In the East African country of Uganda, a staggering 276,000 young people cannot find jobs each year. Even though many of these youth are university or trade school educated, there is simply not enough infrastructure to accommodate them in the job market. And without jobs, many of these youth will relapse into the cyclical poverty endemic in much of their country.

Young women are particularly vulnerable to unemployment. Many find themselves caught in premature marriages, struggling to support their children with little hope of saving for the future of their families.

But in the heart of Jinja, Uganda’s second largest city, five young women work diligently to create beautiful handmade bags and other accessories for Tukula (meaning “we grow” in Luganda), a for-profit social enterprise based out of Lancaster, Pa. The women, who range in age from 16 to 33, have different life stories.

All of them have completed some amount of tailoring school, and two are continuing their education using the money they earn at Tukula. The women hail from different tribes and ascribe to different religions. But what brings them together is their desire to better the future of themselves and their families.

One of these women, Ayakaka Sally, talks about the impact that Tukula has had on her life. “I used to depend on people,” she says. “But Tukula has made me to be on my own. Now I can afford my food. I can pay my rent. It’s good for me.”

Tukula works with its artisans to create budgets and savings programs aimed at preparing each woman to attain her future goals. By creating and selling beautiful, high-quality products, the company hopes to impact more women in the future.

Tukula is working to eliminate abject poverty in Uganda before it begins, one woman at a time. To learn more visit tukula.org.

During a recent trip to Uganda, I met the hardworking cooks of Amazima –- Nancy, Joanne, and Josephine. You think it’s hard to cook for your family? Trying cooking for more than 400. These women sweat over massive cauldrons of rice, beans and chicken every Saturday to feed children from the community.

It’s part of a larger program called Amazima Ministries –- a US-based nonprofit. According to the latest UN stats from 2009, there are an estimated 2.7 million orphans in Uganda. Amazima’s founder, Katie Davis, started the organization at merely 19 to feed, educate and encourage these vulnerable children. To learn more, visit http://www.amazima.org/.

More common than deafness or Down’s syndrome, hydrocephalus, or “water on the brain,” is a completely treatable condition diagnosed in 400,000 babies worldwide each year, including 250,000 in sub-Saharan Africa. Usually caused by complications from an infection at birth or in infancy, babies provided with proper medical assistance are expected to make full recoveries and to go on to lead perfectly normal, healthy lives. But, like many preventable diseases and disabilities prevalent in the developing world, almost 90 percent of hydrocephalus cases found in African children turn out to be fatal.

Luckily, CURE, a non-profit organization that specializes in providing surgeries for the world’s poorest, are on a mission to make complications from hydrocephalus a thing of the past, providing expertise and care for babies in need of attention.

With a leading teaching hospital in Mbale, Uganda, home to the sub-Saharan region’s only pediatric neurosurgery unit and responsible for more than 1,000 success stories over the past year alone, CURE is certainly proving that reaching its goal is achievable. And, with modern facilities and mobile clinics used to reach remote areas for follow-up appointments and make additional diagnoses, it seems that the organization’s model is set for future progress in eradicating unnecessary deaths caused by equally unnecessary diseases.

This host of achievements, along with the development of a groundbreaking minimally-invasive procedure to treat hydrocephalus and a program that has so far trained 11 neurosurgeons from throughout the developing world -– a particularly impressive feat considering that only five existed previously –- is especially impressive given the obstacles faced by many in the area.

“Uganda’s Miracle Babies,” a recent documentary produced for UK Channel 4’s “Unreported World” series, highlights many of these issues in addition to leading a discussion on what CURE is currently doing to attempt to combat them.

Correspondent Jenny Kleeman introduces viewers to three mothers willing to do anything for a cure for their babies, no matter the cost, first introducing us to Sarah, a two-month old infant in need of urgent surgery to prevent hydrocephalus-related brain damage.

Sarah proves to be a minor case in comparison to two other babies that audiences meet later on in the film, however. Kazimiri, who was brought to the clinic six months after he began to show symptoms of hydrocephalus because his mother was unable to afford to travel to Mbale from her home village, presents an advanced case and faces a long and painful recovery. And baby Oroma, whom the team meets while visiting a rural Gulu village, is in danger of receiving no medical attention at all as her mother at first elects to participate in an expensive ritual led by her village elders.

