 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Mar 2006 : 17:31:01
|
SIDIA ON POVERTY ALLEVIATION
In his contribution to the adjournment debates, the National Assembly Member for Wuli West, Hon. Sidia Jatta, started his contribution by saying that “It is a joy to live with the people. When I say the people, I mean what we generally call “the ordinary people.”
It is a joy to live with them because you learn a lot. We have been talking about poverty reduction year in and year out and people believed that poverty is reducing. These people failed to understand that each time they make an attempt to reduce poverty, they aggravate it. That is why I say it is a joy to live with the ordinary people because you see how people are coping with problems of the system. They forget that each time they do something with their budget; they are impacting negatively on the vast majority of the people. I see ordinary civil servants whose transport allowances can hardly pay for half of the days for which they come to work in the month. The totality of their monthly transport allowances can hardly pay for half of the days for which they come to work. For example, now that petrol price is being increased, transport fares may go up, but the allowances remain stagnant and salaries likewise. So it means each time that we do something here in this National Assembly, (we included because we approve budgets), we are impacting negatively on the lives of the people. And yet we all clamour for poverty reduction when we in our effort in approving budgets of this nature, we are contributing to the increment of poverty. Honestly, let anybody take interest to casually make a survey in wherever you may be. Even in a Village! Make a survey and find out how these things are impacting negatively on people.
Somebody said here, I think it is the Member for Lower Niumi that we are here to speak for the people we are representing. And that is why we must assume that responsibility adequately otherwise we are failing. The budget we have dealt with here is saying that the fundamental objective is poverty reduction. But no! That is just one fundamental objective. This budget has three fundamental objectives. One is poverty reduction which is dependent on other fundamental objectives.
The second is to make effort to reach HIPC completion point and the third one is to curb payment of arrears for internal debts. Poverty reduction measures are dependent on the second and the third items. The second item is to make effort to reach HIPC completion point which will result to either debt relief or debt cancellation and the third one is to curb terrible arrears which earn immense interests. Unless the second and the third are completed, the first cannot be completed. The Secretary of State himself has said it clearly when he said “The implementation of poverty reduction programmes has met with difficulties and that less than 40% of those programmes are being implemented because of these two items in the budget. For me, there is no amount of money that will be borrowed and then invested into poverty reduction programmes that would reduce poverty. The only way we can reduce poverty in our circumstances is to enhance the productive capacity of our farmers, and, of course, create outlets for their produces in terms of Agriculture proper and horticulture. Enhancing the productive capacity of farmers would require that the infertile lands that are presently being used are rendered fertile, by making fertilizer available, accessible and affordable. Fertilizer is terribly expensive. I couldn’t buy more than four bags of fertilizer in the last rain season and that is even ‘a lot’! Which farmer can buy two bags of fertilizer? And two bags are insufficient for a standard size farm! It is not possible! So what the Member for Niamina East, Hon. Eliman Secka, was saying, that groundnut production has gone down this year, was not only because the seeds were bad. May be that was a factor, but the land is so infertile and that farmers cannot have enough money to buy what they require to render their farms fertile. I have seen farmers, when they buy a bag of fertilizer; they go and put it only around the crop. I said but this is not it.
Somebody said maybe you don’t understand. If I want to broadcast it, the fertilizer would not even cover a quarter of my farm. So it is best I put it around the crop. And that means only around the crop will be probably fertile and the rest will be infertile. Next year when you put something there, you have the same problem. So I think there is the need for us to contemplate this issue more seriously. This, for me, is the crucial problem with poverty in this Country,” Sidia concluded.
Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 18/2006, 9-12 March 2006
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 10 Mar 2006 : 22:19:14
|
The unfortunate thing is that as far as i know , poverty has not been defined by the government. To be able to eradiccate poverty, we need to know the parameters and it should be described in such a way that we can recognise it.
