actually from Ibanda North, that it is only in Uganda where
the dollar is appreciating. All other countries in the whole world, the dollar is depreciating.

CAPT. GUMA: Engineer hon. Byabagambi, I thank you for your information – (Interruption)

MRS ZIIWA NANTONGO: Thank you very much. I rise to be clarified or to seek some
procedural clarification. From the way I read the report, there are many technical issues, which
the minister or the ministry has not answered. They remained hanging questions even in the view
of the committee. I am wondering whether the minister would be courteous to answer them
before the members can debate. Because, as you can see the honourable member proceeding, this
question of the performance of the petroleum sector is mentioned, but the minister has not given
this House the performance of that sector, which is very important.

Even when you look at other sectors, like the foreign exchange in terms of the performance
within the foreign exchange bureaus - really, when is the minister able to react? Because, if you
react at the end, we are also bound again to come back on the Floor, and maybe get – and yet we
should have got a written explanation.

THE SPEAKER: Well, the question was asked yesterday and the minister was here. But the
question is, when the committee wrote this report, did they have an interview with the minister to
answer some of the queries? Did they write the report without any minister’s comments about it?
Therefore, if there are queries being raised here and yesterday I addressed the same issue: It was
said that he was going to answer after he has heard the points raised. But I think this report must
have been written with the minister’s input. He must have been interviewed.

CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA: Mr Speaker, I wish to wind up with a few remarks. I want
members to take full cognizance of an economy, which they say has been growing and which to a
certain extent I agree, but up to 95/96. The saving deposit rates remain miserably low. That it is
an economy where the medium of exchange, that is our shilling, is continuously depreciating and
yet they tell us that inflation is constant! That is a very serious pointer to a deep-seated problem
in an economy, either in the fiscal or monetary instruments. It is a very serious pointer in respect
to fiscal and monetary instruments of the Government that a shilling depreciates but inflation
remains low.

I have also said that the FDI’s (Foreign Direct Investments) increased up to 1996 but we have
seen a sharp decline of real investors. Star Supermarket on Jinja Road closed the other day and
they sold its assets; it was liquidated. It should not be supermarkets, honourable members; it
should be real investment. If we are talking about 80 per cent of our people relying on land, cattle
keeping and tilling of the land, how many factories in this country are geared towards the raw
materials that we produce, so that various factory centres can act as pull and push factors for
more production? You see, people selling cassettes and they are called investors; which
investment! This is trade or commerce but not investment.

I want to finalize because I can see more interruptions from hon. Chebrot. Mr Speaker –
(Interruption)

DR CHEBROT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to inform the honourable member that
according to the UNDP Report, the Human Development Index for Uganda dropped by about 40
per cent from the year 1996 up to now. The Human Development Index, which is a very clear
measure of what is going on in the economy, has dropped by over 40 per cent.
CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA: You can hear the dropping of the Human Development Index.
That is a very serious indication, Mr Speaker. I hope the hon. Isanga Musumba and his technical
people have heard.

When you move in the countryside of this country, which some of us have done anyway - we are
not Kampala people -first of all, there is a problem with the entire economy policy package.
There are certain problems because World Bank comes and tells the government that you work
on the road. It is necessary, but can that road fight poverty? This Tirinyi road, for how long has it
been there - this Tirinyi road going to Pallisa and so on? That road on its own or in unison with
other factors can never fight poverty. When I go to Mbale, I always see the grass thatched houses
by the roadside. Maybe better houses showing higher standards of living and more income deep
in the villages. But I think there is need to re-examine the entire economic package policies.

This question of peoples coming in here and running supermarkets, selling televisions and so
forth, and you call them investors! There is a problem, Mr Speaker, of externalization of hard
currencies. Of course, this is a problem of capitalizing and liberalizing the capital account.

There are companies in this country, like there is one single company, which externalizes per
month an average of 20 million dollars. What do they bring in, in return, if the planners of this
country are really serious? Because if I get Shs 100,000, first of all I can load it on my mobile:
The question is, what is the net contribution of the mobile to an economy that is 80 per cent
subsistence?

I think there is a big problem. Once the Uganda shilling has accumulated, they go to forex
bureaux, buy dollars and externalize them back to their home country. No amount of dollars, I
can assure you, will be put in the market that cannot be sucked and taken outside the country. I
am told that the foreign exchange reserve is around 900 million dollars. All those will be sucked.

What about our import component? To import goods and services that we require for this country
we need dollars, but what is the composition of those imports; what are the items we are
importing into the country? Are they imports that help the forward and backward linkages? As I
used to hear sometimes in the past, about 15 years ago, they are televisions, rotten vehicles,
second hand shoes and fridges! What is our import component that drains our dollars out of the
country and taken to different centres in the world where we need all these things?

Mr Speaker, there is a very serious - in fact the report of the Budget Committee points it out on
page -(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: But would you like to suggest remedies on how we can go about these
problems.

CAPT. GUMA GUMISIRIZA: They point out, Mr Speaker, that the biggest single area where
Government gets revenue is what the committee report calls international trade. It is really
business, trading. The import of URA - of course it is also a very serious indicator of the
weaknesses of our local economy that about 90-95 per cent of what we require still comes from
outside economy.

I am not saying it was that, but every fiscal year I am seeing a progressive decline of what we
need from outside. There is a progressive decline of what we need as Ugandans, and a
progressive increase of disengagement of our goods and services that we require from outside. I
would be very happy but our import deal is on the increase and in fact it is about twice and a
quarter as much as our export component.

Mr Speaker, I should stop there and give other colleagues opportunity. I think that discussing the
national budget performance for the first half is an important area, and I think it deserves a lot of
attention, input, ideas and a lot of hearing and listening. But when the very people who are
supposed – look at agriculture in this report! In the first half it is allocated 1.9 percent. Of the
total result outlay, it is 1.9 percent and yet some people turn around and say, “Our economy is
agriculture”. It is agriculture indeed! It is not a mining industry; it depends on subsistence. But
what do we see in return in terms of funds put aside in order to stimulate that important sector
that is much sung about? Thank you.

MRS ANIM ANGUPALE (Woman Representative, Arua): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. I would like to thank the Budget Committee for their report and at the same time thank
the finance sector for cutting the budget by 23 percent, without the consent of Parliament.

I rise to give a general comment on the effect of the 23 percent budget cut of the 2002/2003
Financial Year, and I hope that this time we are going to have a proper channel in order to effect
the performance of the budget.

Mr Speaker, I would like to draw your attention to page two of the report. When you critically
observe the sectors that are affected, under Mbarara University, for example, you find that the
budget cut affected the teaching practice of the undergraduates. It makes me wonder whether we
shall graduate students from that –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, I think the minister should tell us the legal basis of that
re-allocation of 23 percent. That way, we shall be informed and get a remedy and also prevent its
recurrence in future. This is for general information.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, PLANNING (Mr Isaac Musumba): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. The issue of the 23 percent budget cut is that it was done by the ministries in accordance
with the law. It is a point of fact -(Interjections)
THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, I asked the minister to tell us the legal basis. Unless we
know the legal basis, we may not be able to prevent the recurrence. I think there is a problem in
the Budget Act that we passed ourselves.

In the Budget Act, we made a ceiling for certain things. They cannot be done. If government
wants to increase the budget, it can do so by three percent. If it is more than that, then it will have
to come here for approval. We also allowed ministries to re-allocate the approved budget among
them, so long as they consented. We never put a ceiling to this. It was just open. Once the budget
is approved, they can sit in Cabinet and say, “Okay, we had allocated this to the Ministry of
Education, but now there is an urgent matter in the Ministry of Works, so we need to change.”
The only rider we put there is that they should consent.

