The man had 2400/- in his pocket but declined to pay for his treatment, saying he had already planned to spend the money on something else. Nevertheless, he wanted to get treatment but insisted his brothers should pay the 2000/- the doctor had asked for. His brothers were indignant, so the man died on the following day, with his 2400/-.
If his brothers had been more sympathetic and paid for his medical expenses, he might have lived to spend his 2400/- as he had planned to. He might have wanted to spend it to build his family’s future, which would have been a good idea, entertained at the wrong time; but he might have planned to spend it on booze after recovery, which is stupidity per se, for him to think he could spend his money on luxury and someone else to pay for his needs.
What shall we say about our government? It had promised to allocate 14,000/- for every primary school pupil to buy educational materials every year, but provides only 5000/-.
Reason? Allocation of funds depends on disbursements by donors (The Citizen, 8th April 2013). Since statistics indicate that half of all the pupils who complete primary school are illiterate and the government is depending on the generosity of donors to raise the money to buy educational materials and that money is not forthcoming, the illiteracy has to prevail.
All the children who have attained the age to start school will be enrolled as the Millennium Development Goal demands, but after seven years only a half of them will be able to read and write. So, enrolling them is only for the sake of formality, so that the world may understand this country complies with global resolutions. At least, this is how things are, in the foundation of education.
In higher education, things are not even better; someone may think that since things are bad to begin with, a good ending would compensate for the loss, but there’s no such luck.
According to the Swahili language weekly tabloid, Jamhuri, October 9th- 15th, 2012, the Higher Education Students’ Loans Board (HESLB) was able to give loans to only 29,000 students and that many were lamenting the fact that the board couldn’t help them due to its little budget which was only 345bn/-.
This paper’s editorial column says if the government would be willing to sell only 1 trillion shillings worth of its 5 trillion shillings’ fleet of luxury cars, all the children in this country would get quality education. Instead of accepting the sacrifice, the government is waiting for donors to sacrifice their wants to facilitate quality education to Tanzania’s youths. Even if the education goes down the drain, what would the donors lose? By the way, who are donors? Are they a specific group of people or individuals appointed or who have volunteered to sacrifice their resources for the sake of Tanzania’s children?
It is not easy to understand why Tanzania should depend so much on donations, even in the primary schools’ education. The country is third in the continent in exportation of gold; the first two being, South Africa and Ghana; it has many other minerals, including diamond, a number of gemstones and the recently discovered natural gas estimated at Shs680 trillion.
The country has many other resources that attract tourism and is not landlocked. It has dwelt in peace all the years except for the Iddi Amin war, which is now history, since more than 30 years have gone by. Apart from these, hectares of arable land stretch from the Kenya and Uganda boundaries to the north, to Mozambique and Malawi to the south and the Indian Ocean to the east and Rwanda, Burundi and Zambia to the west. On top of this area, it has a population of more than 40 million people, able to exploit the resources and generate income.
Nevertheless, the country may be poor as supposed to be, but why on earth would its government cling to luxury cars and leave a sector as important as education at the mercy of donors? The expected donors might be humble personalities, who use ordinary low-cost vehicles although they are rich. People of a kind like this, may give donations to help in the sector but giving 14,000/- to every primary school pupil and more to fill the deficit in the budget of the HESLB so that every higher education student can get a loan is really day dreaming.
What if these donors are moved by the spirit of Godliness and pay the entire amount? Wouldn’t the conscience of the luxury cars’ advocates prick? A generation of morally sound people should think more about action of such donors, thank them, ask to be pardoned, start humbling themselves and stand on their own feet, to pay for their people’s education with the country’s resources.
As written in the editorial of the paper I have referred to above (The Citizen, April 8th, 2013) a nation which is poor in education is prone to retrogression, misery and deprivation, nothing short of these consequences would be reaped, so long as the government clings to this donor dependency syndrome in education.
Its no wonder that one primary school in Kilimanjaro region is operating with only two holes’ pit latrine for its more than 200 pupils. Moreover the two holes have been rendered completely out of use and pose a threat to pupils’ lives by the on-going heavy rains. This is what it means by retrogression.
During this writer’s school days in the 1960s, 200 pupils had eight holes pit latrine, but today, 50 years later, one for 100 girls and another for 100 boys is considered enough by the standards of that village.
If the Kilimanjaro schools’ inspectorate division is satisfied with this situation, (as it seems to be, since these holes had been in use for a long time till the rains eroded its walls) then it’s true that retrogression is actually taking place. Deprivation and misery will be realised as the nation is absorbed in the East African Community. And this will be, if the current neglect of education is not reversed.
Giving priority to luxury above education or depending on donors’ disbursements to pay for it, is really tying a knot on the rope around education’s throat, to hang it. If the former rulers, even the colonialists had entertained luxury and forgotten education, today the country would not have been where it is; it would have gone back to the Stone Age.
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN
