Prime
The UCDA merger debate: Separating fact from fiction
Mr Joseph Lwevuze in his coffee garden in Ntangala Village, Luweero District. Mr Lwevuze counts himself among the beneficiaries of the coffee boom after harvesting and selling more than 50 bags and earning more than Shs50 million this year. PHOTOS/DAN WANDERA
What you need to know:
- The merger's proponents including President Museveni, contend that UCDA has not demonstrated exceptional results to warrant its independence.
I have been closely following the intense debate surrounding the proposed merger of the Uganda Coffee Development Authority (UCDA) with the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries (Maaif) inside Parliament and beyond, and noticed a familiar pattern - politics.
Amid the arguments for and against, some individuals are leveraging this opportunity for political mileage. While acknowledging their valid concerns, it is crucial to separate fact from fiction, prioritising the nation's interest.
The merger's proponents including President Museveni, contend that UCDA has not demonstrated exceptional results to warrant its independence. They point to Maaif's existing crop, livestock, and fisheries divisions as evidence of its capacity to handle UCDA's mandate, adding that streamlining services and eliminating redundant institutions will boost efficiency.
Additionally, they argue that the merger aims to consolidate resources and eliminate scarce funding across multiple government institutions, emphasising that streamlining services and eliminating redundant institutions will boost efficiency.
On the other hand, opponents warn that dissolving UCDA will harm Uganda's vital coffee sector, which generated Shs5 trillion last year, citing concerns about bureaucratic delays and lack of technical expertise within ministries. They contend that the civil service mode of operation cannot efficiently manage the complex demands of the coffee export market.
Mr Muwanga Kivumbi, the Member of Parliament for Butambala Constituency and chairperson of the Buganda Parliamentary Caucus, and Mr Medard Lubega Sseggona, the Member of Parliament for Busiro East Constituency, note that coffee-producing countries typically manage their sectors through specialised agencies, citing Kenya and Ethiopia's experiences with declining coffee exports after rationalisation.
Opponents also highlight the benefits of semi-autonomous institutions like UCDA, which enjoy specialised boards and greater agility in decision-making. These agencies were created to address inefficiencies within ministries, where ministers with limited technical expertise often lead complex sectors. In contrast, agencies are overseen by experts in the field, ensuring more effective management.
Emotions and political affiliations aside, it is essential to critically evaluate the potential consequences of this merger. Coffee is a significant export earner for Uganda, generating Shs5 trillion last year. We must consider the impact on farmers, exporters, and the economy.
The coffee sector is a vital export earner for Uganda, accounting for approximately 20 percent of the country's total export revenue over the past decade. Dissolving UCDA introduces uncertainty, potentially harming Uganda's economy.
As Kivumbi stated: "Oil won't bring in as much revenue as coffee. This is a crop that directly supports our economy."
It’s also critical that we set aside tribal and regional interests in the coffee sector discussion and prioritise Uganda's economic growth and development at all costs. Our main focus should be on finding solutions that benefit all Ugandans. The point I am trying to raise here is how can we grow together?
With all honesty, Uganda's coffee sector requires a unified approach as it is the only path that will ensure equitable growth and development for all.
Key considerations include UCDA's specialised expertise and agility in decision-making have benefited the coffee sector; Maaif's capacity to handle UCDA's mandate requires scrutiny; the merger's potential effects on coffee quality, exports, and revenue; and alternative solutions, such as salary reviews and increased funding for institutions like NACORI-Mukono.
As we navigate this debate, let us remember that our collective prosperity depends on informed decision-making. Lawmakers must carefully weigh the benefits of specialised agencies against the drive for efficiency, ensuring that reforms do not compromise key sectors.
I, therefore, urge lawmakers and stakeholders to put Uganda's interest above all, ensuring the coffee sector's growth benefits everyone. Let us move beyond political posturing and focus on the facts.
Teddy Namayanja