I think this is something that should be appreciated by us so that we find a cure to it. If we allow
government to change the allocations, we should put a ceiling to it. But that is what happened. I
do not know what the minister wants to say.

MR MUSUMBA: Mr Speaker that is exactly what I wanted to say -(Laughter). Section 12 of the
Budget Act generally allows for total supplementary. It says that Government can actually incur a
supplementary expenditure if it requires additional resources over and above what is appropriated
by Parliament. This provision is derived from the Constitution. It has its validity in the
Constitution.

Section 12(iii) does say; “Any re-allocation of funds shall be made in consultation with all the
affected ministries, departments, institutions or organisations.” That is to say, Parliament did
authorise, in keeping with the Constitution, government to make re-allocations.

Two, the Act went ahead to say that if this government wants to make re-allocations, all you have
to do is consult the relevant ministries, and that is what was done by the law. Therefore, if
members are unhappy with the provisions of the law, they have the powers, under the
Constitution, to amend the law.

THE SPEAKER: I think we need to revise that law.

MR MWANDHA: Mr Speaker, we are all aware of that particular provision. Indeed government
was in order to carry out these allocations without coming to us, but when we passed that law, we
never anticipated that government, within a very short time of, say, two months, would simply
change the budget around to the extent they did, of 23 percent. So, we looked at this and felt that
government did not do this in good faith.

To have done it within such a short time after passing the budget gives one the impression that
already they knew what they wanted, and they knew the amount of money they wanted to give to
Defence. “Let Parliament go ahead, pass the budget and then we shall come afterwards, use that
particular provision in the Budget Act and do what we want,” they must have thought. This is our
concern as the Budget Committee.

That is why we are coming up with a proposal, which we hope government will agree with, at
least I am sure that we shall get support from the House on this. That particular section should be
revisited so that at least there is a limit within which government could make re-allocations.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
MR WACHA: Mr Speaker, I do not know whether this is information or just a statement. Taking
into account the provision of the law, which has just been read to the House by the minister, and
directing our attention to this supplementary paper that was produced by the Deputy Chairperson
of the Budget Committee, I see a long list of items that were affected by these cuts.

I do not know whether the people who gave out these items were saying, “We accepted that all
these items should be affected by this budget cut, that these are not priority”. Are allowances and
salaries not priority in the Ministry of Education, or is medical treatment not a priority?

To me, Sir, much as we provided in the law that these various interest groups should be
contacted, I do not think the budget cut was done with their approval. I think it was pushed down
their throats.

THE SPEAKER: Well, the only point of information was to clear the minds of members that
technically, this was done within the law. There was no need, in making the re-allocation, to seek
the approval of Parliament. When we passed the Budget Act, we allowed it. Other details of
whether there was consent or not, is a different matter.

Therefore, with this information, we now know that this happened so quickly and that in future
we should not allow it. We should also put a ceiling like the one we put on the supplementary. It
should not go beyond a certain point. When we are discussing this, we should have it in mind. I
think that is the reason this information came up. As to how the consent was obtained is a
different matter.

MRS AANIMU ANGUPALE: Mr Speaker, the worst thing that could happen when one is on
the Floor of the House is when one is set with words and there are severe interventions. What I
would like to say here is that the situation is really pathetic and it is very terrible because of the
effect of the budget cut.

I would like to inform the honourable minister that as I was standing up to contribute, the
chairperson of my committee was also standing up. We have proof that the finance sector
instructed departments with some particular areas affected by the cuts. I have a photocopy of the
instruction but I think the right person to lay the document on the Table would be my
chairperson. If it is not with her I know it is somewhere.

Coming back to my point of chopping the funds for teaching practice for students, I would like to
caution the finance department that there are other sectors that are very important for somebody
to perform some particular activities, or particularly to graduate in this case, they need teaching
practice. Now we can assume that with lack of teaching practice, none of the students from
Mbarara University will graduate this academic year.

On page three, under the Ministry of Health, you will find that there was a general cut to repairs
in hospitals, and even repair of equipment was affected. To justify my point, I would like to draw
our attention to Arua Referral Hospital. In December 2002, when I was in that hospital, the
situation was really pathetic. The Ministry of Health closed the adult male and female wards
because they had some major cracks. Now adult patients are being admitted into the paediatric
wards, those are the ones for children, and you know the kind of sicknesses the mature people
normally go with when they are admitted. The children –(Interjection)- is it information? Mr
Speaker (_Mr Musumba rose_)

THE SPEAKER: You will be given time later, let her –(Interruption)
MR MUSUMBA: Mr Speaker, thank you. Let me clarify so that we do not debate from a
position of absence of clear information. The cuts were not across the board. There are areas that
were never affected by cuts; these are the protected areas. Some of these protected areas are, for
example, hospitals, universities, drugs, and wages. All these were not affected by cuts. Sir, that is
a point of fact.

MR KIBAALE WAMBI: Mr Speaker, the clarification I am seeking from the minister is that,
are we now discussing a paper that is false? Because I can see here the supplementary
information on the half-year budget performance in the sectors of health, education and gender,
and they have listed the very items the minister is talking of. So, it appears we are discussing a
falsehood.

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, what might have happened, which the minister is
perhaps not taking into account, is that it could be that certain votes were also affected by the 23
percent budget cut, even though they were not cut themselves. Those who are running those
ministries then had to adjust other votes so that the performance that would have been 100
percent becomes 80 percent. That is why we have that list. Those that were affected probably had
to borrow money from other items.

MR MUSUMBA: That is the position, Sir -(Interjection)- let me add that when somebody says
that drugs were affected, that is not true. But it is true that we cut allowances, which probably
made it difficult for somebody to go and administer health services or something like that. Since
they are intertwined, the explanation you have given is valid and true. But we did not cut certain
specific votes.

THE SPEAKER: Continue, honourable member.

MRS ANGUPALE: It is very important for the hon. Speaker to always do consultation with the
departments so that when we are debating here we come out with concrete evidence to support
our speeches. As I mentioned it, if my chairperson does not have that information, allow me to
present it tomorrow. I will lay it on the Table, because it is clear evidence that there were
instructions from the Ministry of Finance.

When we went for a workshop in the Ministry of Health, we questioned the ministry and the
answer was that the budget cut in particular areas affected the implementation of certain
activities. Today, on the Floor of the House, this is not clearly mentioned by the minister.

Mr Speaker, I was talking about the situation of Arua Hospital. Patients there have been mixed up
- the children and the mature people - due to lack of facilities for admission. I therefore hope that
in future, the finance department –(Interruption)

MRS MUKWAYA: Thank you very much, honourable colleague for giving way. I had no
intention of disturbing you, but you said you have a ward that has cracks in it and the district
decided to mix adult patients with children. I understand there is this facility, LGDP, which the
districts could use on items that they find are a priority. Why is it that Arua District Council does
not find it necessary to use this money to repair that urgent and needed facility for the district?

MRS ANGUPALE: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to inform my beloved minister that
Arua District Hospital is a referral hospital and local funds cannot do general repairs on that
hospital. That is why the whole Minister of Finance travelled to Arua to stop admissions in that
ward, so that the Central Government could do major repairs on it. If they were minor repairs, I
think –(Interruption)

PROF. LATIGO: Thank you very much, honourable member. Perhaps the minister should also
be informed that the President removed cost sharing from these hospitals.

MRS ANGUPALE: Thank you very much for that information. I believe if cost sharing were
there, the funds would have helped to do some minor repairs too.

