Last week Scotland became the first country in the world to make sanitary products free, including sanitary pads and tampons, which they said was to help eliminate period poverty.
They recognized that one in ten Scottish women struggle to afford sanitary products on a monthly basis and half of the girls surveyed missed school on account of the monthly event.
In Uganda school drop out among girls were higher than those among boys, lack of adequate facilities to deal with their periods being a major contributor.
This speaks to the larger issue of social protection. The recognition that while we should all receive according to our needs, some classes can not meet their basic requirements of life. This maybe due to their low incomes or disability.
In the same week our finance ministry reported that people living in absolute poverty in Uganda had increased to 28 percent during the COVID -19 lockdown compared to 16 percent prior.
"With the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic not expected to let up for at least another year, it is unlikely that most of those who have fallen into abject poverty will be able to dig themselves out in a year....
As it is now our social security safety nets are too thin and those who are covered are largely already in gainful employment.
Hence the case for cash grants to the most vulnerable members of our society.
A few weeks ago government put a halt to an NGO sponsored scheme to provide monthly cash grants to poor they had identified and who they could afford to support.
Government is within its rights to be wary of any foreign sponsorship of such schemes, as long as it is not in control of the process. But it then has the obligation to provide an alternative solution.
The world over there has been huge controversy about welfare payments, except in countries where they work, in Scandinavia especially.
The critics argue that it only serves to increase government spending and increase dependency of the recipients. The supporters have shown through the data that actually the handouts are less likely than thought to create dependency, they in fact are used to uplift their living standards by paying for school and health fees and even acquiring assets.
With the recent lockdown the case for social security became even more pertinent.
With companies working at less than full capacity for lack of demand, cash grants would help keep them in business. In fact it would be a better intervention for the economy than the posho and beans handed out to the most vulnerable, because with money in their hands they could decide what their most pressing needs were, not necessarily food.
Like during the global financial crisis of a decade ago, the debate was whether to bail out the big companies or step up relief to people who were hardest hit by the crisis. The US chose to bail out the big companies, while Europe, without letting its companies fold provided a robust social security response.
"While the US rebounded faster from the crisis at a macro level, Europe’s populations were cushioned for the worst of the crisis, thanks to existing social security mechanisms which were beefed up, with differing levels of success to aid its populations....
Bailouts by the big companies were used to help restructure them – often leading to job cuts, while in Europe the money in people’s hands helped their companies stay afloat and ensure that some dignity was saved for the everyday man.
Governments don’t like these discussions because, in an earlier age it was difficult to execute and would make them more accountable to more people beyond the tax payer.
If in Uganda’s case cash grants as i describe would mean another million people would be watching government, to who government doesn’t exist in a direct way. Missed payments or other inefficiencies would trigger protests they do not need. Not to mention they would have to commit for the long term because once you start it is unlikely you can stop the process without a lot of protest.
A lot of the cash grants in western economies begun after the second world war, when western Europe had to resuscitate the economy. It is all very nice building companies but if no one is buying the companies’ shares are not worth the paper they are printed on.
Back to the lucky ladies of Scotland. With one stroke the governmmnet has given a boost to the industry around sanitary protection, while ensuring girls can do better at school and eventually become more productive members of society in the future. One outcome – the boost to industry, is more immediate but the second is more durable and pay uncountable dividends to the country generations into the future....
President Yoweri Museveni has pledged to bail out companies stressed by the COVID-19 pandemic. This could turn into a gravy train for a few connected individuals and the outcome will be very questionable. But if we split the bail out between the companies and providing social security recovery can be more evenly spread and sustainable.
It is not only good economics but good politics as well.