First step classify poverty and then your samples will be isolated, and then they can be worked on. Poverty by whose standards is also an issue. I am running out of time but see you all later on monday. |
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
 |
|
|
sankahjang
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2006 : 21:42:09
|
| Kondorong i think you are right. in order to tackle poverty and its related issues, it has to be defined clearly. you cannot handle something that you do not reealy understnd. |
|
|
|
ylowe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 12 Mar 2006 : 07:30:43
|
| Absolute poverty is defined as anyone that lives with less than one dollar a day and there are 1.2 billion people. The scenario described by Honorable Jatta is what some economists calls "the vicious cylcle of poverty". This is why we need a good government that is going to come up with good policies cause the issue of poverty is bigger than we think. Some theories or model works in theory and not practically and other works practically but not theorically. Good luck with your quest for poverty eradication. |
|
|
|
Janyanfara
Tanzania
1350 Posts |
Posted - 12 Mar 2006 : 21:12:05
|
Hi fellas,
I sometimes would want to contribute to politics, but sometimes its rather too hard 4 me as the system of politics in Africa and the Gambia is too much 4 the people to stomach.
Hon.Jatta said it all but with only three oppositions in Parliament,whay can they do?
I remembered sometime last year I was invited into the National Assembly to watch the proceedings.Oh my God,I couldn't believe my ears when one of the Rulling government member stood to reject a motion proposed by Hon.Halifa...( concerning POVERTY ALLEVIATION.) To my surprise this MP stood without thinking of his electorates and how he has suffered as an opposition during the ppp era against Dodou Ngum in Nuimi.I have known Hon.Jane Colley Faye since when he was a teacher and I thought he could be genuine but when he stood in the government to say and I coate:
" Mr. Speaker,we members of the ruling bench will support any bill presented by Government as we are part of that government and will reject opposition claims as that bill presented b4 us benefits only the opposition and I want my collegues to join me to reject it"
With loud applauds from the government bench,I couldn't complete watching the whole proceedings I drove home and straight want to bed without dinner that day.I kept thinking about the JC Faye (commonly called JCC during the NCP opposition Days and cried.)
I stopped attending National Assembly proceedings since then.
Governments in Africa will always force their people into poverty as that's the only way to force them into submission in other to lies and betrayal friends and loved ones 4 pollitical gains.As the saying goes :
" A poor man has no choise.
Look my friends,we all know if Yaya Jammeh had taken off his military uniforms then in 1994 and stood against Jawara in the presidential elections,those desports who are singing his praise are going to be his first insulters.But African politics is that way..Betray friends and even close relatives to gain political favours.I remember in the november 11 arbotive coup,a senior official betrayed his blood cousin(their fathers share the same mother and father) to the authorities and the boy is dead alledgedly died in the shootout.
My friends Opvertyalleviation is the only way forward but that is also self independance with no influence from any master.Whether is canbe done now,I don't know but it is not impossible.
God save the poor.
Mankajang Janyanfara |
|
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 12 Mar 2006 : 21:41:29
|
I think the Mass family are natural politicians. Sidou has so much energy, working for his local community. If you are anything like him I think you would make an excellent politician. |
|
|
|
Janyanfara
Tanzania
1350 Posts |
Posted - 12 Mar 2006 : 22:27:54
|
Well my dear cousin sister,
I was trying to become involved but no I cannot become one as my belief 4 equal rights 4 every humankind,cannot merge with politics.Though they go along-side each,they are not good friends.You become any enemy of every Government so in that case,I will say no.
I cannot even be president as I woun't allow to be corrupted much more tollerate corruption.If I become a minister,I will not serve any master but the people. Thereby,will not hesitate to publicly put my president right if I belief he is betraying the people there then he will hate me due to hypocretes who will be only after their selfish interests rether than national interest so then will mix me with the president.
PEACE
Mankajang Janyanrafa. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 13 Mar 2006 : 23:25:09
|
Gambiabev, I do not think there is any natural politician unless i am taking your statement out of context.
Janyafara , the qualities you have described about yourself are the ones we are looking for in politicians. Unfortunately , because "good" people stay away from politics, we are ruled by crooks and swindlers a lot of times.It is often said that if wise people do not take part in the politics of their nations , they become ruled by foolish people.
Having said that , i will return to the issue of this topic : POVERTY ALLEVIATION.
