Swahili Versrion

Mainland Tanzania started implementing second generation Poverty Reduction Strategy in 2005/06 following recommendations from review of the first generation ...Click here to read more

Swahili Versrion

Mainland Tanzania started implementing second generation Poverty Reduction Strategy in 2005/06 following recommendations from review of the first generation Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRSP). A medium term National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA) has been the national guiding framework for growth and poverty reduction in Tanzania (Mainland) for the past five years. MKUKUTA 1 is concluding in July 2010. The government has subsequently made resolution to develop a successor five years poverty reduction strategy which started with a review of MKUKUTA 1 in January 2009. The review has just been completed in early April 2010 and in the spirit of participatory approach and wider consultation, the draft successor strategy (MKUKUTA II) has now been circulated to stakeholders for discussion.

During the review of MKUKUTA 1, several design and implementation issues were noted during the course of implementing the strategy. They include, among others:

Inadequate prioritization and coordination of interventions: Although by design prioritization of interventions could have been done at sector and cluster levels, this did not adequately happen due to insufficient guidance (i.e sectors not aligned with MKUKUTA). Coordination was not satisfactory (e.g. coordination of line items in MTEFs of various MDA contributing to a particular result/outcome remained weak)

Inadequate financing of MKUKUTA: Financing MKUKUTA required innovative investment programmes that will generate funds to support development activities. This was not realized for the outgoing strategy mainly because the realistic costing of the interventions was late determined.

Inadequate guidance on MKUKUTA supporting strategy: MKUKUTA needed to be supported by other strategies and policies in the implementation. Most of the existing policies and strategies were not in line with MKUKUTA Occasionally, some of them were even contradicting with MKUKUTA.

Weak Monitoring and Evaluation System: The National PMS was weak in that it was not covering most of the Tanzania communities. Thus, majority of the beneficiaries of MKUKUTA were not aware of the implementation of MKUKUTA 1.

In response to the apparent weaknesses of MKUKUTA 1, the following has been added in the successor strategy:

Robust actor-coordination in achieving results: The new strategy will carry forward the successes of the outgoing strategy and address the shortcomings of its predecessor by providing adequate guidance on prioritization and strengthening institutions that foster cross-sector collaborations.

Sharper and more focused interventions: This strategy will be sharper and more focused in the sense that it will go to the extent of clearly spelling out not only the results, but also the means to achieving the intended results. This will be a strategy which chooses few key results embracing agriculture and non-agricultural economic activities, infrastructure, quality and equal access to education (primary, secondary and tertiary) and quality health, water and sanitation, and through scaling up on good governance and accountability. In general, key result areas for achieving the goals will be prioritized in sequential manner that will ensure achievement of targets.

The content of the Draft MKUKUTA II can be found in the following link:

http://www.tzonline.org/pdf/mkukutalldraft.pdf

This discussion topic is therefore intended to gauge the extent at which the successor strategy has taken into account the shortcomings of MKUKUTA 1. In addition, the discussion is intended to assess the adequacy of MKUKUTA II in terms of achieving the specified outcomes, goals and operational targets as well as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Our discussion should therefore focus on addressing the following questions:

Thanks Mr.Meena we have many “Funza”who eating the nation.It has turned out these people who were lifted by Mwalimu to a position of a “Saint” are those who have turned out to be the seroius “devils” that will no come to “heaven” since they have found their own heaven in the natural resources of Tanzania.Some of them have even own the Kiwira Coal Mine and turned “IKULU” to a Kariakoo Market!

However we don’t have stupid Ministers in Tanzania but greedy ones.One could remember Mobutu,Idd Amini dada and Haile Selasie what they have done for their countries is beign indirectly repeated by our leaders in Tanzania.As an example they have their bank accounts in Switzerland where they can deposit money from radar and richmond contracts,avoild paying tax and feed us with MKUKUTA II projects! Part of the donors money find their big pockets and talk always on good governance,accountability,responsibility,implementation and eradicating poverty.Oh,Yes indeed they are eradicating their own poverty but not that of Tanzanians at large!

Dr.Khamis

Dear Comrades,

An interesting discussion here. That we have everything of what it takes to be rich and we are still poor. Thus a black pastor in the UK wrote a book titled "What is wrong with being black?". I haven't had a chance of seeing or reading the book but judging from the title one is tempted to think something is wrong with us! And a white investor had this to say about our viongozi, " I have never come across stupid ministers like the ones I have found in Africa." They don't think- all they think is about themselves and their string of 'meatheads' relatives. Oh, Yes, that is what they do! No one thinks or care about Tanzania. I don't have to go listing a number of bogus contracts this country has found itself in! So, one Mzee was talking very high of CCM- citing good community programmes it had to allievate wananchi of Tanzania from poverty. Nice talk and one gentlemen wondered whether it was CCM or Mwalimu doing that for the good of the country and its people! Unfortunately the same people Mwalimu believed in are destroying the same nation it lifted them from been eaten by 'funza'.
 
regards,
 
Meena.