Mr Speaker, I urge the finance sector, now that the budget process is being carried through the
bureaucracy, the same should happen when there are budget cuts. They should also consult
various departments so that some sensitive sectors like health and education are not severely
affected by the budget cut.

Right now there are no medical drugs in the sub-counties and when you ask the medical staff
what the problem is, they tell you there is no money. I do not know where the money went. The
question is left to the Floor of the House, for us all to find out where the funds travelled. I thank
you very much for giving me this chance to contribute.

MRS DORA BYAMUKAMA (Mwenge South, Kyenjojo): I thank you, Mr Speaker. I would
like to add my voice to those who have appreciated the work of the Budget Committee. I have
only three points.

The first point is to the ministry and the Executive. If the budget cut proposal had been done in
the right procedure, we would not be going on and wasting taxpayers’ money in this manner.
Parliament passes the budget and so courtesy demands that before any tax cut be done Parliament
should also be on board. We as Members of Parliament take security as a priority. I cannot see
any Member of Parliament who would vote against this if it were clearly explained. That way we
would also participate in this blame, which is going around.

I am calling it blame because eventually you will find that when you go to different ministries,
people are using the budget cut as a guise not to perform. Everything is being blamed on the
budget cut. Therefore, whatever has been cut has to be communicated clearly to the people so that
we do not have non-performance in this particular year. That is the first point.

My second point is on the issue of amending the Budget Act, section 12(3). I support this
amendment in the report where it states that Parliament should be consulted and the law should
set a ceiling on the allocation to be carried out with the approval of Parliament, in accordance
with accounting instructions.

Whereas it might be good for us to put this in the law, I think the most important thing is good
faith. We do have the law but in most circumstances, you find that there are efforts to find
loopholes to use not to consult Parliament. This is not healthy because we are partners in the task.

My third and last point is on the issue of the anti-trust legislation. This proposal came up even
when we were discussing the UCB saga. Whereas it might be good to have this legislation in
place to avoid monopoly, to curtail powers and also to ensure that we have a free and liberalised
market, I note that in most cases it is not even lack of a law of this nature that is hazardous to a
nation. I will give an example of the issue of the core-investor.
You find that this issue is being pushed even in circumstances where management is good, even
in circumstances where profit is being made! In those circumstances you wonder why there
should be a core-investor, if a particular entity has been doing very well.

The push for a core-investor is one push that will make us get more private monopolies.
Therefore, my argument is that political intervention in the supply and demand forces in the
market is what distorts the economy, and so this should be watched, and it should be stopped. I
thank you, Mr Speaker.

MS ROSE NAMAYANJA (Youth Representative, Central): I thank you very much, Mr

Speaker. I want to raise something concerning what the minister explained to be the legality of
the 23 percent budget cut. In the committee report, they said that government must explain the
reasons for donor reluctance. I believe that if the Executive initiates something and then
Parliament also approves it or is informed about it in advance, even the donors could see it as a
legitimate cut.

To this effect, Mr Speaker, I must say that actually, the National Youth Council budget was cut
100 percent. Ever since the cut was effected, the National Youth Council has never received any
money for operations. They receive wages but not money for operations, and wages are for staff
and not for the operations of councils.

To me, the most important aspect is accountability for the 23 percent that was cut. In the
supplementary information that has been given, it is indicated that over a quarter of a billion
shillings was released for the procurement of a Mercedes Benz, a Saloon car and one four-wheel
drive Station Wagon for the Prime Minister. Mr Speaker, I would imagine that this money is cut
to meet urgent programmes that come up. A vehicle is more of development capital. I would
imagine that the Office of the Prime Minister would budget for this in advance, other than
deducting from the 23 percent to buy these vehicles.

I will end with the issue of PAF. The committee also recommended that a report on the PAF
operations must be put before the House. Mr Speaker, one of the reasons this programme was put
in place was to cater for other people, particularly the youth and women. I have moved around in
my constituency and in many areas, the youth are complaining that they have never seen anything
to benefit from the PAF programme. So, I also beg the ministry to give us this report so that we
see how best all people could benefit from this programme. I thank you very much.

MRS DOROTHY HYUHA (Woman Representative, Tororo): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. I want to begin by thanking the chairperson for the supplementary report he has
submitted today, and I want to indicate here that the Social Services Committee handles quite a
wide sector. We could not get all the information in time, as you have seen from the submission.
However, I want to thank members for the spirit, support and speed in accommodating our report,
which was submitted.

I also want to thank the committee for the good work done on the report, and also thank the 6 th
Parliament, which came up with the Budget Act; although in certain areas the implementation is
proving difficult.

In my submission I wish to focus on page six, the Appropriation-in-Aid, as submitted by the

committee. The committee clearly indicates some institutions that are autonomous, self-
accounting and were allowed by law to collect and use revenue at source. Some of these sectors
fall under Social Services and I have some information, given what is submitted here, which I
thought I could share with Parliament.

I am perturbed by the conclusion on this section where the Committee says: “However, no report
has been brought to the Floor of Parliament as required by law.” I entirely agree with the
Committee, but we should understand that the implementation of this Act - you may have realised
that ministries, by giving financial implications on some of these bills, were gradually
internalising the law.

But when you move further to look at the conclusion where the committee says, “It was noted
that the transparency in collection and utilisation of Appropriation-in-Aid was still lacking and
the Committee considers it appropriate to invoke the sanctions of non-compliance with this
requirement”, I feel that this is a very strong statement. The Committee would have
recommended that it is high time, as we implement this law, the responsible ministries were
reminded to bring the report on this Floor. Mr Speaker, this implies that it ignores other laws,
which exist.

I want to address myself to some of these institutions, which fall particularly under education. We
have the Makerere University as self-accounting, Mbarara University, and Institute of Teachers
Education. These have been established by the University and other Tertiary Institutions Act,
2001. And within this Act, there are provisions which indicate that this statement, to some extent
other than the last end of the minister coming to tell us how they have spent, is not completely
true to say that there is no transparency in the utilisation.

When you read Section 41 of the University and other Tertiary Institutions Act, it gives the
powers to university councils of public universities to collect the funds and the powers to disburse
the funds. But as you go further, Section 62 (1) indicates how the minister responsible has to
approve the expenditures of these public universities within a period of three months before they
come to the end of the financial year.

When you go further, Section 62(3) gives the mandate to Parliament to approve these estimates.
And, Mr Speaker, it is on this note that I want to disagree with this statement, because in the
Budget Policy Statements of Ministry of Education - as Parliament, we have always received
statements from these institutions indicating appropriation, how much they expect to receive and
we pass it. For example, last financial year, Makerere University indicated to us that they would
collect Shs 15 billion.

When you read this law further, it gives the powers to the Auditor General to look into the
expenditure. So, I would feel that it is only a reminder that this section of the Budget Act which
has not been implemented –(Interruption)

MR MWANDHA: Thank you very much. Mr Speaker, this question of Appropriation-in-Aid,

we still have a lot of work on it because the people who collect the money in many cases are not
very willing to disclose the extent to which they receive this money. The Minister of Finance
himself came to our Committee and complained about one of the institutions, in fact Makerere
University, which the honourable member is mentioning, that he was not receiving the necessary
co-operation from Makerere University to disclose how much was being collected. This is
necessary because it will give some indication of how much more money Makerere University
would require on top of the amount of money they collect.
DR MATOVU BYATIKE: Mr Speaker, first of all, I have to correct the impression. I am no
longer the Chairman of the University Council, but I can state it categorically that every cent that
is being collected at Makerere is accounted for, and the Auditor General goes through all the
Votes. Each year the Ministry of Finance puts that in their report and the Auditor General looks at
it.

