Ending Africa's Wars: Progressing to Peace by Oliver Furley & Roy May

Author:Oliver Furley & Roy May [Furley, Oliver & May, Roy]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Political Freedom, Peace, Political Science
ISBN: 9780754639329
Google: 7QaQAAAAMAAJ
Goodreads: 1980454
Publisher: Ashgate
Published: 2006-01-15T08:32:57+00:00

Financial Control

The Uganda Parliament, through its public accounts committee, has a commendable record in this, though the government has many ways of evading or ignoring criticism in financial matters. Foreign observers usually express a favourable view. The International Herald Tribune wrote on 29.9.99 that although Parliament’s oversight of some key areas of the economy ‘has sometimes slowed down the decision-making process, the benefits of greater accountability should be seen in the resumption of substantial investment in the economy, the upsurge in power generation and other vital services’. Further, ‘An energetic press keeps its readers well fed with well-researched exposés and investigations’, for example in the previous year the network of corruption in some banks and in the privatisation process was revealed, and the government was obliged to take quick action. International donors, and Britain in particular, as we have seen, have shown much confidence in the government’s handling of the economy, and they have admired the commendably high growth rate, 7.8 per cent p.a. in 1998/9 and around 6-8 per cent during Museveni’s period in power (starting from an admittedly low base rate in the previous regimes). Parliament knew that Uganda enjoyed a fortunate position regarding international aid, and concentrated its interests in financial matters more to do with efficiency, fairer distribution, and the elimination of corruption. This was not always likely to have much effect, but the chairman of the standing parliamentary committee on national economy lamented, ‘We have passed very beautiful pieces of legislation in this House, but they are not implemented at times’.30 This illustrates an important weakness in Parliament’s control: the government could twist and turn, evading some of the legislation it did not like, and Parliament did not always hold them to account. Major John Kazoora, MP, criticized the Ministry of Agriculture, saying it was a ghost, it did nothing. Other MPs ‘lambasted’ the Ministry yet they approved its budget.31

Parliament had a major difficulty in that under Museveni’s regime there was almost a parallel system of government based on the Movement, with its own National Council and Secretariat, responsible for much of the country’s expenditure. ‘Parliament has no love for the Movement Secretariat’, declared Fred Mukisa, Minister of State for Fisheries, and he accused it of blocking allocations of funds.32 The Movement’s Secretariat’s continued existence emphasized the military origins of Museveni’s government, and non-movement MPs were increasingly antagonistic. In 2001 Parliament rejected the Movement’s Budget, as not comprehensive, contradictory, and not satisfactorily accounting for last year’s expenditure. In a very critical debate they asked why the Movement appeared responsible for foreign affairs, refugees or disasters.

To sum up, the constitution gave clear indications where financial control lay, but Parliament was still far from achieving the level of control to which it aspired, and this remained a potent source of friction between Parliament and government. ‘Parliamentary government’ was established after Museveni’s guerrilla war, but by 2002-2003 it was clearly creaking and groaning, particularly under the stress of a one-party system which allowed virtually no activities for other political parties.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.