Indeed Mr.Apronius”the problem in the way this country fails to protect and use its natural resources. This country is very rich in natural resources such as Minerals(gemstones), natural gas, forestry resources, water bodies etc. how do manage them?”.

The good management of our natural resources could help us to construct good roads.As an example if you travell from Dodoma to Mwanza you will see rocks besides that road.These are granite rocks that could be easily blasted and grined to construct major tarmac roads and village roads.Have we people in the government who think in this way or have we people in Tanroads who have such ideas or have we people in MKUKUTA who can give sucg suggestions?

Yes it is our natural resources especially gold resources,coal resources, nickel resources and gas resources that can help in developing our country and eradicate poverty.

I think the goverment has to concentrate on good management,good governance,responsibility,accountability and effective implementation on our natural resources.

Dr.Khamis

Sweden

Thanks Mr. Cyril Komba since you have used very interesting work to describe MUKUKUTA.” most of people in Tanzania just knew the programme from the media and not from the founders who were to go through the country to introduce such a model.” I have worked almost 30 years with International Mining Company and I have frequently testing “mine models” before using them practically.There was no campaign to introduce the Mkukuta model to the users namely Tanzanians.Here i will give another example.Before mining our gold in Tanzania any company has to conduct intensive expoloration work by drilling bore holes in a specific pattern and interprate the information save in a database.Then it makes a geological model of the gold deposit to a certain depth.This model has to be refined and scrutinised and extra drill holes be drilled to verify the gold deposit model and the gold reserves.Then a company makes an investment and mining decision.That is why our gold mining is very successful in the country.Had MUKUTATA followed such a model of doing things we would not have this problem of marking is as a complete failure!

Dr.Khamis

Sweden

Dear Dr. Khamis and other

I am following your arguement and good ideas on MKUKUTA. They are valuable and helpful in structuring the successor strategy of MKUKUTA. Given the speed and timing of drafting mkukuta II, I suggest we shift the debate from postmoterm to contributing input into the new draft....attached. This will make sense and hopefully get things done in the right way

Dear members!!

It has been pleasure for me getting a chance to share little i know about MKUKUTA.

Sincerely to say the programme has not achieved many of its goals to a large percent.
among the things that have led to its down fall hope MKUKUTA was not nationalized, here what i mean most of people in Tanzania just knew the programme from the media and not from the founders who were to go through the country to introduce such a model.
 if the gvt used alot of money to campaign for newly introduced budget last year using all MPs and Ministers why didn't these effort used to camapign for MKUKUTA?
another issue is how participatory was the programme perhaps lack of partcipation from the earliest stage of it has made it poorly achieve the goals.

This is a typical example of ”implementation” failure that we have observed in MKUKUTA discussions.It is also an example of ”good governance”.How can we reduce income poverty for the miners if the ministry concerned hides important information?

Dr.Khamis

Sweden

 Ministry hiding information on mining issues - stakeholders

By Lulu George

6th May 2010

Miners from different regions in the country have complained against lack of important information on opportunities offered by the government and sponsors on education, capital and markets which would help to improve their income as well as the mining sector.

They claimed that much information was hoarded at the Energy and Minerals ministry, without being availed to the miners, especially those in the villages.

The miners raised their concern in separate interviews with The Guardian at a stakeholders meeting on the challenges facing local miners, which was organized by the Tanzania Women Miners Association yesterday.

They said the government had many good plans to improve the mining sector in the country, but most of them were never implemented, and often the miners were not told about them.

“We, as one of the intended groups, do not get information about the plans' implementation," said a miner, Bahati Kalekwa, from Shinyanga.

Thanks Mr.Feruz.As I have written in my introduction that” Each of these objects or goals requires a detailed research programs and experiments as to how to obtain the best results.It is evident this has not been done and that is the reason why Mukukuta I has been a complete failure”I have suspected that Mkukuta I was a sort of research that was not conducted in a proper way. Now you have mentioned that “communities were not consulted and encouraged to participate fully” and this is actually the biggest mistake. Any project that involve people requires that you have to convince those people and let their views heard so that you can make changes in the project.You must have all the people with you so that they can fully participate.