To say that there is no transparency, that appropriation-in-aid is not declared, is not true! I can
categorically say that the council looks at the finances and the books are sent to the Auditor
General for checking. That is not true, Mr Speaker.

MR MWANDHA: Mr Speaker, I wish my colleague, who once chaired the Council of Makerere
University had read Section 17, because it reads: “A Minister responsible for any Vote on
Appropriation-in-Aid shall make quarterly reports to Parliament on the manner in which funds
from the Vote are expended.” Quarterly! And the Minister of Education has never submitted a
report on account of Makerere University in spite of what the honourable Member is saying. And
this is the point we are making that these institutions responsible for appropriation-in-aid should
co-operate with the ministries concerned and disclose the amount of money so that reports can be
received in Parliament. Thank you.

MRS HYUHA: Thank you very much, my colleague for this information. Mr Speaker, I want to
indicate to this House that I am an ex-officio Member of the Budget Committee, by virtue of
being a Chairperson of Social Services. I want to inform this House that while the Committee on
Social Services interacts with these institutions, these institutions clearly indicate to us, the way
Dr Matovu is indicating, and we see this within the Budget Policy Statement. I have indicated
that let us invite Finance together with these institutions and we iron out the truth so that we see
who is wrong.

What I want to admit here, Mr Speaker is that it is true the minister has not brought the report, but
this is a strong statement to give the impression that these institutions are not transparent. There
are other sections which are providing that the estimates are approved, there is accountability and
the Auditor General goes ahead - It is only the report by the ministry to be brought here, which is
not yet implemented, but it should not give the impression that there is no transparency. That is
my submission on this.

Having said that, Mr Speaker, my second concern on this appropriation-in-aid is that we have
other institutions which are not autonomous, self-accounting and which are obliged by the law,
but whatever revenue they collect, they have to remit to the consolidated fund; to the Treasury.
Some of these institutions are referral hospitals: the national referral hospital and regional referral
hospitals. And many of these institutions and health centres collect revenue from the private
wing.

Mr Speaker, I want to submit here that these referral hospitals, be it at national or regional level,
are experiencing difficulties because it is expected that when this money is remitted to the
consolidated fund it should be given back. But they do not receive this money on time. And I
want to submit here that from the statistics we were given, you find that some of these were
affected by the budget cuts. They are having difficulty because when there are problems in cash
flow and fluctuations, certainly what is given back is not on time and the consultants are getting
discouraged. Some of this is supposed to purchase drugs and they have difficulty here.
On the other hand, some of these institutions have already requested that they should be allowed
to spend this money at source, and we need to do something about the law so that it is amended
and we allow the referral hospitals to spend this money at source, Mr Speaker.

As I conclude on this particular subject, I want to indicate that the spirit of appropriation-in-aid,
regardless of some of these slight mistakes we have noted which are not yet implemented in the
law, we should appreciate the collection of internally generated revenue by some of these
institutions. When you look at some of these institutions, which we have been analysing under
social services, they have helped us to address many factors. For example, for Makerere
University, Government provides 60 percent of the recurrent expenditure and 40 percent is by the
institution.

Some developments like construction have been done by these institutions, and also, the trouble
we used to have like some of these institutions going on strike for poor welfare of some staff, this
appropriation-in-aid has acted as a stop-gap.

Recently, Government promised that Makerere University would be given Shs 2 billion for the
renovation of Lumumba Hall, but for two consecutive financial years, Government has not
afforded this. But when we were analysing the budget of Makerere University and they indicated
to us that they would generate Shs 15 billion, as a committee we advised them to use some of this
money and renovate the Hall. When we went there recently, at least two blocks of Lumumba Hall
had been renovated and this should be commended, Mr Speaker. So, I feel that as a committee,
we needed to come out and urge the ministry to remind them by implementation of this.

Lastly, Mr Speaker, I want to make an observation on the budget cuts. My understanding of the
budget cuts the way it was reported, the way it has been effected is that –(Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable Member, did you say you are a Member of this committee?

MRS HYUHA: Ex-officio. Did I sign? All the same, does that deny me an opportunity, Mr
Speaker, as a Member of Tororo to speak my mind on this Floor?

THE SPEAKER: No that is not the case. I was only wondering that all these comments, which
you are making since you are a Member of the Committee, I thought you should have put these in
the committee unless you were not present. But you are a member whether you are ex-officio
member. You really make your contributions during the proceedings of the committee. I did not
realise this until you said you are a member.

MRS HYUHA: I want to thank you and I made it clear that what I submitted there was not taken
in. I needed to give a clear picture to this House on appropriation-in-aid, and as a Member of
Tororo, Mr Speaker.

My last submission is on budget cuts - (Interjection)- yes, this is the last. Mr Speaker, the way I
understood the budget cuts and reallocation was that they were a way of protecting the lives of
Ugandans. Reallocation to defence so that we can protect the lives of Ugandans. I have no
problem with that. However, I wish to indicate here that we have certain sectors, which equally
protect the lives of Ugandans. When we are handling budget cuts, such areas should be
considered so that they are protected.

My particular reference is to the ministries of Health and Internal Affairs. Mr Speaker, as we

interacted with the Ministry of Health, we were concerned. Whereas the minister has indicated
here that certain areas like Primary Health Care Fund (PHCF) were protected and 50 percent of
those funds are addressed to drugs, which are sent to districts - in education it is UPE mainly -
those were protected but there are still other essential areas where we have drugs to regional
hospitals. Where certain emergencies are handled like programme 4 item 30, 39. This is about
community health, medical and veterinary drugs. This is the Vote under which the Ministry of
Health gets the money to address emergencies such as an outbreak of an epidemic like cholera,
like Ebola, like meningitis etc.

Recently we had outbreaks of cholera, many people camped in Mulago and we were surprised as
a committee to find out that this particular programme was cut by Shs 128,000,000. And many
other programmes concerning repairs of equipment in hospitals; regional hospitals, concerning
where the minister uses money to go and purchase, to pay the storage and handling of drugs in
National Medical Stores. Such areas were affected which we felt was very unfortunate.

So, I wish that as we agree and accept to protect the lives of Ugandans, certain sectors which
directly deal with protection of lives, like the Ministry of Health and Internal Affairs, should be
considered. I thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR MARTIN WANDERA (Workers’ Representative): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

First of all, I would like to observe that if this Mercedes Benz is meant for the hon. Prof.
Kagonyera, and later hon. Rose Namayanja (Mrs Nsereko) managed her displeasure more
positively – Now, Mr Speaker, turning to the subject under discussion, the biggest question that
economics is concerned with is that of using very scarce resources to meet the unlimited wants of
society. One task that every planner or economist is therefore supposed to grapple with is that of
choice; of deciding how the scarce resources should be allocated. Any planning function that does
not take proper choices will always let down society.

The planning function of Government has quite often let down this country. If you look at the
supplementary statements submitted to this House by the Deputy Chairperson of the Budget
Committee, under point 3, “utilisation of additional resources”, you will find that one of the
proposals that was accepted by the people responsible for our budget is to use money that had
been generated from the budget cuts to procure motor vehicles for Members of Parliament
coming from the war-ravaged areas. There is a plan to create a pool of vehicles such that when
these Members of Parliament want to go there, I presume they go to the office of the Prime
Minister and access those vehicles.

Now, I am just wondering, when none of these MPs is going to those areas, what will those
vehicles be used for? Does it make sense to plan to spend Shs 0.57 billion to create a pool of
vehicles and cut money that is supposed to be for teaching practice? Does this make sense?
(Interruption) I can hear someone saying that it was never expended, but to even think about it is
a serious economic crime.