Thankfully, both Sarah and Oroma are now expected to make full recoveries thanks to the work of the Mbale hospital, while Kazimiri continues to undergo live-saving treatment. With programs like CURE’s it is clear that more stories like theirs are possible for babies suffering from hydrocephalus and other preventable diseases across sub-Saharan Africa.

Take a moment to look at CURE’s website to find out more about their work. And be sure to stay updated on their blog for continued news on the lives already saved by their programs and what you might be able to do to help.

There has been an unprecedented show of unity in Uganda’s parliament, as opposition and pro-government ministers of parliament (MPs) have joined together to demand a temporary halt in the completion of oil agreements until an independent regulator is established. This move was prompted by a collective sense of suspicion about Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs) signed between the Ugandan government and two oil companies, the Italian firm ENI and the Irish company Tullow Oil. Ugandans had hoped that the emerging oil sector would help to create jobs, improve infrastructure and boost the economy. However,as the government continuously refused to make public the details of PSAs, suspicions grew that ordinary Ugandans were not going to benefit from the emerging oil sector.

Calls for transparency

The united front between opposition and pro-government MP’s in Uganda is due to the fact that citizens on both sides of the political spectrum insist that there should be more transparency in the oil industry. A Ugandan civil society coalition on oil issued a statement on October 25 congratulating and associating all Ugandans with “those Members of Parliament who remain steadfast in demanding transparency and accountability in the exploitation of our oil and gas resources.” Citizens believe that they have a right to know about the deals that their government is making to sell their country’s oil. Access to oil PSAs would enable civil society organizations to push government, firstly to insist on a fair price for the country’s resources, and secondly to ensure that the nation’s oil revenues go into the budget process where they can be effectively invested in poverty reduction rather than being used for personal gain. The Ugandan Attorney General claims it is the oil companies that insisted on the confidentiality of PSAs. However, Tullow Oil, a member of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), has previously posted its agreements with Ghana on its website and claims that it cannot publicize Ugandan PSAs without the consent of the host government.

The unfolding events in Uganda illustrate the importance of transparency in minimizing the effects of the “resource curse” seen in many African countries. A lack of transparency in relation to natural resource revenues enables leaders to become increasingly autocratic in their relationship with the public and political opponents. This is a pattern that has been seen in other oil-producing states. Ugandans and those MPs who represent their interests are keen to ensure that Uganda does not follow the same route, stating that they “want to first see transparency and accountability before oil turns into a curse.” Greater transparency would enable citizens to hold their government to account, to ensure that revenues are spent in the public interest.

International support

Citizen demands for transparency in the Ugandan oil sector are complemented by work at the international level. This includes the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, and legislation introduced in the US in 2010 and just yesterday in the EU that will require extractives companies – and logging companies in the case of the EU legislation –- to publish details of their financial activities for every mining, oil, gas and forestry project in every country in which they operate.This initiative will provide citizens with information they need to hold their governments to account for the use that they make of natural resource revenues.Transparency is a tool to reduce the corruption and illicit financial flows that rob many African countries of the resources that they need to make faster progress on poverty reduction. ONE has played an important role in pushing for these pieces of legislation, working as part of the Publish What You Pay coalition.

We’ve blogged a lot over the last few months about the importance of childhood vaccines. But kids aren’t the only ones who need vaccinations to stay healthy, and this week the global health community celebrated a major milestone when Uganda announced that it had eliminated maternal and neonatal tetanus through a vaccination campaign for women of childbearing age.

Tetanus is a potentially deadly infection that can occur if a baby’s umbilical cord is cut with an unclean tool or if a harmful substance such as ash or cow dung is applied to the cord, as is traditional practice in some African countries. When tetanus develops, child death rates are extremely high, especially in countries where health systems are not strong and access to more advanced medical treatment can be difficult.

Protecting against neonatal tetanus actually begins before a baby is born. Mothers can receive the tetanus vaccine and learn about appropriate delivery and cord care practices to ensure the health of their babies. Significant global progress has been made over the last few decades: the WHO estimated that in 2008 (the latest year for which estimates are available), 59,000 newborns died from tetanus, a 92 percent reduction from deaths in the late 1980s. Yet 39 countries still have not eliminated the disease.

