Wednesday, 12 March 2014

For God and my Country. Oh Uganda!

A few days back, after the storm that destroyed lots of property in schools and people’s homes, an academic friend of mine asked me why this does happen to Uganda and argued that God did not love us. I told her that “shut up” because God loves us. We are a beautiful country, wonderful soils, wonderful climate but we have systematically destroyed it. God has given us the knowledge to manage our society and it is entirely upon us to decide how to use that knowledge. Resource poor Japan is today one of the wealthiest countries while America is rich. There are many people in the United States. When you meet Japanese, you see wealth around them. The way they speak, dress, even the civility by which they conduct themselves, you see society that is wealthy, organized and progressing. Japan is the peninsular that is susceptible to all kinds of natural disaster, earthquakes, tsunamis, typhoons name them. Japan has over 100 million people on this peninsular however 70% of its land is planted with forest. If there were not forests, the occurrence of these storms would be much higher and much more destroyed.


Many other countries have an afforestation programme. This is a plan to make sure that the countries forest endowment is replenished periodically. But what is happening to Uganda? We have cut all the trees down in most parts of Uganda and the rate at which we are planting are not sustaining our demand for timber.  It is not surprising therefore that when we have these minor storms since our land is exposed, we end up with these disasters that we see. Whoever is in charge of afforestation of the country needs to tell us what the problem is. But it may be surprising that we have all these wonderful plans and nothing happens on the ground.

Tuesday, 11 March 2014

Interesting Article

This is an article that appeared in the Newspapers., I found it interesting

Mubs paralyzed by top dogs row

Tuesday 07 January 2014
New Vision
What began as a quiet power fight between the principal of Makerere University Business School, Waswa Balunywa, and his deputy, Dr Samuel Ssejjaaka, has come to a head with an investigation that reveals interesting findings.
In August 2012, Balunywa was out of the country. Consequently, his deputy Ssejjaaka was in charge.
Dr Ssejjaaka, who is ordinarily in charge of academics at Mubs, was keen to improve capacity among a number of staff who had earned PhDs.
He made some promotions and among those promoted was Dr Moses Muhwezi, called on to become director for Quality Assurance.
On his return, an angry Prof Balunywa reversed the promotions, arguing that they had been made without sufficient consultation.
The decision was humiliating for Ssejjaaka. He was left an angry man, realising that his authority had been violated. Many employees at Mubs were also taken aback by Balunywa’s decision.
“If you are not a very strong person, it can leave you with a bruised ego, and you even fail in your work here,” an employee said. The matter simply ignited what is now a long-running wrangle between the two men.
Officials at Mubs say Balunywa and Ssejjaaka have since been engaged in a cold war, including trading angry letters. Ironically, they had been close friends and worked well together to establish Mubs.
Alarmed at the sudden hostility between the two, the former chairman of the Mubs Council, Dr Colin Sentongo and his deputy Dr Frank Ssebowa intervened. Both spoke to the two men on two separate occasions but failed to reunite them.
Committee report
After this intervention failed, the Mubs council sat on October 14, 2013 and set up a three-person committee. It was composed of Dr John Kiyaga-Nsubuga as chairman and Victoria S Byoma and Steven Kasangaki as members.
The committee studied correspondences between Balunywa and Ssejjaaka and interviewed the two feuding officials as well as other staff. The committee wrote its report on November 12, 2013 and presented it to the Mubs council for consideration.
The council has since asked Balunywa and Ssejjaaka to write, explaining what they intend to do about the report’s findings.
Committee findings
According to a copy of the report that The Observer has seen, Balunywa accuses Ssejjaaka of underperforming in his duties, which include supervising academic programmes. On the other hand, Ssejjaaka complains that although the two are peers, Balunywa treats him like a junior partner and does not respect him.
He also complains that Balunywa routinely reverses the deputy principal’s decisions “with little regard to the humiliation and loss of face that this causes him.”
The committee concluded that the conflict resulted from flaws in the institution’s structure, which was previously overlooked because the two were friends.
“The deputy principal is supposed to be in charge of academic affairs, but the deans do not report to him. They report to the principal,” reads the report in part.
The report adds that the principal has too much power and influence at the institution.
“With the exception of the internal auditor, who reports to the Audit Committee of Council, all the other 15 senior staff report to the principal,” the report reads.
The committee concluded that this would mean that the principal is swamped with administrative duties without enough time for strategic issues, while the deputy principal relies on work delegated to him by the principal.
Recommendation
The committee recommends that Balunywa and Ssejjaaka should work to repair their relationship either by themselves or through a mediator, suggesting Prof John C. Munene, another senior member of staff. The committee also suggests a revision of the institution’s structure to put academic affairs directly under the deputy principal’s ambit, to make the office holder’s support to the principal and Mubs more clear cut.
The committee further tasked Mubs to comply with their obligation to give the deputy principal a car or compensate him accordingly.
“The fact that the school has not been able to buy him a vehicle due to financial constraints does not remove his entitlement,” the report concludes.
Meanwhile, Muhwezi, whose appointment was revoked by Balunywa, has since been promoted by the principal to dean of the faculty of Entrepreneurship and Business Administration.
Other view
A long-serving Mubs  staffer has told us on condition of anonymity that the real feud between the two men was caused by the knowledge that Ssejjaaka’s contract expires in July.
“Balunywa may be privately hoping that Ssejjaaka is not popular with council, the appointing authority, which would make it easier to dispense with the deputy principal,” the staffer said.
Another staffer added that Balunywa might have his eye on another employee becoming deputy principal.
“In the past Ssejjaaka did not raise a finger when others were being shown the exit, his time has come – that is how things are here.”


