But something that may not be intended as a joke, and is certainly not innocent, is another lamentable milestone in the history of the government’s current showpiece initiative to assist the recovery of war-affected northern Uganda: the Peace, Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP).
The milestone in question was a March 31 deadline for the submission of detailed work plans to the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) – which oversees the PRDP – in order to access funds to become available in July 2009, when “full-scale” implementation of the PRDP is promised to begin.
When the PRDP was launched in October 2007, the Prime Minister Apolo Nsibambi described the plan “as a commitment by the Government to stabilise and recover the north,” and The New Vision front-page coverage of the launch stated: “The comprehensive plan is expected to kick start the recovery process in the north following the return of peace” (“Sh1 trillion for northern Uganda,” New Vision, 16 Oct 2007).
The three-year PRDP budget was announced as Shs 1.1 trillion ($606m) – Shs 387 billion ($202m) per year, 30% of the money to be committed each year by the Government of Uganda plus 70% from the Government’s development partners.
The March 31 deadline noted above was announced on February 4 by the Permanent Secretary of the OPM, Pius Bigirimana, in a meeting at the offices of the Refugee Law Project (RLP) in Kampala. This did not give much time – less than two months – for such plans to be drawn up and submitted. But that is, or was, not the real problem.
The real problem is not even one at the opposite extreme of dubious timing: the July 2009 date promised for full implementation of the PRDP is nearly two years after the plan was announced in October 2007.
The real problem is this: According to the Permanent Secretary, the proposed work plans due last week were to be based on clear, explicit guidelines to be provided by the OPM and made available to the eligible districts and other potential implementing partners. Without such guidelines, it is impossible to draw up meaningful, detailed work plans. Trying to do so is like target practice in total darkness.
That is now the situation. With the March 31 (and April 1, April Fool’s Day) dates past – and nearly a year-and-a-half after the PRDP launch – there are no PRDP guidelines. There is still no chance for districts or other implementing partners to know what the PRDP will fund, and to what extent. How will they proceed? What will happen now?
Unfortunately, such lack of clarity from the OPM concerning the PRDP is hardly new. Indeed, a recent RLP report on the plan emphasizes how slow and opaque the PRDP process has been so far, with no explanations or criteria for selecting projects for funding; no clear identification of what those projects, if any, have been; and no mechanisms for monitoring or evaluating those projects (“Is the PRDP Politics as Usual?,” Briefing Note 2, December 2008 – access at www.refugeelawproject.org).
In early January a front-page Daily Monitor story reported that “President Museveni has approved the suspension” of the PRDP. The article cites a December 30 letter “to various government agencies” from Mr Bigirimana stating that the “deferral” of the PRDP was “intended to enable his office and other key parties to draw up work plans to guide the budgeting and monitoring of the scheme” (“Govt suspends plan to reconstruct north,” Daily Monitor, January 9, 2009).
The article caused a flurry of responses. An editorial in the Sunday Monitor on January 11 demanded an explanation; articles on January 12 and 16 were headlined “Northern MPs unite to fight PRDP suspension” and “PRDP a hoax – leaders.” Alice Alaso wrote an opinion piece on January 15 titled “It would be scandalous to suspend PRDP.” And in the midst of these questions and criticisms David Wakikona, Minister of State for Northern Uganda Rehabilitation, wrote a letter to the Monitor published on January 13 insisting that the PRDP was not suspended, although in the same letter he acknowledged challenges that would put off “full-scale implementation” until July 2009.
This was the context in which Bigrimana came to the RLP offices on February 4. He stated that he wanted to correct what he called “misinformation” about the PRDP being suspended, and listed a number of “pilot activities” that had been funded (but without details). But he then acknowledged, as Wakikona had earlier, that full implementation would only begin in July 2009.
He also, but only after a series of questions asking for clarification, stated unequivocally that all of the initially promised Shs 1.1 trillion ($606m) would be available, $202m each year for three years beginning in July 2009. Nothing spent so far would count against those totals, and all of it would be “new money,” on top of money already budgeted for the targeted districts.
He then outlined the process of implementation: (1) The OPM would provide a detailed budget breakdown, identifying program areas to be funded, with the amount of money to be provided for each area, year-by-year for the three years of the program. (2) All implementing partners – district governments covered by the PRDP and NGOs – would need to submit detailed proposals and work plans by March 31 each year in order to access PRDP monies. (3) Monies would then be allocated to begin implementing funded programs beginning July 1, 2009.
But there are still no guidelines. What does this mean for “full-scale” implementation of the PRDP in July 2009?
Will the PRDP remain essentially a mirage, with no or little funding as has been the case for the past year-and-a-half? Or will billions of shillings be spent – and wasted – without guidelines and monitoring, without meaningful input from districts and others in the war-affected regions?
Skepticism about Government’s commitment to assist the recovery of the north is wide-spread and deep. This goes back to the unfulfilled promises of and under-commitment of funds to earlier Northern Uganda Recovery Programs (NURP I and II) beginning in 1996, has continued with the wastefulness and corruption of NUSAF, and is now further fuelled by the so-far empty promises and lack of transparency with PRDP.
atkinson This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