So how did Uganda do it? According to the news release from UNICEF, “Between 2002 and 2009, 25 high-risk districts in Uganda were targeted for intervention, and close to two million women of child bearing age received three doses of tetanus vaccines in those areas… In 2010, Uganda reported it had eliminated the disease – and this year, a validation survey has taken place, confirming Uganda’s elimination campaign has been successful.”

Congratulations to the Ugandan health officials, as well as the many partners of the Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus Elimination Initiative, for this fantastic achievement. We celebrate one more example of the power of vaccines in keeping mothers and children healthy, and celebrate the thousands of lives that will be saved as we continue the push for global elimination.

Vincent Magombe, Lee Opiyo Oryema, William Nkata Masembe and Belinda Atim outside number 10

A group of Ugandans in the London Diaspora have delivered an open letter to Prime Minister David Cameron on behalf of over 200 civil society activists from their home country. The petition calls on the British government to force oil, gas and mining companies registered in the UK to be more transparent in their operations abroad.

Belinda Atim, one of the civil society activists who handed over the petition, said:

“I am proud to be representing the voices of over 200 activists from across Uganda who are calling for transparency in the oil industry. Today we sent Prime Minister Cameron the clear message that Ugandans need his support so that the resource course that has blighted so many of our neighbours in Africa doesn’t come to Uganda. By introducing a law that forces companies like Tullow Oil to publish all their payments to governments, David Cameron can make sure activists like me can get the information we desperately need to hold our leaders to account. We are determined to make sure that the huge revenues the government will generate from oil are used to help the people of Uganda, not to line the pockets of the wealthy elite.”

Uganda will soon be producing large quantities of oil, which has the potential to transform the country’s economy and help lift people out of poverty. However, the Production Sharing Agreements have been kept secret by the Ugandan Government despite repeated attempts by journalists and civil society to access the contracts. Currently there is no provision in place for publishing payments received once production begins.

The US passed a law last July as part of the Dodd-Frank Act which will mean all extractive companies registered in America will have to publish all their payments to the governments in every country they operate. ONE is now campaigning for a similar law in Europe. The key company operating in Uganda, Tullow Oil, is not listed in the US so will only have to disclose their payments once Europe follows suit.

The UK Chancellor George Osborne has pledged his support to the new law and has promised to push European legislation. Nearly 10,000 ONE members have signed a petition urging him to act as swiftly as possible.

That is why the decision by the UK government, with France and Germany, to support reform of obscure European Union rules on financial reporting for oil, gas and mineral companies will have such far-reaching consequences. In Uganda, campaigners for greater transparency and accountability in the oil industry are already preparing for the day when they will have access to all legal payments made by oil companies to their government. In a letter sent on Thursday to David Cameron, over 200 of these activists make clear why this is so important, saying, “the only losers would be those who plan to steal the revenue”.

Last year civil society in many resource-rich developing countries celebrated as the US passed the Dodd-Frank Act, which contained the first ever “publish what you pay” law. This means that from April all companies listed on the New York stock exchange will have to report their payments to the governments of the countries where they operate, and even break down the payments to the level of individual projects. This will empower millions of people by giving them access to the information they need to hold their leaders accountable, demanding greater social and economic results, and reducing levels of corruption.

However, Uganda – which has large untapped oil reserves – will not see the benefits of the US law since the companies operating here are all listed on European stock exchanges. Tullow Oil, for example, is registered in the UK. Uganda is the perfect example of why European leaders need to swiftly implement these reforms. In his 10 minute-rule bill last week Anas Sarwar MP highlighted this by referring to the Ugandan shadow finance minister’s recent video message calling for UK leadership.

It is estimated that at peak production the oil reserves in Uganda will generate $2bn a year in revenue. To put this in context, the last national budget is $3bn billion, and $1.7bn has been coming from foreign aid. Clearly this oil money has the potential to drive economic development in Uganda, yet the early signs are not promising.

The production sharing agreements between Kampala and the oil companies have been kept secret by the Ugandan government despite repeated attempts by MPs, journalists and activists to access the contracts. A section of one of the agreements, which was leaked by a whistleblower, showed that the terms were not consistent with international norms as the government claims.

