Jeniffer Musisi’s salary of $178,509 (shs.432m) annually is very disturbing
Kampala Executive Director, Jennifer Musisi
I have been saddened by the salary that has been accorded the executive Director of Kampala City, Jeniffer Musisi. Apparently, she is to earn shs.432 million (US. $178509.08) annually as a salary excluding other financial privileges. I find this kind of extravagancy so hurting and unbearable especially for one person to earn that much in country where the biggest part of 33 million people are barely having any food.
How does someone doing cleaning or teaching as a job in Uganda feel about this. I don’t know how much exactly people make in these jobs but I equate them to someone flying burgers in Europe or USA. Let’s take a look at a McDonald’s burger flipper. Here they make between £6.50 to £7.50 an hour. That may be what a burger flipper makes next year and the year after, as well. That does not matter if the cost of living does not rise either. In fact, it is to be expected in a non-inflationary economy. The value of any given labor is going to remain the same relative to the overall economy, unless for some reason that particular labor becomes more important.
But why would Jeniifer Musisi get that kind of salary in a country that is clearly facing a financial crisis? Is this selfishness of the highest order or our leaders are just heartless? The simple fact is that the NRM party does not care about poor Ugandans and low-level working people in general. They either seem to be stronger believers of the theory of trickledown economics, by which if we let rich people make more money, jobs would be created, and it would then trickle down to the rest of the society, or they are purposely making people poor to keep them at the bottom of Maslow’s theory of needs. They want them to keep thinking about basic needs instead of changing governments.
Under Gordon Brown leadership here in the UK, when we were in recession, the government was borrowing money and increasing spending where it is necessary.
‘Where is necessary’ here involved pumping more money into the banking system or nationalising some banks but not buying expensive jets for the executives or presidents or increasing the salaries/bonuses of company executives ( as is the case with Jeniffer Musisi’s shs.36m per months[US.$ 14875.76]or other public workers. This is where Uganda has got it wrong. They should not allocate biger salaries to public officials in such a poor country. Even bigger salaries are questionable in developed nations.
All countries or local governments around the world are reducing on their budgets because of global recession. In USA, according to the centre on Budget and Policy Priorities, 44 states have reduced their budgets by more than $350 billion dollars since 2009.
In the UK, bodies such as the Association of British Insurers, the Investment Management Association and Pirc, a consultancy advising shareholders, believe the bonus culture should be reformed during this recession period. Both in Nigeria and Tanzania, there are finding ways of reducing on public spending.
It is also true that different countries deal with recession using different theories of economics which I prefer not to go through today. However, the theory people are familiar with is the Keynesian theory which was welcomed by former UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, with open hands, before David Cameron switched to cutting down on public spending. This is where governments advocate for deficit spending.
With Keynesian theory, when you are heavily in debt, the only way to keep spending is to keep borrowing. I supported Gordon Brown but his Keynesian theory was more of a political survival decision rather than anything else. The whole thing was a gamble from the start. Yes, consumer spending is the main driver of the UK’s economic growth but an increase in people saving to pay off their debts normally results in companies’ profits falling. Companies in turn tend to lay off staff, leading to a vicious cycle of people losing their jobs and being unable to pay their debts and mortgages.
The only reason why Gordon Brown could not easily reduce on public spending was basically because he had been on TV telling people that reduucing public spending means worse public services, so he couldn’t turn around and start slashing it. So the only real option for the UK government then was to spend some of the money that was saved during the good times combined with less borrowing to beat the recession. After all, the UK economy had been booming for years. UK had not had a recession since 1992.
But the reality is that any government under financial crisis should be trying to cut debt by trimming public spending. But that is suicide to some political leaders especially if all they care about is keeping themselves in power.
The main downside to Keynesian style of economics is that government borrowing is exactly the same as consumer borrowing. At some point, you have to pay it back. And the way government pays off borrowing is through higher taxes.
One Ugandan wrote on the Ugandans At Heart(UAH) forum in 2009 when recession had hit big nations such as UK: ‘To say that Uganda has recession is like talking of a chicken with a toothache’. Basically, the statement would have been:’ to say that Uganda has got no recession, it is like a man sleeping with a woman with HIV for a long time without a condom, and then turn around and say that he has got no HIV before he even goes for a check up’.
Uganda has been sleeping with the donor countries who have got HIV (recession) for a long time. Uganda is basically married to the donors ( USA , UK , Canada , France, Japan , Dubai ,…) and there have got a lot of children (Ugandans abroad) together. Donors support over 30% of our budget at the moment.
Ugandans abroad gave Uganda about $1.4 billion in 07/08 alone and there are the major source of foreign exchange in the country. Each of these guys looks after a lot of families in the 75% non-monetary sector. So because the ‘’Nkuba Kyeyo’’(unpaid Ugandan ambassadors abroad) or donors are affected financially, less money is being sent back home at the moment, and as a result the following services have been affected one way or the other: Construction boom in Uganda has declined; Quality of life of families is affected especially those depending on Ugandans abroad; Businesses in Uganda cities like the hospitality industry are feeling it because of reduced spending; Uganda’s general export industry has been affected because of less spending in USA or UK . We don’t have enough market within Uganda to consume the goods we produce. Let’s hope that the donor countries don’t shut down their markets from us as was the case in 1930s.
NGOs are already reducing their activities in Kampala because donors have squeezed funds. Tourism industry is already in decline in Uganda and this is directly affecting the so called CHOGM hotels and travel agencies. Foreign investment is in a decline as few foreign investors wish to bring money into the country. Food prices have become high in Uganda such that I was told a sack of charcoal costs over shs.90,000 and I kg of sugar is at shs.4000.
This country needs to make some changes. It has to start with Campaign Finance Reforms, corruption and the excesses there. To get that passed, we need a new Executive leadership, and it certainly can’t be NRM to get this done.
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
No comments:
Post a Comment