Before Uganda Spends Another Shs15 Trillion in Karamoja, What Have We Learned?
Karamoja has seen numerous government programmes aimed at improving livelihoods, infrastructure, food security, water access and economic opportunities. Yet this week, Members of Parliament raised a fundamental question: before launching another major development plan, do we know which previous interventions worked, which failed, and why?
On September 24, Parliament’s Presidential Affairs Committee considered a proposed Shs15 trillion, 10-year Karamoja Regional Development Plan. The proposal includes major investments such as water projects, schools, electrification, livestock industries, industrial parks and a railway.
The discussion quickly turned to something more basic than the size of the proposed investment: evidence.
MPs called for a comprehensive assessment of previous government programmes and the money spent on them. They questioned whether different government agencies had been implementing overlapping projects and whether some earlier projects had failed to deliver lasting results. The committee also raised questions about reported government-funded dams that had not been completed.
There were also questions about conflicting figures surrounding a Shs45 billion emergency food intervention. Parliament members asked for clarification about how much had been spent and how many households had actually benefited. These are questions raised during a parliamentary committee meeting; they should not be treated as proof that funds were misused.
The government, for its part, says the proposed plan is intended to take a whole-of-government approach, with different ministries and agencies coordinating their interventions rather than duplicating projects.
That distinction matters.
Development is not simply about allocating more money. It is also about knowing whether previous spending produced the intended results.
For an ordinary Ugandan taxpayer, the question is straightforward: if billions have already been spent on a problem, what evidence tells us that another large investment will produce a different outcome?
This is not an argument against development spending in Karamoja. The region has legitimate development needs, and long-term investment can have significant benefits if properly planned and implemented.
It is an argument for learning before spending.
A serious evaluation should tell citizens what was promised, how much was allocated, what was actually delivered, who benefited, what did not work and what should be changed. It should also make that information accessible to the public.
The proposed Shs15 trillion plan therefore presents Uganda with an important governance test: can government demonstrate what has been learned from previous programmes before asking taxpayers to finance the next generation of interventions?
What should citizens demand from government before another Shs15 trillion is committed to transforming Karamoja?
Comments