|
Netters,
While Museveni and the NRM Goverment continue to blame their failures on
others, the facts should be available for all to see but I fear that this is not
the case. The recent example is on the completion of the Apac-Kigumba-Masindi
line, the Press reported that some people had endorsed the Kisanja thing simply
based on the completion of a long overdue Project rather than indignation
for delays due to incompetence for a Project which should have been completed by
1989! Below is a posting on power generation which I sent in March
1999.
The Fugee
----- Original Message -----
From: The Fugee
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 1999 3:24 AM
Subject: Are we being taken for a ride? Netters,
I have been trying to follow the debates for and against the power projects
supposedly initiated by the NRM. Based on some facts available to me, I wish to
state that this is not a question of being taken for a ride but in actual fact
being ridden in a fashion worse than that of the proverbial beast of burden. I
believe that the whole problem comes about because the 'clearest head' in the
'revolution' did not, has not and will probably never develop an idea worth
implementation for the development of our country. This is brought to light by
the irrefutable fact the UPM could not produce an elections Manifesto for
the 1980 elections, (even though people like Tumusiimwe Bwajoojo claim to have
seen one) and after launching and waging a vicious war which involved destroying
of the much needed infrastructure, the best idea they could come up with is the
primitive barter trade.
In the NRM's first budget speech, they stated "What went wrong
in Uganda was that budgetary discipline was lacking and those who advocated the
monetary approach to the management of the economy depended on the market
mechanism to orient the economy towards more production and less consumption."
They went further to state "The situation was made
worse by the financial programme approved by the Obote Government and supported
by the International Monetary Fund." At this point in time the
'clear headed' leadership was totally opposed to the liberalisation of the
economy and "therefore, decided that the exchange rate be fixed at
1,400 per US dollar. With immediate effect, the dual exchange rate regime is
abolished." It could be that Lutwa's regime re-instituted the dual
exchange rate regime because records show that on the 14th June, 1984 during the
reading of the Budget Speech, A. M. Obote President/Minister of Finance stated
"I propose that the dual exchange rates be unified on 15th June,
1984, at a rate to be struck at the auction on that day." Whether
the NRM were flogging an old [work] horse, I don't know, but by removing the
market mechanism from the system, it is hardly surprising that the inflation
rates went into triple digits, which they will conveniently blame on
"past regimes."
From the Economist Intelligence Unit Country Report No 1 - 1987 under
"THE ECONOMY" from the sub-title "The economy continues
to drift -" it states "A year of peace in the South has
done wonders for the rural areas which comprise Uganda's economic heartland and
this recovery has been helped by the resumption of projects in the field of
agricultural rehabilitation, roads and power as aid funds have begun to flow
again. In other respects the situation is bad, with inflation well into three
figures at the end of the year and still rising, local industry bankrupt and in
disrepair, and foreign exchange critically short." The report
describes the situation in the urban centres that the "continued
economic drift has hit urban Ugandans particularly hard, as employment has been
lost and wages massively eroded by a year of hyperinflation."
though the report describes much improvement in the
"countryside" on the basis that "peace has
allowed the peasants to resume cultivation unhindered by security
problems." The "projects in the field of
agricultural rehabilitation, roads and power" were not conceived
by the NRM but were part and parcel of the UPC Recovery Programme which was
"approved" first by the people of Uganda and
then by the international finical institutions. In other words these were
legitimate UPC babies. (Maybe I should do a detailed piece on agricultural
rehabilitation soon)
Seeing as the NRM/Movement are even now petrified of producing a clear
economic programme to be approved by the people of Uganda in a competitive
contest, it does not surprise me that "In the continuing absence of
a declared and detailed economic strategy, assessment of the Uganda economy and
its prospects has to lean heavily on the broad policy statements of government
leaders." A more accurate description should be 'on the clearest
head of the revolution'. In 1987 it was assumed that "the government
[read clearest head] may well insist on distancing
itself from the international financial system which it believes has operated
[and continues to operate to Uganda's disadvantage]." Therefore
the EIU decided to rely on the speech on the first anniversary of movement rule,
where the 'clearest head' "set out a classic exposition of
dependency theory as applied to Uganda." In his speech, the
'clearest head' "highlighted the neo-colonial character of Uganda's
economy after Independence as an appendage of the British economy; the lack of
integration between modern, export oriented, cash crop sector and the
traditional, non-monetised subsistence sector; the heavy dependence on external
forces, especially capital, technology and expertise; and failure of Uganda's
early political leaders to take the steps necessary to bring about independent
development." The 'clearest head' further described the economic
slide of the Amin era which "had left Uganda with little more than
the coffee industry intact, and the Obote recovery programme which accomplished
nothing but increased the country's debt burden to more than $2 bn by
1986." Even though at the time the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) had "identified
foreign debt of $1,076mn in 1985" which is $1.076 bn.
Coming back to power generation, the UPC Annual Delegates Conference held
at the International Conference Centre in Kampala on 6th November 1980, approved
a Manifesto for the 1980 General Elections which contained under the title
"INFRASTRUCTURE" and sub-title "8.1 Energy and
Electricity" how the UPC would handle this vital sector. The Manifesto
noted the fact that Uganda is "well endowed with vast natural
resources of hydro power" which had "suffered from a
decade of neglect and indecision." The three aims which I would
like be bring out concerning power generation as contained in the elections
Manifesto are:-
Uganda had at the time 9 small diesel generating stations with a total
capacity of 4.4MW which were serving towns which were not yet connected to the
National grid. During 1971/72 a number of industries shifted from electricity to
oil due to the relative price of the two energy sources. With the substantial
increase in oil prices in 1973 Uganda was ill-prepared for the change and so by
the 1980 elections there were some industries and the towns supplied by diesel
generators being unnecessarily dependent on hydro-carbon fuels. Considering the
Uganda's fuel bill for 1981 stood at U$130 million and represented 60 per cent
of export earnings; while of the 9 diesel generators, 2 were not operational
while those in operation were both expensive to run and maintain. The UPC
Recovery programme in the Mining and Energy sector had a project (ME 03)
entitled Rural Power Distribution which encompassed
the construction of a total of 1,741 km of overhead 33kV line and 340 km of
11kV with the view to extend the power distribution to the rural areas and
close down the diesel generators. The first 7 routes, totalling 651 km were
funded by the EEC at a cost of $6.5 million. Funds for the remaining routes
amounting to $11 million were sourced by the UPC government and were scheduled
for construction by the UEB in the post-1985 era.
From the NRM's plagiarisation of the UPC "Revised Recovery
Programme" renamed the "Rehabilitation and Development Plan"
under the same Project code of ME 03, it
states:-
The EEC-funded schemes were:-
Lira-Apac
Kasese-Katwe-Kabale
Mbarara-Ntungamo
Gulu-Moyo
Lira-Kitgum
Kagamba-Rukungiri
Mbarara-Ibanda
The 'unfunded' schemes were/are?
Lira-Aura-Koboko
Mubende-Kyenjojo-Fort Portal
Apac-Kigumba-Masindi
Soronko-Kapchorwa
Mafumbe-Makuye
Kiteme-Kiwumu
Kayunga-Galiraya
Fort portal-Bundibugyo
Mityana-Kasanda
Soroti-Moroto-Kotido
Mubende-Kakumiro-Hoima
Lugole-Mayugwe
Namasiga-Busede
Kiryasaka-Lukonko
Gulu-Lugole
Ibanda-Kamwenge
Earlier studies (1960s) had shown the "Nile system as a
whole represents an untapped capacity of over, 2,000MW of which Kabalega
(Murchison) and Ayago Falls account for over half. The only hydro-electric plant
currently in operation is the Owen Falls Power Station at the source of the
Nile, Jinja. It has an installed capacity of 150MW. Owen Falls generates
sufficient power to meet all Uganda's present needs and exports 30MW to Kenya
but for the economic deterioration and the industrial decline of the Military
regime period total power demand would, by now, [24 October, 1983;
Revised Recovery Programme 1982-1984] have exceeded available
capacity."
The project set for Kabalega was torpedoed, mainly by an organisation whose
concern about wildlife is exemplary, even admirable but as for people is a
different matter. Even after a Swedish company produced a plan which would have
generated the much needed electricity underground without taking away any of the
natural beauty of the Falls. Which followed the next best choice was Ayago Falls
of which from Background to the Budget 1982-1983 we find that the
"next major development is for a new hydro-electricity scheme at
Ayago on the River Nile. The project report for this is now ready and provides
for the development of 480MW which is more than three times the output from Owen
Falls." The purpose and objectives included among other things,
the getting power to needful areas such as hospitals etc. In the same Background
to the Budget the UPC government noted that "There is still a
substantial unsatisfied demand for electricity in the urban areas but not much
has been done so far because materials are lacking. As part of the rural
development programme, 62 kilometres of 33kV line from Lira to Apac is virtually
completed. This will provide supply to the hospital [UPC conceived
& built] at Apac. Eleven other rural development schemes for
connecting all parts of Uganda are expected to be completed within the next
two-and-a-half to three years. About 1,700-kilometre route length of
high-voltage lines will be constructed together with extensive low voltage lines
and many sub-stations. Last year, Kigagati Hospital [also UPC
conceived & built] was connected to Owen falls supply."