This morning I attended a meeting of the deregulation project where the Secretary to the Treasury
and PS were, and he said that one of the main responsibilities of any government is to create
employment, both qualitatively and quantitatively. You know you create jobs but jobs of quality.
Now, how can you ensure that there is quality employment if you are killing the inspection
function of the Ministry of Labour?

Many of you honourable members are aware of workers who recently died at Tembo Steel
Rolling Mill in Lugazi. This investor usually collects scrap, even from military facilities. These
things are not inspected and when the scrap was being put in a furnace, it exploded and three
workers died. There are many workers in this place who work under very severe conditions in
terms of occupational health. Their work places are not well ventilated; people work for up to 20
hours!

I wonder why we should be quarrelling about people being kept in ventilated safe houses and we
do not care about workers who are working in dungeons? We have people responsible for
planning and they do not appreciate that the people who work for this country must have their
quality of life protected. I therefore want to invite the Minister of Finance to take the issue of
protecting the quality of employment very seriously, and this should be reflected in their
economic policy packages. I thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR PATRICK MWONDHA (Bukooli County North, Bugiri): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. I have been very persistent because I thought I should tell this story to the House. The
danger of this arbitrary budget cuts.

We have been told of stories of Mobutu’s Zaire. When Mobutu would go for budgeting, he would
summon one minister after another and dish out from his pocket and say, “What do you want for
your ministry?” Then the Minister would say the amount and Mobutu would pull out of his
pocket the equivalent.

That way of running state affairs is very dangerous. I can see Mobutism here; because Parliament
takes a lot of time - budgeting itself is a balancing act - to balance what should go where and do
what, to balance the priorities and the size of the envelope of the country. Now, when you
arbitrarily do this - and I think the Committee should have demanded that an account of the
money spent should be given to this House, because what we are hearing from the field is also not
correct. The soldiers are already complaining that they are not receiving their allowances and
salaries, their working conditions have never improved – (Interruption)

MR MWANDHA: Obviously the Committee on the Budget put that question to Government.
But the bulk of the amount of money constituting the budget cut actually went in to classified
expenditure. From that point of view it was not possible for the committee to demand that
Government give classified expenditure details to the House. Thank you.

MR MWONDHA: What actually is the position of the law? The Chairman Public Accounts
Committee told us that no such expenditures should exist on our account books anymore.
Expenditures called classified - that is what the chairman said here before. So, I do not know
what the position of the law is on this matter, but I am saying that the danger is very pregnant.
You see already that it builds, it gets waves, which follow the action. A non-performing official
in the ministry would plead budget cuts to a non-suspecting member of the public. You go and
ask this and that service and they – (Interruption)

MR ISANGA MUSUMBA: Thank you, Mr Speaker and thank you hon. Mwondha for giving
way. I want to give information that we have put it before this House that the things that we did
that led to the budget cut were not outside the law. However, members have really made the
point. I want to assure this House that we will not do it again; we will consult the Parliament if
we have to carry out any further changes.

In the further alternative, we are prepared to support any amendment that will change the law.
Furthermore, we will originate an amendment ourselves, if there is no other source of
amendment, to ensure that this does not happen. I want to be on record on that matter, so that we
can progress. I thank you.
MR MWONDHA: I thank the Minister of Finance very much for those remarks, but I hope it
will not have another syndrome of Musumba 1, 2 and 3.

Mr Speaker, for instance, some ministries phase their work plans region by region. We have been
told this year that the Ministry of Works has focused strictly on eastern region, to repair the
bridges and to repair the feeder roads in that region for this year.

This same year, the ministry has suffered a budget cut. So, what happens to the programme? Will
the ministry come back to the eastern region the next financial year? Because only 10 per cent of
what they had programmed to do has been done! Is the eastern region going to suffer specifically
as a region out of no making of their own?

So, these are some of the issues that really complicate the working of Government, if they do not
regard what Parliament has said. We do not want to work like Mobutu. Of course, Mobutu had no
parliament to work with anyway. We are worried that some people are also starting to have the
feeling of Mobutu that they will work without this Parliament. But that is dangerous. Thank you,
Mr Speaker.

MR DANIEL KIWALABYE (Kiboga East, Kiboga): I thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to
thank the committee for this report.

Mr Speaker, in my simple understanding, this concept of a budget is a financial management

control measure. It is a tool to financial managers to control the finances. And I think this concept
was brought into this government to ensure that financial management is under control, hence the
Budget Act.

For this control tool of financial management to work, there must be discipline. There must be
discipline to adhere to the Budget as approved. But if this law left such a big gap to Government
to re-allocate as it so wished, then that was very unfortunate, Mr Speaker - (Interruption).

MR MWANDHA: I would like to inform my colleague on the Floor, including any other person
who may come to contribute. Considering that the minister has conceded, and even apologized,
and has given an undertaking that this will never happen again - a thing which does not happen
very much in this House - is it not better that we accept that, and we discuss other matters of this
report?

THE SPEAKER: But saying that this will never happen again is not realistic. Do you think it
can be realized? I think, what you can do is to look at the law itself and make precautions by
adjusting it and putting a ceiling - two percent, or three percent or something like that.

MR MUSUMBA: Mr Speaker, what will not happen is doing so without consulting the
committee. We will come to the committee, and we will tell them about the changes that we want
to make.

THE SPEAKER: You see, it is a matter of courtesy. As far as the law stands, you may say, “I
will not consult”. You may consult because members have expressed regret that this was not
done; so it is informal. The law is there, you can strictly adhere to the law and you do not consult.
So, for us to make sure that you do not go 23 per cent, it is better for us actually to limit you,
rather than relying on your good judgement or concern.
Honourable members, I want to really finish this business, because we have now many reports
which have come in today concerning bills, and we have not done much as far as enacting laws is
concerned. I want to wind up this business so that next week we really concentrate on a number
of bills. The committees have already, I understand, received the reports. Many reports have been
submitted in. So, be brief.

MR ERESU ELYANU: I will be brief, Mr Speaker. Given your wise guidance and the
commitment by the minister, by way of procedure, can I know from the minister when he is likely
to bring a bill to this House to the effect that this limitation is put in place?

MR MUSUMBA: Mr Speaker, we have the Finance and Accountability Bill. In that bill, there is
a provision that exactly addresses the problem we are discussing today, and that is a point of fact.

MR MWONDHA: I think it will still be proper for this House to bring the Budget Act in
resonance with the Finance and Accountability Act. We will, therefore, need a consequential
amendment to the Budget Act, and that is what we are asking for. When are you coming with
that amendment? I am proposing that we do not pass the next Budget before that amendment.

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (Mrs. Janat

Mukwaya): Mr Speaker, I am at pains, because you tried to labour to inform my colleague, the
minister of state. Because you cannot commit yourself, I am at pains to appreciate what our
problem is.

For example, one colleague here said that he couldn't even imagine that money was put to
purchase vehicles in a pool for our colleagues who come from war-ravaged areas, to go and
mobilise support for our people and the army. Could any of us risk our own vehicles to go and do
monitoring work in a war-ravaged area? Would any of us want to go to a war-ravaged area
without escorts? Because it appears now that we in the Executive are not really mindful of what
our people want, much as we are elected leaders. I am really at pains.

Secondly, an elected government can be voted out of power and Parliament can retain their seats.
Yes, an elected government can be voted out of power and come parliamentary elections,
Members of Parliament can be voted in again. So, I am trying to beg Parliament that let us try to
strike a balance. When government finds that this action is appropriate, whether we have come
back to you as a matter of courtesy, I would be worried as Minister for Justice and Constitutional
Affairs if our act was illegal. However, I am so relieved that at least members now realise that
our act was not illegal. As a matter of courtesy, it can be done but I do not think that courtesy
should stop Government from doing what is right, just and timely. That is the clarification I am
seeking.