Thomas A. Edison once said that" opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work".Poverty may not be dressed in overalls but when we see it we can recognize it.It is the lack of resources; insecurity; deprivation of the basic essentials of life such as nutritious food,clean water,adequate shelter and clothing,(and education).This concept is perhaps universal, although where the line is drawn may differ from one country to another.For example , what is considered poor in the U.S. may not be so in the Gambia.So I do not think as Kondorong and Sankajang would like to that poverty reduction in the Gambia has remained elusive more because of lack of definition than strategy. The situation of poverty in the Gambia does not require polemics. It is so glaring everywhere you go that it is impossible not to recognize it.
Poverty is also a question of inequality and powerlessness. All of rural Gambia is largely poor, and poverty is very steep in the urban areas too. In the long run Banjul and the Kombos are not going to be much better than the country-sides because as Reuben K. Udo argued " if we do not develop the rural areas then we should prepare the urban areas for more people". Apparently there are no jobs in Banjul and Kombo. Many poverty reduction and rural development programs have failed in the Gambia due to the reasons Sidia eloquently identified.
A big part of our development effort needs to focus on job creation both in the government and the private sector. The government in Banjul needs to create incentives for farmers , especially large-scale farmers , entrepreneurs and other private sector employers.
This , in combination with prudent financial planning( among others) could create a robust and dynamic economy that could help reduce poverty in the Gambia. |
|
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2006 : 07:29:55
|
As you say kayjatta poverty in the villages is everywhere..... material poverty that is..... but because everyone is in the same boat that is somehow easier to bear. There is a great feeling of community and that community is to some extent still based on bartering rather than money. You can exist in the village with very little.
To me the poverty in the city is worse. You have people living on the street with nothing side by side with richer people going to work at the bank in their suit! The poor people dont have the same community suport and they are living in a monetary system. When you see people with things you dont have, that makes your lack of them worse. EG electricity. If you leave in the city with no electricity but your neighbour has it, that makes your lack of electricity more felt. If you live in a village where noone has electricity perhaps you accept it easier.
Poverty is a terrible thing, but within that I think relative poverty is an important concept. In uk in 1940/50 MOST working class people were poor, but they were ALL poor and had a good sense of community. Now only the 'underclass' of uneployed, low paid, disabled, sick etc would be considered poor and that is in the relative sense.
The dollar a day as a definition of poverty is a definition of absolute poverty.
In Uk you would be considered poor if you dont have a car, a tv, a mobile phone and a home computer etc.... Also if you cant pay your rent and other bills........buy good food and perhaps afford a holiday.
The life style of the middle classes in uk would include owning a house, takeaways, eating in restaurants, more than one holiday a year, perhaps 2 cars etc etc...... You need to earn at least £30,000 per year to fund all of that. But that is what people want and expect. So if you earn £12,000 a year you are relatively poor in UK.
|
|
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2006 : 07:44:04
|
In the Uk noone needs to be in ABSOLUTE poverty, because we have a benefits system designed to support people to a certain level.
Does anyone know figures for what percentage of Gambians live on 1$ a day or less.... I should imagine as a percentage it is very high.
Education is the key to rising out of poverty in 2 different ways and it is the same in the uk.
The first route is the middle class route: Study hard and get lots of qualifications and then train for a profession...... become part of the middle class of the country.
The second route is the working class route: Learn a useful skill. Be a fisherman, a silversmith, a waiter, a tailor, an electrician etc......
Finally being self employed is a great way to help your family: there is no middle person taking the profit from your work. So a tailor working for their own family keeps all the profits from the clothes they make.
So in Gambia, if people are educated to a higher level, or educated with a skill then they are set for an independent life where they HOPEFULLY wont be in poverty. Even in middle age being taught a useful skill such as sewing can be enough to lift someone off the poverty line.
This is a subject very dear to my heart and I could talk about it all day! I will go now and leave others to post their comments.
If anyone out there wants to help a Gambian family, sponsoring the education for one of their children is probably the best thing you can do to help long term......and in the short term when you visit...take a bag of rice. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2006 : 18:07:54
|
I do not know of any community in the Gambia today that is based on battering( rather than monetary system) as Gambiabev seem to suggest.
Furthermore , the fact that the vast majority of our rural residents are poor does not make their condition legitimate.Arguably "poverty is as much a vice as wealth is", and nobody should comfortably accept poverty.I must emphasize that poverty is about inequality,and powerlessness. It is about justice and human rights.Every human being is entitled to a decent living no matter where you live at. That is why development needs to be decentralized rather than localized around the seat of government only.Our development efforts need to reach the actual people as Sidia Jatta just said.