Ironically our 'clear headed' rulers after stating in their
plagiarised Rehabilitation and Development Plan that
"All materials for the seven funded schemes have been purchased and
have arrived in the country" and yet still Ugandan children are
incubated using sigiri [charcoal stoves] in UPC built hospitals which were clear
testimony of the UPC's Will to "fight relentlessly against .....
disease" in the spirit of Article 4(6)(i) of the UPC Constitution
which states inter alia that every person who "accepts the Aims and
Objectives of the Party" MUST "protect without
discrimination... every person lawfully living in Uganda and enable him to enjoy
the fundamental right[s] and freedom of the individual ...to ... Life...".
In the Revised Recovery Programme under project
profile ME 04 which incorporated ME 05 of the
Recovery Programme "initial studies have already been completed for
an increase in the generating capacity at Owen Falls and for a new dam further
down the Nile." The work had began because of the
"long lead times for hydro-electric power projects, preparatory work
must be undertaken during the Recovery Programme period to enable these schemes
to be completed in time to bring additional capacity on stream to meet expected
demand." Under the steam of the Recovery Programme
"projections suggest[ed] that extra capacity will be required by
1986." Up from "the rated capacity of the Owen Falls
station [was?] 150 MW." The study for a
second dam on the Nile at Ayago Falls was funded by the EADB. With two other
studies funded by the UK into the "detailed requirements for
rehabilitating and up-grading the present distribution system" and
the other was to "review previous studies of potential sites for
hydro-electric schemes and determine a least cost programme to meet projected
demand by the year 2000" costing $0.4 million.
From what I am reading in the Press it is not clear whether the uprating of
Owen Falls was actually carried out. In the NRM's plagiarisation under project
code ME-06/09 it states "Current power projections
suggest that extra capacity will be required by 1989." The year
1989 comes about because of the lack of direction in the beginning of the NRA
rule until they adopted the plagiarised the UPC Recovery Programme in 1988. But
as with most of the Movement's plagiarisations the costs were increased in that
where the UPC Recovery Programme for the UPRATING OWENS FALLS POWER
STATION (ME 09) was estimated to cost $24.0m and the
REHABILITATION OF POWER LINES (ME 06) was estimated to cost
$9.0m with the first $3.0m secured in 1983. ME 06 was
"also to cover the rehabilitation and completion of the small hydro
station at Kabale." [This power station appears under
ME-15 of the NRM's "Rehabilitation and Development
Plan."] The NRM's plagiarisation had the total cost of the combined
projects entitle: "Rehabilitation and up-rating of the Owens Falls HEP
System (ME-06/09)" at US$70.70m of which all the required funds were
entered as having been secured and the "Total Funding Gap:
Nil". The plagiarisation further states "The uprating
of the Owens Falls Power Station will provide Uganda with extra
hydro-electricity to meet the expected increase in power demand in the
intervening years up to the construction and commissioning of a second power
project whose studies are to be funded under ME-13." This project
titled "Detailed Design Studies for the Second Hydro-Electric Scheme"
with the project location at "Ayago Falls". In
the project write up we find "A Power Development Study was
completed and a report submitted to the Government in
1986.[Obviously initiated when others were in the bush.]
The report provided the economic costs of five alternative sites
along the River Nile, together with their environment implications to enable
decision to be made on the optimum choice of the Next Hydro-electric Power
station."
With the long lead times and total lack of forward planning it is virtually
impossible to imagine that Uganda will have the required extra capacity by 2004!
If the uprating had been done according to the studies and Owens Falls is
currently generating the expected 180MW it may be that some of the export
arrangements which were unplanned for are major factors in the load shedding.
These are of course cannot include the 30MW to Kenya nor the 15 MW to
Tanzania. These are the unplanned for exports based on the whims of a dictator
whose will must be satisfied otherwise he will wreak havoc on the
"population".
More later,
The Fugee |
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
