1. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA1 HARMONIZATION THE APRM (NPoA) WITH UGANDA’S NDP (2010/11-2014/15) Presented by Kasingye Kyamugambi National Planning Authority (U) At An Expert Group Meeting on “Harmonizing APRM-NPoAs and other National Development Plans (NDP) into a Common Medium Expenditure Framework (MTEF)” KAMPALA, UGANDA, 29-30 SEPTEMBER 2010

2. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA2 PRESENTATION OUTLINE  Background to NPoA  Background, Process and overview of NDP 2010/11-2014/15  NPoA Versus NDP  NPoA Versus NDP (issues not in NDP)  Linkage of NDP to MTEF, annual plans  Implementation strategy of NDP  M&E strategy of NDP

3. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA3 BACKGROUND OF NPoA  IN 2003, a MOU of APRM was adopted in Abuja by the sixth summit of the Head of State and Government implementation committee of NEPAD  APRM arguably most innovative aspect of NEPAD, an instrument for self evaluation  Country self assessment carried out using holistic approach and CSAR submitted in December 2007.  His Excellency tabled the country report to his peers at APR forum and review at Sharm-El Sheikh in Egypt on 29 th June 2008.  APRM country review report No.7 released in January 2009 with a National Programme of Action (NPoA)  Progress of review of NPoA is every sixth months in APRM summits

4. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA4 BACKGROUND OF NDP 2010/11- 2014/15  Uganda had 5 year Plans from post independence up to Early 1970S  Political turmoil and instability in the 1970s and early 1980s affected economic progress  Post-1986 reforms geared towards stabilising the economy (erratic macro-economic environment and promoting economic growth  Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) 1997/8-2007/8 as post structural adjustment poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs).  PEAP extended to cover the period of NDP formulation  NDP launched by H.E the President of Uganda on 19 th April 2010.

5. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA5 NDP Process  Independent evaluation of the PEAP…. Noted issues of concern  Formed a Core technical committee (CTC) composed of NPA and MFPED to spearhead the process of formulation  Formed Sectoral committee in each sector comprising of Government, private sector, and civil society to draft sector papers  Review of literature (internal and external) and consultancies in specific areas  Consultation in LGs, sectors, CSO and private sector institutions  Consultations with Development partners and humanitarian organisation  Consultation with Cabinet, Parliament and H.E the President  Passing through formal approval process

6. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA6 Overview of NDP  Progress on Economic development since 1962-2008

7. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA7 Overview Cont’d  Noted structural features in the economy to be addressed  Identified the most binding constraints limiting growth in Uganda, (PSM and PA, HRM FINANCING, INFRASTRUCTURE, MINDSET ISSUES, LOW APPLICATION OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, LOW AVAILABILITY OF PRODUCTION INPUTS)  Derived theme in line with National Vision Growth, Employment and socio-economic transformation for prosperity  Proposed policy shift : Intertwining economic growth and poverty eradication  Proposed new strategic Direction: Quasi market approach (Mixture of market led and state led interventions, business approach to service delivery  Proposed investment priorities and national core projects 

8. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA8 Overview Cont’d  Modelled the macro economic framework with fiscal and monetary parameters  Produced the MTEF for implementing the Plan  Proposed financing strategy (increase of tax base, efficiency gains, PPP, capital markets, DPs)  Proposed sectoral interventions  Outlines the Implementation strategy  Outline the monitoring and evaluation strategy  Cost implementation matric programmed and produced.

9. Key Macro and Financial Targets for NDP Friday, May 01, 2015NPA9

10. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA10 NPoA versus NDP General observation  Process of developing APRM CSAR was participatory and consultative like the NDP formulation process.  APRM Country Review report 2009 was one of the key source document at sectoral level and national level  The identified actions were preliminary linked to their respective sectors. Implementation will take place at sectoral and LG level  These actions were integrated and incorporated. In some cases they formed objectives, in other areas they were part of strategies and in some areas they were specific interventions  In some cases they provided “symptomic” areas of further investigation  There are many repetitions in action points.

11. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA11 NPoA Versus NDP DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL GOVERNANCE ACTIONS  Objective 1: Covered in NDP and some progress made on the land policy, PRDP implementation, formation of equal opportunities commission.  Objective 2: most aspects covered in NDP and progress made on electoral reforms, and media law under preparation.  Objective 3: Most of the issues covered and progress made in JLOS sector  Objective 4; most aspects covered under JLOS an legislature chapters

12. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA12 NPoA Versus NDP DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL GOVERNANCE ACTIONS  Objective 5: issues captured and progress made. The Public service review is underway  Objective 6: issues noted but little progress to date  Objective 7: the issues were wholly captured and implementation underway  Objective 8: the action points were covered under social development chapter on NDP  Objective 9; Issues captured under social development chapter ..

13. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA13 NPoA Versus NDP  Economic governance and management actions  Objective 1: All issues captured under NDP. Notable progress being made like Oil policy, measures to increase tax base being implemented, UDC revitalised  Objective 2: The actions captured. Progress made in enhancing capacity of NPA, PPP policy being formulated;  Objective 3: Actions captured but challenge on decreasing public expenditure given the creating of new districts  Objective 4: The key actions were captured. Progress made in establishment of anti-corruption courts. Challenge in implementing recommendations of commissions and establishment of leadership court tribunals  Objective 5: Actions captured under various chapters. Progress made on the establishment of E.A common market and efforts to develop regional transport infrastructure.

14. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA14 NPoA Versus NDP Corporate Governance Actions  Objective 1: Most actions captured however notable progress only on pensions bill and one stop centre at UIA. Slow progress on enactment of laws  Objective 2: The actions were captured in NDP. Progress on establishment of industrial court. Other actions being implemented  Objective 3: Actions noted but slow progress on strengthening and adhering to corporate governance standards  Objective 4: Actions captured in NDP but no decisive action on strengthening the UNBS  Objective 5: Not explicitly captured

15. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA15 NPoA Versus NDP Socio-Economic development Actions  Objective 1: The actions captured. Notable progress made of strengthening the role of NPA. The Chair of NPA sits in Cabinet.  Objective 2: Action captured. Progress of formulation of Agricultural DSIP and promotion of environmental protection.  Objective 3: Action were captured. However implementation is still a challenge in the areas of health and education partly due to funding constraints  Objective 4: Actions captured and progress made in areas of water and sanitation, ICT infrastructure and general progress towards MDGs. The land policy is being formulated  Objective 5: The actions were captured in NDP. Progress made in establishment of equal opportunities commission and promoting of gender.

16. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA16 NPoA Versus NDP (Areas not covered )  Some areas under fostering constitutional democracy like  Highly political actions: like reverse the presidential term limit  Review the representation of special interest groups

17. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA17 Linkage of NDP / NPoA to implementation  NDP is the sole Government strategic framework for next 5 years  The NDP provided MTEF  The NDP provided sectoral interventions and cost estimates from which the Sectors will derive annual budgets  NDP provided an implementation strategy clearly spelling out some responsibilities of key government institutions

18. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA18 Monitoring and Evaluation  NDP has an M&E strategy. Currently M&E framework is being prepared. It will ensure indicators of NPoA are captured

19. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA19 Challenges  The format or orientation of government sector and APRM country review report are different  There were budget limitation and therefore some action points will not immediately commence like Land fund  Before addressing some constraints identified in NDP some of the actions can not be implemented. The slow process of legislation is one major challenge

20. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA20 Conclusion  Most of the Action points were captured in the NDP 2010/11-2014/15.  The monitoring of NPoA will be easier since the issues are captured in NDP which will also be monitored  The NPoA will be implemented through government institutions since the NDP is the sole government strategic document.  For easy integration, thematic grouping should as much as possible follow government laid down groupings

21. Friday, May 01, 2015NPA21 FOR GOD AND MY COUNTRY Thank you