It appears that one member is asking us to stop the next budget until we bring this law. What will
happen if the minister is not in position to bring this amendment? Would the whole country suffer
because of this amendment, for purposes of courtesy?

THE SPEAKER: No, honourable members, the Budget Act was not a bill that was brought by
Government. It was brought here as a Private Members’ Bill. If you feel that you want to amend
it, you do not have to ask the minister to do so. You can apply for leave of the House to bring an
amendment, and then we allow you to do so. You should not say that you should not deal with the
budget, when actually the law was passed by you and you have the opportunity to amend it. The
Constitution allows you to do so. Anyway, we shall see what to do.
DR JOHNSON NKUUHE: I think we are wasting a lot of time here yet we know what
happened. Ministers were called to Gulu and were told what to do and now we are frying and
roasting them! Why don’t we do what is quick? We should put an amendment in the law so that
we can negotiate. Yes, that is what happened.

PROF. KAGONYERA: Mr Speaker, is hon. Nkuuhe, who is not a Member of the Executive
arm of government, in order to stand here and mislead this House? Does he know very well what
happened? What he is saying is millions of miles away from the truth. Is he in order to mislead
this House?

THE SPEAKER: No. Honourable members, I think we have agreed that what was done was
within the law, although Parliament was not consulted. We have agreed that the consent had to be
given by the owners of the Votes, and calling ministers to Gulu, to Mbarara or to Masaka as the
case may be, is definitely not out of order. Cabinet could sit anywhere in Uganda.

This is not something for us. You know there is nothing wrong with His Excellency the President
holding a Cabinet sitting in Gulu. I think we should go on with other matters and finalize this.
Have you finished hon. Kiwalabye?

MR KIWALABYE: Mr Speaker, I had not finished. As you can see I was receiving information,
clarification and so on.

I was going to say that this control of budgeting also presupposes that things are normal.
However, under abnormal circumstances, budgets cannot, of course, be adhered to. You can
change; that is true. But we also suppose that in the process of making budgets, many of these
variables should have been taken into account. We should not have underestimated, say, the war
in the North and asked for a small allocation of the budget, because that is one of the reasons
there were these budgetary cuts.

The war should have been estimated properly, as somebody was talking about unforeseen
disasters and so on. There is a ministry for that, and it should make estimates of what would
happen in form of disasters so that all these variables are put in the budget. Not every new item
that comes about should affect the budget. If you do that, then the concept of budget control is
lost.

Mr Speaker, I would also like to say that even this new concept of ROM, Result Oriented
Management, which is being introduced in Government dealings, is also undermined. If the
budget is changed, then it is very difficult to assess the results according to the allocations you
make to each ministry. So, there are already problems with these budget cuts and re-allocations.

Now that the minister has said he will support any move to rectify this anomaly in the law, then it
is okay. I think we should go with that. Otherwise, Mr Speaker, it was very unfortunate that these
cuts affected so many things. They even affected the road, the Busunju-Kiboga, Kiboga-Hoima
road. The people have been promised, since the days in the bush, that this road would be repaired
for them. Up to now it is still not done. Work on it has stalled and one of the reasons for this is
the budget cut. We are also tremendously affected in other areas too. So, in order to rectify this,
we should bring the law in conformity with that. I thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Honestly, don’t you think that we should end this debate now? We should hear
from the minister, the chairperson and then we wind up.
MRS KABAKUMBA MASIKO (Bujenje County, Masindi): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for
giving me this opportunity. I will be brief and I have only three points.

The first point is on privatization, on page 15 of the minister’s report. I see that among the major
transactions to be completed is Kinyara Sugar Works. Really, this is a problem of departing from
an agreed and good principle. I would like to assert again that in Kinyara we do not need a core
investor. We have enough resources but government is fidgeting, going around our resolution,
and bringing in a core investor! I would like the honourable minister to take this point seriously.

Two, it is unfortunate there is no minister from the Ministry of Agriculture here. We are aware
this is supposed to be a productive ministry and it is even in the report. We have been talking
about budget cuts. On page 11 it is said that the development budget, with the exception of PAF
activities, suffered budget cuts. For instance, tea seedlings, coffee seedlings, and many others
were affected.

I had a meeting today with stakeholders in the coffee sector, and people are lamenting. Much as
in this statement of the minister, Shs 2.1 billion was authorized, it has never been paid out. The
farmers are crying.

Even of the Shs 3.6 billion that was supposed to be given out in cash, only Shs 2.6 billion was
given. Mr Speaker, as I talk now, the rains have started and yet the money is not available. As far
as agriculture is concerned, timely intervention is very important. I can see the hon. Minister of
Finance noting this. I hope he will address this issue expeditiously.

In the meeting we also proposed that UCDA should be allowed to spend even before the budget is
approved for the following financial year. This is because the rains come in August and by
November they are finished, yet the budget is passed in October. So, we miss out on this
particular issue.

Lastly, the issue of education: I am really perturbed. We have a very good policy of UPE but it
seems Government now is not paying due attention to post-primary education. I will just give one
example, which is cited in this report. The post-primary education and training report
recommended that about 98 seed schools should be constructed. But the ministry is telling us that
last year they constructed about eight, which could not even open doors to the students because of
the wage bill.

As if that is not enough, they are saying this should be halted and I am sure you will come back to
us and say they have nowhere to put these UPE "graduates”. What will happen?

I would like to appeal to our government and our ministers that they should learn to plan
properly. We have had seven years since UPE started to prepare for these children, but as I see
now we are going to have a problem when these children are offloaded onto the economy.

The last one, kindly, I would like to request that when the budgets are being cut, due
consideration is taken. Sincerely, when you cut out the inspection of schools - no wonder the
standards have gone so low, especially in UPE schools. I know there are very few of them around
Kampala that performed well but in my constituency, and in Masindi in general, the teachers are
not being supervised enough. Therefore, they are not teaching enough and hence the standards are
going down. So, I would like to say that supervision of schools should also be given enough
funds. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, don’t you really think we have covered this? Anyway, I
now give you just four minutes to make your point.

MR ELIJAH OKUPA (Kasilo County, Soroti): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The clarification I
want to seek from the minister is on page five, about taxes. Parliament does appropriate, during
budget time, the money for paying taxes by the different ministries. But on page five, the
committee has noted that the money has not been paid for the last year, and even for the previous
years to the extent that we have arrears of over Shs 18 billion.

We have been meeting Uganda Revenue Authority in the Committee on Commissions, Statutory
Authorities and State Enterprises on this and it is one of the areas in which we need an
explanation from the minister. Where does this money go? Currently, the list that we got from
Uganda Revenue Authority is to the tune of Shs 25 billion in tax arrears. I think we should lead
the other taxpayers by example. Could the minister explain where this money goes, which we
appropriate here?

In appendix 3 of the report, the committee notes that all local governments were exempted from
the budget cuts. However, I am surprised that for the District of Soroti, concerning the LGDP
money as of February, they got a letter from the Secretary to the Treasury that the money was cut.
More so, the money for Soroti District Council had been earmarked as donor funds by the
Netherlands Government, and so cannot be re-allocated to other uses without the formal approval
of the donor. How did this money get re-allocated?

To date, Soroti District has only received Shs 200 million, out of the Shs 600 million. This has
hampered the development of the district. Could the minister explain to me how this happened?
Thank you.