On the otherhand that Mkukuta I was a wide project that covered the whole country.I would suggest that Mkukuta could concentrate in one selected village in each region.All those Mkukuta experiments on education,health,agriculture,reduction of income poverty,good governance,implementation,follow-up,reporting and evaluation could be applied in such a village.If we had good results from these selected villages then we could extend to other villages for example 20 villages in every region.

Remember that 70 years ago villages in Sweden(or Scandinavia) were as poor as Tanzannia.But slowly have they managed to contruct tarmac roads,building hospitals,ditributing electricity and even Internet services in those villages.

Dr.Khamis

Sweden

     Dear Dr Hamis.
Thank you very much for your response in this particular topic.My views is that we have to consider MKUKUTA I,as a research that has failled,hence the majority rular comunities have not been consulted and encouraged to participate fully.
 best regards.

Feruz Ally

4.Financing

The question here is who is financing Mkukuta II projects? All there projects will be fullfilled if only the government has to finance them.Our budget is 40% dependent on donars and if the donars delay in giving the money that means the Mkukuta II projects will also be affected.Mkukuta I has mentioned resources from a) Domestic revenue, b) Programmme loan and grants, c) Project loans and grants,d) Basket Support loans,d)HIPC relief IDA,IMF and ADB e) Bank Borrowing.Who is going to pay all these loans and at what interest rate?

Mkukuta II has pointed mining as a source of finance.However the 5 % royalty from the mining activities in the country is far from enough to help in reducing poverty in the country.Now the new passed bill will allow only Tanzanians to mine gemestones but the big money is not on our gemestones but in gold mining.During privatisation the gold price was at 350$ and now is at the range of 1000$ and only foreign companies are mining gold in Tanzania and Tanzanians themselves have no shares in these companies.During Mzee Nyerere’s period as President all gold mines were under STAMICO. Most our gold mines will be mined out by the year 2025. if you look at the data of mine reserves from each mine one can easily come to this conclusion.If the gold mines were operating on a joint venture basis between the government(51%) and foreign companies(49%) part of the benefit would be helping in the fight aginst poverty.

5 Implementation,monitoring and accountability

The above mentioned things were not properly functioning in Mkukuta I and lead to its complete failure.There are no indications in Mkukuta II that improvements will be made regarding those topics.One would expect monthly reports in all projects and follow ups.There should have been 6-months reports for all projects and evaluation reports.Decisions should be taken after evaluation report if the project could continue or put on hold.

6.Conclusion

  i. Mkukuta II is actually similar to Mkukuta I

ii. Mkukuta II is not comprehensive and robust to face the challenges of poverty ( income poverty reduction,quality of life and well being and financing problems).

iii.I have mentioned some factorts behind the failure of Mkukuta I as partly poor implememtation, poor reporting and follow up as well as lack of evaluation and right decision.

iv.We don’t have the right frame and we need a completely new approach to most things regarding poverty reduction in the country.Let the concerned Ministries solve their problems.As an example,let the Ministry of Education solve the education problem and let the Ministry of Agruculture deal with irrigation farming,miexed farming and large scale farming.They have the experts.

 Dr.Khamis

Sweden 

Water

A country with enormous water resources located in Lake Victoria,Lake Tanganyika and Lake Nyasa and still can provide its citizen with clean and safe water! What prevents us from building a water pipe from lake Victoria to Singida or even Dodoma and provide all the villages along this pipe line with clean and safe water.Mkukuta I has touched this problem:”Increased proportion of rural populstion with sccess to clean and safe water from 53% to 65% by 2009/10”.”Increased urban population with access to clean and safe water from 73% to 90” by 2009/10”.Have we reached to these goals now since we are in the year 2010? Mkukuta II is following the same trend like Mkukuta I, we don’t have the right people to make decisions. As an example we have sea water that could be refined to soft water that can be used for household.Bu the Minister concerned has recently refused the building of water processing plant in Dar es Salaam with a remark that it is too expensive without taking into consideration that it will be more expensive to build such a plant in the year 2025 when we will have big water problems in Dar es Salaam.

Our open pit mines when exhausted (mined out) can be filled with water.This is what we do Internationally.Even our underground mines will be filled with water when they are going to be closed.These can act as our water reserves/resources.Most of the drill holes in the mines have water and if they are unlocked after the mining activities they will fill the open pits/undergrouind mines with fresh water that can be purified for domestic use.

Education.

