Donors Reject Uganda Budget 
 
SECURITY: Nsibambi and Ssendaula
 

By Alfred Wasike 
INTERNATIONAL donors have refused to endorse Uganda’s proposed budget for 
2004/5, citing high spending on defence and public administration at the 
expense of the poverty eradication action plan (PEAP). 
They questioned the sh30b budget for the referendum on political systems set 
for next year and the continued financing of mass mobilisation activities 
despite the current move towards pluralism. 
Uganda, with a projected domestic revenue of sh1,823b, a 9% increase over the 
current fiscal year, wants sh3,359b, a 6% increase compared to this financial 
year. 
The budget is to be read out next month. 
The donors made these concerns at a day-long Public Expenditure Review meeting 
at the Uganda International Conference Centre, Kampala. 
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund officials, on behalf of donors, 
criticised the steep rise in government spending and called for efficiency and 
an end to corruption. 
They praised Uganda for sound economic management that has resulted in economic 
growth and poverty reduction. 
World Bank mission chief in Uganda Grace Yobrudy said, “We will not be able to 
endorse the draft budget presented to Parliament. We do not find it a 
convincing reflection of PEAP priorities, and key elements of the budget—
defence and public administration—remain too high.” 
Prime minister Apollo Nsibambi said Uganda had made progress in education, 
health, water/sanitation and roads. He said insecurity in the Great Lakes 
Region, especially the LRA rebel terror remained a major concern for Uganda, 
necessitating adequately funded security strategies. 
Yobrudy noted, “I would like to begin with defence, a topic which we discussed 
at length last year. Defence spending rises by 19% to a proposed sh367b in 
2004/5, after a 48% increase in the preceding two years. Last year’s 29% 
increase was presented as a one-off.” 
Finance minister Gerald Ssendaula said, “You and us have come a long way 
together. Bear with us. This year is very difficult. The revenues are low but 
the demands are too high. But Uganda has made a lot of progress in very many 
sectors of the economy.” 
But Yobrudy said though the donors recognised the need for security, 
particularly in the north, they felt the proposed defence spending increase was 
unjustified. 
He said the donors also doubted whether the management changes identified under 
the Defence Review would be in place to manage the increase. 
She said the increase was not sufficiently targeted towards security in the 
north. 
“In the absence of information on how the classified budget is being used to 
implement the Defence Review, we are not persuaded that increases of this 
magnitude are justified.” She wondered if the rise was affordable given 
competing priorities. 
They urged the Government to reconsider the defence provision for 2004/5. They 
welcomed the planned sector working group on defence. 
The donors cited excessive cost of public administration in Uganda, a big 
public service and bureaucracy and called for a solution. 
They called for an efficient public service. 
Ends

Published on: Friday, 14th May, 2004
 
Email this article to a friend.
 


\\\\\\\"Always be a first rate version of yourself instead of a second rate 
version of someone else.\\\\\\\\\\\\\"

Njoki Paul 
University of Pretoria 


--------------------------------------------
This service is hosted on the Infocom network
http://www.infocom.co.ug

Reply via email to