People are very mobile now , and people carry their baggage (poverty or otherwise)with them where-ever they go.That is why our cities are not even protected from the crisis of poverty and related social problems.
I hailed from rural Gambia. My father was a second generation businessman , and our family was relatively previledged .I , however chose the path of education and ended up where i am today. So , I agree with Gambiabev that education and self-employment could be a key to self-reliance ; but we need to always remember that people need to be given the OPPORTUNITY to " become what they can be" as Abraham Maslow would put it.
The fact that poverty is endemic in rural Gambia is not sufficient grounds to neglect these potentially vast resourceful communities to wretchedness.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
ylowe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 07:58:51
|
| You are right Kayjatta that development needs to be decentralized. Decentralizing development will reduce the number of unemployed in the urban. People migrate when their expected income is greater than their actual income. This explains why there is higher unemplyment in the cities of poor countries cause if the number of migrants is greater than available jobs then we have alot unemployed. |
|
|
|
gambiabev
United Kingdom
3091 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 08:23:52
|
In most places that develop tourism there will be a drift of people to the coastal areas. Developments such as the large hotel complex at brufut will only make this worse. So then you have a population of unemployed, misplaced men(usually)without the support and control of their families.
The consequence for the village is that the population will be out of balance....... leaving behind the children and the elderly with the fit men out there looking for work.
In Uk there has been migration to urban areas for work away from the countryside over several generations.
Development needs careful planning so it is shared around the people, not just at coast. In UK we often feel development is all based in the south east and the north of the country is ignored. If Gambia wants people to keep their traditional village life style then the development opportunities need to be even handed across the country. The question is WHAT other than tourism can be developed? Agriculture? Small scale production businesses? (peanut butter? clothing?)
The structure of the village and village life itself is one of Gambias natural strengths......... I do hope that development doesnt destroy it.
I stand corrected about 'bartering'....maybe I overstated the case. I just meant in the village people do favours for each other and they do exchange goods with each other.......it is not completely without cash...otherwise there would be no village store.......but cash is only part of the story. In the city life is more harsh financially. |
|
|
|
somita
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 17:46:23
|
Gambiabev, I cannot help it but bust into laughter for what is a very serious issue. I find to hard to see the logic when every this argument of £1 aday is put on the table, may be because I'm a villager myself.
I'm indeed very proud to say that my family lives on probably £1 or less a day and I hope they will continue to live on it for a very long time because I belive their quality and way of life depend not on how much they spend a day rather what is available to them at no cost. Lets put £1 into proper perspective not into western sensationalism, In my back garden, we have oranges, mangoes, Cahsew, Bananas not to mention crops that we grow every year, all available for all, milk is available from from our cows, meat and eggs from chichens, surely we dont need to buy lot more for our day ...isnt it?
People in the villages are more kind to each than anywhere else. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 18:03:45
|
This excerpt from Gambiabev above caught my attention a lot.
"The structure of the village and village life itself is one of Gambias natural strengths......... I do hope that development doesnt destroy it".
You have probably just touched on the crux of the matter in Dr. Peters' ( Peters is a Gambian surgeon , poet and novelist) poem , Katchikali. In Katchikali Peters laments the destruction of our environment as a result of tourism and urbanization.It is just amazing !
I always admire the countryside and the simple life of its humbler people.Yet we live in a society in transition.Development comes at tremendous sacrifices; much of the the environment and nature is sacrificed , although sensible conservation methods can save ,and even restore some of the damage.
While development is so paramount and urgent in the Gambia , especially rural Gambia , I also hope (as Gambiabev does) that we temper that effort with conservation.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 18:21:34
|
Somita , you have missed the whole point here.All those products your family produce in the garden is their income . You have to assess the value of those products at their fair market price and include it as income.
Unless someone lives on welfare or the like , most items received (or disposed) could be considered income.
Now , if a family still makes less than a doller a day after all this inclusions , then that family might be consdered poor.
But the important thing here is that if you grow crops for presonal consumption , the monetary value of those crops is your income.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