We can improve the life quality and well being of our people by providing them a qualitative education.Some of the goals of Mkukuta I were a): “Increased gross and net enrolment of children(boys and girls) in primary schools from 90.5% in 2004 to 99% in 2010” b):”At least 70% of girls and boys pass at Division I – III in Form IV examinations” c:” 90% of primary and secondary schools have adequate,competent and skilled teachers by 2010”. Whereas Mkukuta II is just mentioning about “Ensuring equitable access to quality education(page 59) and “Efforts will be made to improve quality of pre-primary,primary and secondary education”

It is already known that there is a big shortage of qualified teachers in both primary and secondary schools.I herby give an example from Usagara Secondary School Tanga which has only one qualified Mathematics teacher.There is a lack of science teachers in most secondary schools.We actually need more than Mkukuta II to solve these problems.

.
Dr.Khamis
Sweden

2.Transport

In order to sell their products our farmers need reliable roads from villages down to their markets.Mkukuta I has written “Improve passable(good/fair condition)rural roads from 50% to at least 75% in 2010”.Whereas in Mukukuta II it is supposed that we could expand air cargo,constuct and upgrading existing railway lines.Since our independence period untill this moment(1961-2010) the railway line from Dodoma to Tabora is a problem.The swampy area is a major problem during rain period and nothing has been done to solve this problem.The railway line between Tanga-Korogwe-Dar es Salaam-Tanga-Korogwe-Moshi-Arusha is out of function and goods trains no longer reach Tanga.During 1960’s to 1979 goods that were supposed to be transported to Uganda were off loaded at Tanga harbour and then loaded on train to Nairobi via Korogwe-Moshi-Voi and then to Kampala.In this way it has been proved that we have failed to run our railway lines and some of our ports/harbours to our ouwn benefit.How can we now manage to uppgrade our railway lines or increase air cargo since we can’t even operate Air Tanzania.Had we have a good railway system we could be able to reduce road accidents and save the lives of our citizens.How can our farmers transport their products since we have bad roads from their villages to major towns/city.We cannot reduce income poverty in this way.

3.Improving of life quality and well-being

We have to remember that we are not fighting poverty only since we have diseases such HIV & AIDS, Maria and TB that need our attention.We have waged war aginst HIV & AIDS and Maria since these diseases can destroy our economy(government) and prevent us from reducing poverty in the country.Both Mkukuta I and Mkukuta II has taken this into account.Mkukuta I was aiming at having 90% of schools and 80% of health facilities in the urban and rural areas to have the required mix of skilled and motivated workers.It also aimed at” 100% of eligible older people provided with free medical care and attended by specialized medical personnel by 2010”.But has this been realised?It also aimed at “100% of schools to have sanitary facilities by 2010”.However, we can find several schools with only one toilet in their compus even now in the year 2010!
Dr.Khamis
Sweden

After reading Mkukuta 2005 and the draft of Mkukuta II(2010) one finds many similarities between the two.We have to distinguish Mkukuta II from the roles of the Ministries of Education,Agriculture and the Ministry of Health.There are various things in the uncompleted draft that are pointing to the duties and rensponsibilities of the above mentioned ministries.A good example is the “Implementation Arrangements” where it is noted that the central ministries as follows:

.Ministry responsible for economic management

.Ministry responsible for coordination of government business(is this the Ministry of Finance?)

.Ministry responsible for Public Service

.Ministry responsible for Local Government will coordinate implementation of programs at regional and district level.

Actually MKUKUTA II should concentrate only on one thing namely the reduction of poverty in Tanzania,especially in rural areas.This implies that it has to have a sort of economic approach in solving this problem.The growth and reduction of income poverty ,improving of quality life,good governance and accountability are the major themes.Each of these objects or goals requires a detailed research programs and experiments as to how to obtain the best results.It is evident this has not been done and that is the reason why Mukukuta I has been a complete failure.

1.We have mostly farmers in the rural areas.The goal should be to improve their way of farming and in this way they can get better income from their products.But most of our farmers depend on rain and they don’t use irrigation farming and are still using hoes.These should have a sort of mixed farming with cattles,goats,sheep with plantaions of various products.Besides, they should self sufficient interm of electricity and they should not depend on TANESCO.They have to generate elecricity themselves by using the modern technology such as solar panels,windmills etc.In this way they can use water pumps for irrigating their farms and using modern machines for milking their cattles undistrurbed of TANESCO power cuts.I here give the example of Danish farmers.These farmers use windmills to generate their own electricity .By helping our farmers in this way we can reduce the income poverty before 2025.The Ministry of Agriculture could take care of this part since they have experts.

Secondly we need industries in order to create jobs for those living in urban areas as well as rural areas.Ministry of Industries could take care of this part and participate in the income poverty reduction.

Dr.Khamis
Sweden