Uganda Railways Corporation (URC) is under mounting parliamentary scrutiny over the expenditure of more than Shs20.8 billion allocated for staff capacity building under a controversial Spanish-funded railway project, with MPs questioning how billions of shillings were channelled to a handful of expatriates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The revelations have emerged before Parliament\u2019s Committee on Physical Infrastructure, chaired by Hon. Mwine Mpaka, which is investigating how URC utilised funds from a \u20ac28.96 million Spanish loan, equivalent to about Shs125 billion at the exchange rate used in the current figures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At the centre of the inquiry is the capacity-building component, which URC says was allocated \u20ac4.821 million\u2014about Shs20.84 billion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But MPs have heard that five expatriates allegedly received \u20ac4.338 million, approximately Shs18.75 billion, over a three-year period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That means nearly 90 percent of the capacity-building allocation was reportedly consumed by payments associated with just five expatriates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The reported monthly rates ranged from \u20ac20,500 to \u20ac32,500, translating to approximately Shs88 million to Shs140 million per month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The figures have left MPs demanding to know whether Uganda obtained value for money from a programme that was supposed to build sustainable local railway expertise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The arithmetic is at the heart of the parliamentary storm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Of the approximately Shs20.84 billion set aside for capacity building, about Shs18.75 billion was allegedly paid to five expatriates over three years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That leaves roughly Shs2.1 billion of the allocation for the other capacity-building activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee is now expected to scrutinise the contracts, payment schedules, qualifications, deliverables and evidence of skills transferred to Ugandan railway personnel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fundamental question is blunt: how much of the Shs20.8 billion actually built Uganda’s railway capacity?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The inquiry comes as URC faces wider questions over the management of the Spanish-funded railway programme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The wider project was financed through a Spanish loan of approximately \u20ac28.96 million, or about Shs125 billion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Government brought in Spanish companies Consultrans S.A.U and Imathia to implement components of the railway rehabilitation programme. The project included rehabilitation of the Kampala\u2013Mukono railway corridor and other infrastructure interventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Consultrans also signed a memorandum of understanding with URC to handle the capacity-building component.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The arrangement was supposed to help equip URC personnel with the skills required to operate and maintain an improved railway system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Instead, the expenditure has now become one of the most contentious aspects of the Spanish-funded project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Committee chairperson Mwine Mpaka has questioned the rationale behind spending millions of euros on capacity building for a relatively small number of railway employees, including training associated with train-driving programmes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The concern is not simply the existence of foreign consultants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Rather, MPs are questioning whether the scale of their remuneration was justified by the results achieved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At a reported maximum monthly rate of about Shs140 million, one expatriate could cost more than Shs1.6 billion a year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over three years, that would amount to almost Shs5 billion for one person if maintained continuously at that rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For a railway corporation that has struggled with inadequate infrastructure, rolling stock and operational capacity, such figures have inevitably attracted parliamentary attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The controversy is particularly striking because URC continues to face significant operational challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Uganda has spent years trying to revive its ageing metre-gauge railway network after decades of underinvestment and deterioration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Spanish-funded programme was therefore intended to address both physical infrastructure and human-resource weaknesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Kampala\u2013Mukono corridor was among the key railway sections targeted for rehabilitation, while the broader programme also included development of railway-related facilities and capacity-building interventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The idea was straightforward: repair the railway and train Ugandans to run it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Parliament is now questioning whether the second part of that equation became disproportionately expensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The capacity-building controversy has also emerged against a wider backdrop of scrutiny of railway expenditure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Recent parliamentary and audit inquiries have raised questions about payments and procurement under railway rehabilitation projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The latest investigation has consequently placed URC officials under pressure to explain not only what was paid, but who authorised the payments, under which contracts, against what deliverables and with what measurable outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee’s work could ultimately determine whether the expenditure amounted to legitimate technical assistance, poor value for money or possible financial irregularities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The figures now before Parliament paint a striking picture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shs125 billion: approximate value of the Spanish loan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shs20.84 billion: capacity-building allocation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shs18.75 billion: amount allegedly paid to five expatriates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shs88 million\u2013Shs140 million: reported monthly remuneration range.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For MPs, the numbers raise a question that goes beyond the Spanish contract: can Uganda claim to have built local railway capacity if almost all the money allocated for that purpose went into paying foreign personnel?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee’s continuing inquiry is expected to dig into the identities and roles of the expatriates, the contractual basis for their remuneration, the training delivered, the number of Ugandans trained and whether URC retained the expertise after the consultants’ engagement ended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The scandal is therefore no longer simply about an expensive railway project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is about whether borrowed Ugandan money produced lasting Ugandan capacity\u2014or merely financed an extraordinarily expensive foreign consultancy arrangement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And as Parliament follows the money, the railway corporation will have to explain why building capacity for Uganda’s railways came with a bill running into tens of billions of shillings.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Uganda Railways Corporation (URC) is under mounting parliamentary scrutiny over the expenditure of more than Shs20.8 billion allocated for staff capacity building under a controversial Spanish-funded railway project, with MPs questioning how billions of shillings were channelled to a handful of expatriates. The revelations have emerged before Parliament\u2019s Committee on Physical Infrastructure, chaired by Hon. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":27987,"featured_media":43332,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"format":"standard"},"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_paywall_metabox":[],"jnews_override_counter":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[356],"tags":[31,7506,10375,119,10374],"class_list":["post-43331","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-big-story","tag-featured","tag-mwine-mpaka","tag-parliaments-committee-on-physical-infrastructure","tag-uganda-news","tag-uganda-railways"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43331","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/27987"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43331"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43331\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43333,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43331\/revisions\/43333"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/43332"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43331"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43331"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ugmirror.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43331"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}