Currently, there is no provision in place for publishing the payments received once production begins. Ugandans are nervously looking across to neighbours in the Democratic Republic of Congo and wondering if they are heading down the same road, where natural resources have been a curse rather than a blessing.

Of course, transparency itself cannot deliver perfect oil governance – it is a means to an end. It is vital that once published, the information is used in the right way. Those working to improve aid transparency have voiced some concern that people in developing countries do not feel sufficient ownership over aid to hold donors and governments to account, even with greater transparency.

Natural resources do not suffer that problem. Citizens are demanding their fair share of what they know to be theirs. Civil society, supported by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, is tooling up to provide the checks and balances on government. The Ugandan activists are clear: “We stand ready to hold our leaders accountable, but we require your support to do so even more.”

The importance of extractive industries to African development cannot be understated. In 2008, exports of oil, gas and minerals from Africa were worth about nine times the value of international aid to the continent ($393bn v $44bn), and over 10 times the value of exports of agricultural produce ($37.9bn). Yet most of Africa’s natural resources remain in the ground. The economist Paul Collier estimates that only a fifth of sub-soil assets have been discovered in sub-Saharan Africa.

In Uganda, where over 7 million people still live in extreme poverty, harnessing the newfound oil wealth is a one-off opportunity to accelerate social and economic development at a previously unthinkable rate. With transparency and accountability acting as a vaccine against corruption and poor leadership, the new revenue has the potential to lift the country to middle-income status. Europe must do all it can to empower the people of Uganda to make sure this happens.

This blog was co-written by Winnie Ngabiiwe – chairwoman of Publish What You Pay – Uganda,

For a country whose President sits 7th in the league of longest serving African leaders (and could have climbed to 6th by the time this is published), Ugandans appeared remarkably relaxed about awarding Yoweri Museveni another five years in office. The election campaign was largely peaceful, a welcome change from the violence and intimidation inflicted on his main opponent Kizza Besigye in 2006, and the result was decisive. On a significantly reduced turnout of 58% Museveni took 68% of the total, winning by over 3 million votes – a figure predicted almost exactly by an independent opinion poll three weeks out.

The opposition have predictably cried foul, with legitimate complaints about the massive use of state resources to support Museveni and National Resistance Movement candidates. What they lack is an Election Day ‘smoking gun’ to explain Museveni’s wide margin of victory. There was relatively little evidence of the NRM’s favoured rigging methods: ballot box stuffing, pre-ticking and ghost voters.

Instead the election will be remembered for money. In total Museveni used $350 million to bolster his campaigns, most of it state funds. Some of the spending was in the form of crude vote buying, with the undignified sight of Museveni handing over brown envelopes full of cash to local luminaries a daily occurrence. In January the NRM-dominated parliament passed a $250 million supplementary budget, much of which was funnelled into the campaigns. Parliament also awarded each MP a $8500 grant 3 weeks before the election, effectively a campaign donation to boost incumbent candidates.

Other methods were less obvious, but just as effective. Veterans had their arrears cleared, local councillors received a facilitation fee for the first time in several years and government building projects across the country conveniently kicked into action.

It would be wrong, however, to underestimate the value of Museveni’s political genius in this election. As he toured the country he perfected the art of putting himself on the side of the people he was addressing. His stump speech would list all the money his government was allocating the various districts for agriculture, health and public services. ‘Have you not seen it?’ he would ask, before calling up the relevant local government official and lambasting them in front of the crowd for failing to deliver on his programmes. In this way he insulated himself from complaints of corruption, and reinforced his popularity with the rural and less educated people. It is a paradox of Ugandan politics that the areas which voted most heavily for Museveni are the poorest that have benefited least from his government. The educated middle-classes and elites, who have tended to prosper under his laissez-faire economic management, continue to lean towards the opposition.

Museveni also showed himself adaptable to new methods of campaigning. On the eve of polling his party used ‘robocalls’ to phone up millions of Ugandans with a recorded message asking them to vote for the ‘old man with the hat’. SMS messages were also sent out offering $3 of free airtime if the recipient forwarded the NRM’s official line to seven of their friends. Infamously, Museveni also tried his hand at rapping in his native Runyankole language, much to the delight of his younger supporters. The ‘rap’ was subsequently remixed and released as a hit single. A plane spent the days before the election traversing the Kampala sky playing the song in an unusual ‘get out the vote’ method.

