Education is the cornerstone of a child’s future, shaping their opportunities and laying the foundation for a better life.
In Uganda, public and government-aided schools play a crucial role in providing this essential service, particularly through programs like Universal Primary Education (UPE) and Universal Secondary Education (USE).
However, a new proposal from the Ministry of Education and Sports has sparked widespread concern.
The ministry suggests that the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) should take over the responsibility of collecting any additional fees in these schools.
While UPE and USE are meant to remain free, the proposal aims to streamline fee collection and improve how the money is managed.
However many parents, school administrators, and education experts fear that this change could create more problems than it solves, potentially leading to delays in fund distribution and adding further strain on schools that are already struggling.
Joseph Ssembuusi, a concerned parent, believes that involving URA in collecting school fees could create new problems instead of fixing the current ones.
He points out that schools often face delays in getting money from the government, which can affect their ability to meet urgent needs.
Jackie Nalubega, who lives in Mulago, also worries that this idea could hurt public schools, which are already struggling because they don’t get enough government funding.
She explains that the small fees parents pay are what keep these schools running.
If the government takes over collecting these fees, and there are delays in returning the money, it could lead to chaos in schools.
However, Nalubega admits that there could be some benefits to this plan, like making sure the money collected is used properly for educational purposes.
She acknowledges that, despite the concerns, this system might help ensure that the funds are directed toward improving education.
“There have been instances where some headteachers and school management committees have misused the fees collected,” she explained
The concept of centralised fee collection for primary and secondary schools was initially proposed by the National Planning Authority in early 2023 as part of their submission to the Nuwe Amanya Mushega-led Education Policy Review Commission.
“All fees and charges by any public education and training institution should be remitted to the consolidated fund and never should there be spending at source without an approved budget,” the NPA issues paper on Uganda’s education reforms reads in part.
The National Planning Authority (NPA) suggests that if the new centralised fee collection system is put into place, all public schools and training institutions would need to use a single official bank account for their funds.
This idea comes in response to growing concerns about the rising cost of school fees. The NPA also proposes that these institutions should not be allowed to take on debt without approval and that there should be limits on increasing fees, and charges.
This concept isn’t entirely new; it was first introduced in universities back in 2019 after it was discovered that some fees were being misused or not fully reported.
The decision to channel fees through a single account was made to reduce such problems.
However, Filbert Baguma, the General Secretary of the Uganda National Teachers’ Union, criticised the proposed policy.
He highlighted a contradiction in the government’s approach. While Universal Primary Education (UPE) and Universal Secondary Education (USE) are meant to be free, the government is also talking about collecting fees through URA. Baguma questioned how these two ideas could coexist.
“The government needs to clarify this matter,” Baguma stated. “It’s contradictory to claim that education is free and then suggest that URA will collect fees in some schools. What exactly will URA be collecting if there are no fees?”
Baguma also questioned the effectiveness of URA’s fee collection system, which is already in place in universities.
“We haven’t been informed about how well this system is working in universities,” he said, adding that “before implementing this policy, there needs to be a thorough study to determine if collecting fees through URA will be effective in the context of secondary and primary schools, given the diverse issues across the country.”
He expressed worries about possible delays in sending the collected fees back to schools, as well as the practical difficulties parents might face, such as paying in small instalments.
“What problem is the government trying to solve by having URA collect school fees?” he questioned the government’s intention. He stressed the importance of clear explanations and a thorough review of the policy’s impact.
Geoffrey Birungi, the headteacher of Mbarara Secondary School, noted that while having URA collect school fees might not be an issue on its own, the timely release of those funds is essential.
“We’ve seen local governments and universities using this system report delays in fund disbursement,” Geoffrey said.
“Such delays can be problematic, especially if funds are needed urgently for essential teaching and learning resources. For instance, some funds collected by the PTA are used for teacher salaries, school feeding programs, and purchasing educational material,” he said.
He also highlighted that delays could lead to significant issues within schools.
“Sometimes, we need immediate funds for seemingly minor expenses, like replacing a burst ball. Delays in addressing these needs can lead to bigger problems, such as student unrest or disruptions like strikes and even school fires,” he added.
Several headteachers who spoke anonymously for this story echoed the concerns raised by Birungi. They expressed serious doubts about the proposal, fearing it could bring new difficulties for schools.
“The government has already failed to properly fund schools and now wants to take control of the limited money that parents contribute. Schools will end up begging for these funds, relying on when the central government decides to release them,” one headteacher remarked.
The idea of centralised fee collection isn’t entirely new. It was first implemented in universities in 2019 due to issues with fee misuse and underreporting.
The move to have fees managed through a single account held by the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) was intended to prevent such problems and improve financial oversight.
Regarding misinformation on social media, when the policy proposal was published in a newspaper, some false claims began circulating online.
It was suggested that people would need a Tax Identification Number (TIN) and have to pay through the Electronic Fiscal Receipting and Invoicing System (EFRIS), but this is not true.
If the policy is approved, school fees, which will be treated as non-tax revenue, will be paid using a Payment Reference Number (PRN).
In universities, students can generate this PRN through their student portals.
Universities’ Experience
Prof. George Ladar Openyjuru, Vice Chancellor of Gulu University, shared his insights on the centralised fee collection system, drawing from his experience with its implementation at the university level.
Despite ongoing debates about the system, Prof. Openyjuru believes it has proven beneficial in terms of accountability and financial management.
According to him, the URA system, while often discussed without full understanding, has significantly improved financial oversight.
“During its use at universities, the system helped increase fee collection and reduced under-the-table negotiations commonly conducted by some bursars,” he noted.
However, he acknowledged that the impact of the system might differ between universities and primary or secondary schools.
One issue he pointed out is that when a school raises more money than originally budgeted, the surplus funds are not refunded to the school.
For instance, if a school aims to collect Ugx10 million but collects Ugx15 million, the extra Ugx5 million is not returned.
Additionally, Prof. Openyjuru acknowledged that delays in fund disbursement do happen.
END
English 