The 2013 CCFU Annual Report

Welcome
The debate: Is CCFU up to the task of promoting
cultural heritage in Uganda and beyond?
2013 was indeed a year of outstanding success for CCFU
– a time of increased and improved services to various
groups. The pillar of this achievement is our small
hardworking staff whose capacity the Board is proud of.
But we are now in a rather complex situation – what should
be the next focus for CCFU? To illustrate this situation, I
recall the seemingly simple question by a delegate from
West Africa attending the global conference of National
Trusts co-organised by CCFU: “Patrick, tell me, is CCFU
an international organisation?” “No” I quickly replied,
“Why do you ask such a question?” “The high quality of
CCFU publications, the calibre of your staff and …” I kept
reflecting on this independent assessment of CCFU. I was
in for more puzzles. All delegates from Africa asked CCFU
to “coordinate” and “mobilise” them into a Sub-Saharan
Africa-wide movement promoting cultural heritage.
Why a puzzle? During Board meetings, some of the best
moments happen when we review the wide range of
activities undertaken by the Secretariat in different and
often isolated areas and in various contexts (cultural
museums, schools, chiefdoms, historical buildings,
etc). While recognising the value of operating at Africawide
level, as a Board, we wonder what realistic mix of
services will optimise output from the small high quality
staff we have.
Our staff have proved that it is possible to promote
the role of culture in national development and family
wellbeing. Yet within Uganda, there are endless requests
put to CCFU, including ‘spearheading the formation of
a National Trust on cultural heritage’. Out of these
demands, what priorities should the Board approve,
considering the limited financial resources? And how
can we realistically support the staff in raising the much
needed, but difficult to obtain, finances?
Field work has provided insights and a broad range of
learning points. As a Board, we realise that there are
many knowledge
gaps in cultural
heritage work,
requiring further
and systematic
action research.
There are many
small groups and
individuals who need
technical support.
We keep pushing
our staff – we want
them to respond
to every issue of
Patrick D. Kiirya,
Board Chairperson
cultural heritage – but this is not always possible. One
area we have often complained about is the slow work
in showcasing the activities various CCFU partners are
engaged in in various parts of the country. One area
the Board fully appreciates as a major strength of the
Secretariat is regularly highlighting current thinking
and practices as far as the role of cultural heritage in
improving livelihoods is concerned.
Beyond CCFU’s immediate work, the uncertain
government policy towards Civil Society Organisations
- especially NGOs - is worrying. Too often, CSOs are
considered agents of outsiders. On the contrary, CSOs are
part of the evolving Ugandan culture. What international
and local CSOs need is similar: to build strategies and
interventions truly focusing on local demands based
on local knowledge, local traditions and customs, local
technologies and natural resources. In other words, by
paying attention and celebrating cultural heritage, one
will be firmly rooted and cause meaningful change,
reflecting our national identity.
Let me end with a phrase we often repeat at our Board
meetings: gaining real political commitment on issues of
cultural heritage would radically improve the well-being
of numerous marginalised populations of Uganda. Is a
local or central government policy maker ready?
3