PROF. OGENGA LATIGO (Agago County, Pader): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I
agree with those who initially focussed on this report. To me it is important that we focus more
on this report in the context of the fact that it is the first of its kind. However, it is unfortunate that
this 23 percent budget cut derailed us, and we spent a lot of our time on that. I will also add one
small thing to the discussion of that 23 percent budget cut.

What is its implication to the medium-term expenditure framework, which you have been using
for planning your budgets and the macro-economic stability? That is where I have a problem. If
you have a structured system and you disorganise it, you destabilise the whole set-up.

Nevertheless, Mr Speaker, I went through this report comprehensively and now I ask myself,
what can we do to improve budget performance? It is this question that I have been grappling
with, particularly in the context of the fact that when releases are made, as already indicated that
80 percent has been covered in this Vote item, then what normally happens? And it is year in and
year out.

In the last month of the financial year, huge sums of money are taken to local governments and
they do not have the time to spend the money. This is the biggest problem. It is not the extent to
which we have released the 80 percent in this quarter, but making sure that the releases are on
time, and they are used for the purpose for which they are given.

I will quickly run through a number of points that I picked from this report, particularly on page
two. The committee talked about the large disparity between the savings and lending rates, which
was illustrating the inadequate competitiveness of our banking industry and its inefficiency. We
still get very sentimental even when we have resolved this matter.

I just passed in front of what was Uganda Commercial Bank (UCB) this morning, and I found
blue symbols of Stanbic Bank. That means UCB is no more, and yet the privatization of the bank
was supposed to enhance the banking sector. So, some of these things bring bad memories to
some of us.

Then there is another element, which I was worried about, and which probably reflects what Capt.
Guma said about our economic figures. On page 2, they said that the GDP projection was revised
from 6.6 percent to 6 per cent. The explanation was that the Bujagali Dam Project was not
implemented. This is incredible!

The dam is a five-year project, its injection to GDP, in spite of the total cost, is spread over that
period. How can a single project like that so adversely affect our GDP? And what is our GDP
then hinged on? This, I thought, was worrying.

Of course, as an agriculturist, I would like, again, to reassert the fact that every time you look at
inflation figures, it is hinged on the price of food and agricultural commodities, and yet the
ministry and Government consistently pay lip service to agriculture.

You know that policy and conducive environment do not create change in agriculture; it is
resources. You have to put money in agriculture. It is so pathetic that agriculture, which has 1.9
percent of the budget, still even suffers budget cuts in its development area. I thought this should
be brought out for the minister to consider.

The committee had three very good observations: One was the one I have stated. The second one
was really the persistent depreciation of the Uganda shilling, which is indicative of capital crime.
Given the reality that we are in, we in this country should begin to exercise a lot of restraint on
political matters that will merely accelerate capital crime.

When political pronouncements that create more uncertainties emerge, you can be sure the
economy will suffer. I am begging Government and the political leaders of this country to save us
from the impending chaos. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

MR PETER MUTULUUZA (Mawokota North, Mpigi): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I
thank the committee for this report, and particularly for the concern of the very low food crop
prices. He has just mentioned that problem, but as a person from a predominantly agricultural
area, all along I have been trying to find out why my people are not producing.

The reason they give, actually, is that when they produce sweet potatoes, for instance, they put in
a lot of effort, labour and sometimes cash. But when it comes to marketing their produce, it
becomes a problem, and that is why they have no incentive for working very hard. Now, I wonder
whether Government has any policy in place, like what they did to control the prices of maize. I
wonder whether they are considering how they can control the prices of some of these crops.

Secondly, capital flight: Mr Speaker, we have a problem, and I combine this with observation
number three, on page 2. We have investors who come to invest mainly in services and
consumable activities. I wonder whether a company like MTN could produce airtime cards in
Uganda, so that we save the money that goes to purchase these airtime cards.
Companies like supper markets - I am sorry to say, but we are enriching our brothers and sisters
in South Africa. You go to a supermarket like Metro and you find even chicken is imported from
South Africa and chicken gizzards are imported from South Africa! Now, what will the people of
Uganda do? How will they gain from that? Mr Speaker, I think we should –(Interruption)

MR DEUSDEDIT BIKWASIZEHI: I thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank my colleague for

giving way. On the case of South Africa bringing chicken here, the reason is that we do not
produce enough chicken. Otherwise, if we had enough, they would buy. I want to tell you that
they are even buying local products.

On the issue of the service industry, I would like to inform my colleague that in economics,
service industries like communications, supermarkets and so on are also very important sectors in
the economy. Actually, it is one of the best or the highest levels of investment in a developing
economy. So, in some way, it improves or it promotes development in that it provides jobs and
they even buy and sell some of the locally produced products.

DR NKUUHE: I would like to inform you that South Africa’s trade with Uganda is so skewed in
favour of South Africa that they bring us seven times what we take to South Africa. In fact, we
have to do something and force them to buy something from here because there are things here
they can buy. We are just not putting pressure; that is all.

MR MUTULUUZA: I thank the honourable members for the information. Mr Speaker, I think
these supermarkets, which are coming in, should also help us improve on our own local poultry
projects, so that we do not rely on their imports. This is the same as fruits, for example.

We have areas in Uganda where we can grow fruits, which are imported from South Africa, like
grapes in Kabale. I think the land is fertile and we can get those fruits from there. But the problem
is that I do not know whether Government has a plan to encourage these people to develop our
farmers also.

Fluctuation of the rate, I think is caused by this same problem - the service and consumption
sector, which most of the investors concentrate on. They get our little money, then they buy all
the dollars we have and they just go to buy these products they sell to us. So, I think the
government should try their best to also encourage these investors to make sure that what actually
can be produced here is produced, so that we save that foreign exchange. Thank you.
MRS MARGARET ZZIWA (Woman Representative, Kampala): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. I want to thank the committee for this elaborate report. I feel that maybe if we had a
little more time, we would have been able to have a little more understanding of some of the
issues the committee has raised.

Notwithstanding that, and in high anticipation of the response from the minister, I want to raise
additional concerns to those raised by the committee. I think I should start with the very one they
started with, on page two - consistent or persistent depreciation of the Uganda shilling, which has
been related to capital flight.

I want to find out from the minister; since, I think, 1989, foreign exchange was liberalized and
there was enactment of a law, which gave liberty to foreign forex bureaux to start operating.
Since then, I want to find out whether the ministry has made any assessment of how much money
has been transmitted out of this country through the foreign forex bureaux, and how much money
is earned in terms of differentials. I would like to find out in terms of volumes of capital.

Some of the allegations that have been put on the Floor of the House are that, in most cases when
there is a lot of capital flight, Bank of Uganda comes in and puts some money in circulation. But
more than often, it is bought. For instance, about two weeks ago when there was this problem,
about 200 million was put on the market, I think to control the dollar at around Shs 1,870. But
today when you look at the rates, it has gone up to almost Shs 2,000. It is barely two weeks! So,
what is the problem? I think we need sincerity in this situation.

The second one is also a concern, which has been raised. His Excellency the President mentioned
that lately, there is a lot of concern about indicators like inflation, GDP; that is why the real
production sectors have not been addressed.

I heard a concern raised by the committee where they were saying that the impact on the real
production sectors - seedlings of coffee, tea and others - has been drastically reduced. Really,
aren’t we contradicting ourselves? If we talk in terms of improving the real development or
growth sectors and we know certainly that agriculture is one of them!

