At the inaugural address of the new cabinet in 2021, President Yoweri Museveni, he offered a metaphor that was both colourful and memorable. He told the nation that he had selected “fishermen and women” to run the government; people who, like those who cast their nets on Uganda’s lakes and rivers, understand patience, persistence, and the discipline required to secure a good catch. The imagery was intended to communicate pragmatism: a team capable of navigating complex challenges and delivering Uganda’s long-promised socioeconomic transformation.
Five years later, as the 2021–2026 cabinet approaches to an end of its tenure, the metaphor invites an unavoidable question: what exactly has the nation caught? What have these fishermen and women achieved to complement efforts of socioeconomic transformation – the president’s overarching vision for Uganda?
Government reports highlight notable progress. Roads have expanded, electricity generation has grown, and industrial parks have taken root in several parts of the country. Uganda has also navigated a turbulent global economic environment marked by the aftershocks of the COVID-19 pandemic, rising commodity prices, and disruptions in global trade. In these respects, the government can point to measurable achievements.
Nevertheless, the public memory of this cabinet will not be defined only by infrastructure projects or economic indicators. It will also be remembered for controversies that raised uncomfortable questions about accountability, priorities, and the integrity of those entrusted with public office.
The earliest and most damaging episode was the Karamoja iron sheets saga (Karachuna). Thousands of iron sheets procured by government to support vulnerable communities in the Karamoja sub-region were allegedly diverted to senior politicians and officials who were never meant to receive them. What should have been a straightforward intervention to assist one of Uganda’s most marginalized regions instead became a national scandal.
The symbolism could hardly have been worse. At a time when the government was speaking of inclusive development and poverty reduction, basic relief materials meant for struggling communities were reportedly ending up in the homes of powerful figures to roof houses for pigs and goats; Parliamentary inquiries, public outrage, and official investigations followed, sadly, the episode left a deep dent in public confidence.
Beyond that scandal, several flagship initiatives have struggled to deliver the sweeping results initially promised. The Parish Development Model (PDM), launched with great fanfare as the engine that would lift millions of households from subsistence into the money economy, has produced mixed results. In some areas, beneficiaries have received funds and begun small-scale investments. In others, delays, bureaucratic hurdles, limited technical guidance, and concerns about transparency in the selection of beneficiaries. The recent revelations by the Office Auditor General paint a very concerning picture of the implementation of the PDM. These challenges have slowed the pace at which the program can realistically deliver the transformative impact originally envisioned by the President.
The idea behind the PDM remains sound: push development closer to the grassroots and empower communities to shape their own economic destinies. Yet a good idea poorly implemented risks becoming another entry in Uganda’s long list of promising policies whose impact falls short of expectations.
Questions have also arisen over the compensation of so-called cooperatives destroyed during the post-independence wars. Government programs designed to compensate cooperatives for historical losses were meant to revive the cooperative movement and correct past injustices. Instead, allegations emerged that fictitious or poorly verified entities may have benefited from public funds. Such claims once again highlighted weaknesses in verification systems and financial oversight from the Fishermen and women Cabinet.
Taken together, these episodes point to a broader governance challenge that extends beyond any single minister. Uganda has never lacked ambitious policies or grand development visions. The real test has always been implementation, ensuring that public resources reach their intended beneficiaries and that accountability mechanisms function effectively.
To be fair, the cabinet did preside over tangible progress in several sectors. Major road projects have improved connectivity. Energy generation capacity has expanded significantly, strengthening the country’s ability to support industrial growth. Industrial parks and regional trade initiatives are gradually positioning Uganda within a more competitive regional economic landscape.
Nonetheless, for many ordinary citizens, particularly millions in rural communities, the pace of socioeconomic transformation still feels painfully slow and sluggish. Youth unemployment remains high, household incomes remain fragile, and corruption scandals continue to persist predictably, effectively eroding trust in public institutions.
Consequently, “fishermen and women” metaphor now deserves a deeper and detailed reflection. Fishing requires skill, endurance, and knowledge of the waters. But it also requires discipline and integrity. A successful expedition should deliver food for the entire village; not just a select few on the boat.
As the country prepares for the inauguration of a new cabinet in the coming months, the moment offers an opportunity to rethink how leadership teams are assembled and composed. Uganda’s development challenges are becoming more complex and deeply intertwined: managing energy transitions, strengthening industrial policy, addressing climate pressures, modernizing agriculture, and navigating a rapidly changing global economy, while cyclical poverty defines lives of millions.
These tasks require not only political instinct and grassroots experience or rewarding political losers, but also deep technical expertise (technical knowledge).
Uganda is fortunate to possess a large pool of intellectual talent within its universities and research institutions. Economists, scientists, engineers, agricultural specialists, and public policy scholars have spent decades studying the very problems government seeks to address. Yet this expertise is often underrepresented at the highest levels of executive decision-making.
The next cabinet would benefit greatly from a stronger presence of such intellectual leadership, particularly members of the academics, including professors and researchers who bring analytical rigor and evidence-based thinking (empiricism) to policy design and implementation. Their presence would not replace political experience; rather, it would complement it.
A modern government must combine the wisdom of those who understand the grassroots with the insight of those who study systems, data, and long-term development strategies. Fishermen know where the fish might be, however, navigators with maps, charts, and scientific knowledge can help ensure the boat does not drift off course.
The lesson from the 2021–2026 cabinet is therefore not that fishermen cannot govern. It is that governing a modern and transforming state requires more than one set of skills. Thanks for the recent appointments in Bank of Uganda and the Judiciary.
As Uganda prepares to cast its nets again, the country needs a crew that includes both experienced fishermen and women as well as a few seasoned navigators from the world of ideas (knowledge). Only then can the nation hope to land the full harvest of the socioeconomic transformation it has pursued for so long.
Dr. Samuel B. Ariong (PhD) is an academic, researcher, and development policy scholar.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
