UGANDA: GOVERNMENT OUGHT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OVER FAILED SYSTEMS PRODUCING SAME BAD RESULT IN NORTHERN UGANDA

Whilst i do agree that individual attitudes matter and the examples cited under NAADS are not imagined. We all saw it: tagged goats in the market the very next day, cows diverted for dowry, cassava cuttings left to dry, and groundnuts roasted instead of planted, those realities can not be denied. That is why I talk about people buying new African print dresses and marrying new wives with PDM and Emyooga money as widely registered by the government.

Suffices to mention who is in charge of all these mishaps and situationism. Is it the disadvantaged category i described above from the war camps receiving for over 20 years and not working because of war conditions that groomed the once hardworking  self-reliant Acholi communities into beggers,  or normal Ugandans from else.

Also suffices to mention the timing of seed redistribution. Are you aware that some people who pushed for coffee in Acholi land recently actually distributed coffee seedlings, and they are drying under trees, huts, and the hot sunshine because the approach was not considered? Who is to blame if not the one person who is in charge of the system? Why do we have extension workers, consultants, and experts who are paid crazily for their vast knowledge if they keep delivering the same bad results year in year out?

Also, acknowledging those failures does not absolve the government of responsibility. In fact, it strengthens my argument for better state design, not withdrawal.

*Government is not just “me and you” in the moral sense. The government is also policy, systems, safeguards, incentives, timing, monitoring, and consequence. When the same failures repeat themselves across districts, across years, and across programmes such as NAADS-that you mentioned, Operation Wealth Creation, the Parish Development Model, and now compensation linked restocking that i am discussing, then we must be honest with ourselves. This is not merely individual moral failure. It is a systemic failure. And, it is the hard fact that the government has to confront in order to break free from the failure bandage spell.*

*A system that repeatedly assumes behaviour will change without redesigning incentives is a system that has refused to learn.*
A system engineered for intentional neglect of a given marginalised group.

Because they should be result oriented, they should invest in research.

Culture does play a role, I agree. But culture does not exist in a vacuum. It responds to scarcity, trauma, hunger, lack of trust, and weak follow-up. When a family sells a cow immediately, it is often because survival today feels more urgent than investment tomorrow (I’ve talked about this time and again. Rich people don’t feel me because they wake up to a warm kitchen and rich aroma of breakfast with the promise of indefinite eternal wealth  Not to say I am very poor, but you highlight that i am very absorbed into what matters more for the plight of the disadvantaged war torn communities of Northern Uganda- Acholiland perway). That is not an excuse, but it is context that government policy must confront, not ignore.

*Imagine, if the government knows, because history has shown it, that livestock can be sold the next day, then why design a programme that allows the same failed outcome again and again and again? Why not think differently? Why not consider phased restocking, communal herd models, delayed ownership transfer, veterinary linked tracking, involvement of cultural leaders, financial literacy before distribution and not after, or direct physical restocking instead of cash where patterns of misuse are already known? That is what a learning and evolving government looks like.*

Advising our brothers and sisters is necessary, but advice alone has never defeated poverty. Systems shape behaviour more reliably than sermons.

*So yes, citizens must play their role. Families must be responsible. Culture must heal. But the government must also do what only the government can do. It must research failure, redesign delivery, enforce accountability, and stop repeating experiments that history has already shown to be flawed.*

*Otherwise, we will keep blaming the people while recycling broken models and calling it effort.*

And that, too, would be vanity.

And I guess to the comfortable officer, he or she cares less after all they are paid at the end of the day. If they can’t care more, then it makes the whole government system a huge, irritating hoarx! A scam!

And it’s not just about defending the government. It is about logical facts and about what works.

Truly yours,

*Laker Gloria Grace*