Some time back, there was a feeling that we should not really go with what the Western World is
saying, that we should not subsidise the agricultural sector. I think there was a move to go into
this sector and grow the seedlings, give them to the farmers, and of course bring in also some
other insecticides and other things that can actually result into the growth of the sector. When this
23 percent problem came in, definitely it affected the sector. Aren’t we contradicting ourselves?

As I wind up, may I also know if we do not have another contradiction? We know that in the
medium term economic framework, some of the pillars are governance and democracy. But when
you look at the performance of this sector, I think democracy and governance are the most
affected, to the tune that even the very institutions of governance have not been put in place.

Some of the institutions, I will not mention, are affected. But you can even look at the
postponement of local council elections, and even those at the district levels - some of those
organs, which should actually strengthen governance and democracy. And all this
notwithstanding that one of the conditionalities, which is being given to us by our donor partners,
is exactly in that area. They are not satisfied with the way we are doing our things. So, may we
not start to rationalise?
When you look at the figures in the last bit, there are some sectors, which have not been affected
at all. What is the rationalisation? What is genuine? I think I will end by re-echoing what the
committee said; we need to be sincere to ourselves and we need to respect each other.

The Executive should also have the courtesy to respect this House. Some of the dissatisfaction,
which is being expressed here, is because there is no respect. We should not waste more time on
budgeting; let us just leave this as a function of the Executive, and you will go your way. And I
am saying this out of frustration. Thank you very much.

MR BASALIZA ARAALI (Fort Portal Municipality, Kabarole): Thank you very much, Mr
Speaker. I will be very brief. Mr Speaker, this 23 per cent Budget cut is a fait accompli, and I
believe that it was done for a noble cause. But my concern, Mr Speaker, is the various cuts
carried out by various ministries.

When you look at this supplementary information they have here, the July to December Budget
performance on Gender, Labour and Social Development there is one item there which mentions
failure to buy enough food for children in remand homes.

Mr Speaker, I am concerned because there are some remand homes in the country, and these are
not normal schools. They are schools for vagabonds, they are schools for children who have left
their families, and there is that problem. Some of these are victims of HIV/AIDS, and yet they
say there is a cut, they are not going to get enough food for the children in remand homes!

Mr Speaker, I am appealing to the ministry concerned to revisit this issue and try to re-allocate
enough money to buy enough food for these children.

As one member said, there is a big problem because people are using this budget cut. They are
saying, “because of this budget cut, there is this problem, because of the budget cut that is why
things are not being done properly”. Mr Speaker, many people are using it, even in connection
with the road from Kyenjojo to Kyegegwa; they are using it.

We have seen what this budget cut affects, but we have not seen what it has left out. We would
like to know whether the road is still on in the Budget, whether it is going to be worked upon
within the period stipulated. I thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR PLANNING (Mr Isaac Musumba): Mr Speaker and
honourable members, first of all, I want to thank the committee for this report, and I also want to
thank Parliament, which has enabled this kind of discussion to come as a consequence of the
Budget Act.

Mr Speaker, hon. Guma did raise the point of the Front Bench taking a very keen interest in the
debate of the economy. I agree. I just want to appeal to the House also to mutually, along with us,
take an active interest in this debate.

Hon. Guma gave an example of the UCB debate. Yes, it is true during the UCB debate some of us
could not find space to sit. So in this matter, which is more important than the UCB debate, active
interest should be on both sides.

The majority of the concerns that the members have raised, we have taken note of. The purpose
of this mid-term review is for the members to inform us, to pinpoint where the shoe is pinching in
our development process, and we then take them on board in consideration of our next steps,
especially in the forthcoming Budget.

Therefore, I will not spend too much time of this House, to answer query by query or concern by
concern. I have taken extensive notes on the concerns that have been raised and they are going to
be addressed.

I just want to emphasize two things, however. One, hon. Margaret Zziwa said we should respect
this House. I want to repeat what has already been stated in this House, we respect this House and
we shall continue to do so. The purpose of this interaction is for us, mutually, to be able to
compare notes and make a way forward for this country.

The other issue of the 23 percent, I have already made a commitment here, and I want to say that
we did not do anything outside the law. The law allows what we did. But by way of procedure, I
have admitted, I am going to write to all ministers and heads of departments and tell them that an
undertaking has been made, if there is a reallocation, let us go and discuss what we intend to do
with the Budget Committee. There is no harm in doing that. I am going to communicate to that
effect, Mr Speaker.

The other thing is that the instruments are before you, the Finance and Accountability Bill is with
the committee; it is an avenue. If this House wants to amend its own law to the Budget Act, we
have no objection. We will listen to them and where necessary, support will be given.

Finally, Sir, there are specific issues that have been raised: the roads to Kyenjojo, privatization,
and coffee for UCDA. On Coffee for UCDA, I want to say that we have given authority for this
organization to receive coffee from farmers. We shall pay them in due course, so that we do not
plant out of season. The instruction has also been given for this other season. That instruction has
been given, and we are on course.

We will take care of all the concerns that have been made, and I want to thank the committee and
the House again.

THE SPEAKER: Chairperson, do you have anything to say?

MR JAMES MWANDHA: Mr Speaker, I want to just make a few remarks, mainly to thank my
colleagues for the appreciation of my committee for the report that was produced. I want also to
say that I think this debate has proved that, indeed, it was a very good idea to have the Budget
Act. I believe as we move forward, we shall be perfecting our way of planning and budgeting
together with the Executive.

I want to make an appeal to my colleagues, chairpersons of sessional committees. We still have

some four sessional committees, which never responded to our request to carry out an analysis of
the impact of the budget cuts, so that they can be included in our report.

As you know, this is going to be a continuous process, and when you read this document, which
was laid on the Table by the minister yesterday, you immediately see that this business of budget
cuts is likely to feature prominently again in the next financial year. You will see for yourself that
there is, for instance, an un-funded gap of over Shs 47 billion in the security area alone. And if
you consider the commitment of Government to spend more money on security, you can almost
assume that there are bound to be further similar cuts to ensure that these un-funded gaps are
actually funded.
Therefore, Mr Speaker, once again, I want to thank my colleagues, and particularly the
honourable ministers who have sat all through, and even participated actively in this debate. I
think this is a plus on their part. I hope that when we come round to a similar debate, more of
your colleagues will be present as indeed more of the other colleagues, the Backbenchers, I hope
will be present. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Thank you, chairperson, and I thank honourable members for your
contributions and time given to this motion.

Honourable members, the motion is for consideration and adoption of the report on the national
budget performance for the first half of the Financial Year 2002/2003. I now put the question.

(Question put and agreed to.)

THE SPEAKER: Honourable members, we are coming to the end of today’s business, but I will
take this opportunity to remind you that tomorrow and Friday there is a symposium on NEPAD.
NEPAD is one of the programmes of our missions under the African Union. It is important not
only to Uganda but also to the entire continent, because we want to uplift ourselves economically
and politically. Therefore, I appeal to you to attend because this was arranged for you, Members
of Parliament. It is supposed to start at 8.30 a.m. at the International Conference Centre.
Therefore, you are urged to be prompt so that proceedings can start as planned.

As I informed you earlier, a number of reports have been coming out, dealing with a number of
bills that have been pending in the committees. These reports will be distributed so that next week
on Tuesday when we reconvene at 2.00 p.m. we start business of legislating for the country. But
we intend to issue a notice for Members of the Business Committee to meet on Monday so that
we can make plans for the rest of the period remaining for this third meeting of the second
session. I thank you very much.

The House is adjourned until 2.00 p.m. on Tuesday, but you are urged to attend the symposium
tomorrow at the International Conference Centre.

(The House rose at 6.18 p.m. and adjourned until Tuesday, 8 April 2003 at 2.00 p.m.)