Sunday, 9 March 2014

Why foreigners will not develop Uganda

President Museveni has been the biggest enthusiast for the development in the country and in all his speeches and efforts is to see the country transform. Realizing that the entrepreneurial class in Uganda was missing, he pushed for foreign investment and his enthusiasm has brought all and sundry in the country. We have have companies like BIDCO that have transformed Kalangala, the oil company that are prospecting for oil in the Bunyoro region (I do not know why we have an English name for this region which I now I can’t even remember and yet that is the intention) and many other genuine companies that are doing business in Uganda.
On the other hand, there are thousands of briefcase investors who are operating in Kikuubo in Kampala and have gone to all small towns in Uganda to do what the small vulnerable ordinary business man should be doing, petty trade. This process of attracting investors has brought mixed results. Every action that the president takes attracts criticism. This is normal, if you are not criticized, you never know the basis of your decisions neither do you review or reflect what you have done.

Business is business. It is about giving shareholders value by giving them a good return of investment. Any business that doesn’t do that is not worthy being called a business. Therefore foreign investors in a country know what they want. They come to make money in the best way possible and they must take their capital back along with the profits that comes from that investment. For the country where they are, they produce product or a service for the market or for the export. They also create jobs and in some other cases, they even have a multiplier effect. This is good for the country where the investment is made. It is even better if the investment is expanded especially through generated profits. The smart countries that attract these investments, watch these investments and learn from them. They also try establishing competing businesses.  The country as a result generates more jobs and more wealth. However there are those who do not make any investments in the country, they come to the country and trade. Trade gives very quick profits unlike productive investments which take longer because of the gestation period.

Investors who come to trade are not good for the country. The most undesirable investor is one who asks for a guarantee. I remember years back, one of my first exposures to business was some European “gentleman” who got a guarantee from Uganda government when supplying tyres to one of the government companies. The gentleman allegedly shipped the tyres which got lost in Mombasa. Why do I have to do anything it government can pay me just like that. This is one of the biggest problems with government loans and guarantees. Invariably, government pays for nothing being done.


Below is a case where the President donated land to a computer assembly plant that was never built instead the fellows sold the land and made money and walked away. What needs to be done is to foster entrepreneurship in Uganda. It is not a simple thing to do that. While I hate government companies because I believe government cannot do business. I note Europe is full of them. The control you need in government companies is to ensure that there is accountability, transparency in the management of these companies and the political will to fire those who mess up with public funds. Uganda needs to re-evaluate its position on public enterprises but only if and only if the country can develop excellent management skills that is accountable and transparent and that there is the political will to do what it takes to safeguard such public assets. No foreign investor is going to do this for Uganda

Museveni duped into giving away 50 acres for ‘ghost’ computer factory

President Museveni got a raw deal after giving free land to an investor to build a computer factory that never was. Read More