Conversely, the opposition failed to take advantage of the opportunities presented to them. They took for granted their previous electoral base in the North, which allowed Museveni to capture the region with a message of peace, stability and promises of better services if they voted ‘wisely’. The opposition failed to find a message which truly resonated, instead pitching the same ‘time for a change’ mantra they had used in 2006. A lack of coordination also hurt them. Despite a formal inter-party cooperation agreement there were seven challengers to the incumbent.

The parliamentary races were more competitive with 19 government ministers losing their seats, although the NRM easily held control of the house. Many of the ministers lost to independent candidates who had been defeated in the NRM primaries and will now largely vote with the government.

So what next for Ugandan politics? Besigye’s attempt to call people onto the streets to protest against the results appears to be falling flat. There is little appetite amongst his supporters to test the formidable army and police deployments in the country’s urban areas. The political analyst and journalist Andrew Mwenda compares the state of the opposition to the tough new political realities the UK Labour Party faced in the post-Thatcher era:

The lesson of Museveni’s 2011 victory is similar. There has been a major change in public perceptions about politics. The old message of attacking Museveni for the corruption, nepotism and incompetence of his government is stale. It still finds passionate support amongst his most ardent critics; but its effect is to appeal to the base without growing it. It seems that many Ugandans have moved on; for Museveni’s greatest triumph has been to make these failures banal, routine and normal.

As for Museveni’s future, close watchers of his career will tell you to never second-guess the master tactician. However, you will struggle to find anyone who believes ‘the old man in the hat’ will not be on the ballot paper in five years time.

Next month Ugandans go to the polls to elect their President and Members of Parliament for the next five years. So the country is now in full-scale campaign mode with posters lining the streets and the front pages dominated by election stories. And it’s not just Uganda. In total 17 African countries will be going to the polls in 2011.

On the campaign trail with prospective MPs in rural Western Uganda you can easily identify the hyper localized retail politics that the candidates are engaged in. Voters need to be convinced village-by-village and take it as a personal slight if they have not received a visit. However, campaigning in rural Uganda comes with many challenges. A typical village rally will see a convoy of several vehicles arriving on pot-holed mud roads to find a few chairs set out in the shadiest spot they can find. The truck in the convoy carrying the audio equipment and power generator – no electricity here – then gets to work, playing local music at full volume to announce the arrival of the politicians. Within a few minutes a crowd has assembled and the music is swapped for speeches.

Traveling with members of the governing National Resistance Movement party the message is the same: ‘look how far Uganda has come, how stable it is, how the economy is growing – do you want to risk change?’ Of course the main opposition parties see it differently. They accuse President Museveni – now in power for 25 years – of using patronage to cement his power and argue that senior ministers have not been punished for acts of corruption.

Money certainly plays a key role here – and arguably in most elections round the world. A pro-democracy coalition of civil society organization this week attacked all the main political parties for attempting to buy votes. Candidates often have their organizers distribute salt, sugar and soap in the hope this will translate to votes at the ballot box. The organizations also highlighted a time-honored practice of ruling politicians everywhere in announcing big new projects (or delivering on past promises) just as the election heats up.

With less than a month to go the elections have been relatively peaceful though, certainly compared to 2006 when opposition Presidential candidate Kizza Besigye was falsely jailed for most of the campaign. This time the process is far from flawless, but there is clearly a vibrant democratic process taking place. That certainly won’t be said of all the 17 African elections this year.

He makes a powerful case in support of the so-called Publish What You Pay principle and offers his support to recently passed legislation in the US: “We have a good opportunity to borrow what happened in the US…and compel companies to disclose whatever payments they make”.

Mr Oduman is pushing for Uganda to implement its own comprehensive oil law in the next parliament following elections in February, but it is clear that countries that host companies on their stock exchanges also have a critical role to play. It is people like Mr Oduman who will be able to hold their governments accountable when full transparency over oil, gas and mining payments is finally achieved.