The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
“Why should our people continue wearing ‘dead people’s clothes’ when we grow cotton and have got our on factories? Is it fair? It is not. We can trade in many other things but not in used clothes.”
Isaac Shinyekwa, the head of Trade and Regional Integration Department at the Makerere University-based Economic Policy and Research Centre (EPRC) told The Independent in an interview that banning used clothes will leave the population naked.
“We indeed need to stop second clothes coming in because they are affecting the growth of our textile industries. But we cannot just wake up one day and say we are stopping it. What is in place to ensure that that gap is filled?” he asked.
He said leaders of the EAC should have developed a plan to make sure that the local textile industries can stand on their own prior to starting to implement the ban.
However, Kenya has bowed out of the plan, supposedly to save its U.S. market for new clothes produced locally in the Economic Processing Zones. In 2016, Kenya is estimated to have exported US$ 394million worth of textiles and apparel to the USA under AGOA.
But Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania say they will not back away from their plans due to pressure from local and foreign business firms at the expense of their local textile industries.
Matia Kasaija, Uganda’s minister for Finance, Planning and Economic Development told The Independent last year that the government took a decisive position to protect its local textile industries and thus will not bow to pressure locally or internationally to remove the imposed taxes on used clothes.
“We are not going to back away from our plans to ban used clothes in this country because few business people in the US or Uganda are interested in the business,” he said.
“Why should our people continue wearing ‘dead people’s clothes’ when we grow cotton and have got our on factories? Is it fair? It is not. We can trade in many other things but not in used clothes.”
He said any business person interested in selling clothes in Uganda and the region, should instead focus on importing new garments.
He added that the new clothes are expensive but the governments in the region are interested in promoting cotton growing in the bloc and increase household incomes of the citizens who will eventually afford new clothes.
Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame early last year stated that his country will proceed with the ban on used clothes despite of threats by the US to review trade benefits to the three EAC countries.
“This is the choice we find that we have to make. As far as I am concerned, making the choice is simple, we might suffer consequences. Even when confronted with difficult choices, there is always a way,” he said after officially applying to run for a third term in office, whose election is slated next month.
“Rwanda and other countries in the region that are part of AGOA, have to do other things, we have to grow and establish our industries,” Kagame added.
Tanzania’s Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs and East African Cooperation, Susan Kolimba told a local daily that the future of the community is bright.
“Differing is common in any group. The good thing about our community is that we have a room for discuss issues, which we have differed from, until we reach a consensus,” she told The Citizen.
Tanzania Private Sector Foundation’s (TPSF) Executive Director Godfrey Simbeye said any decision taken by the US will have a little effect on the country’s economy since there are few industries i that are taking advantage of the market.
US AGOA imports from Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda totaled $43 million in 2016, up from $33 million in 2015, according to the USTR.
On the other hand, US exports to Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda were $281 million in 2016, up from $257 million the year before, most of which consists of used clothes.
A research carried out by a trade law and policy analyst, Esther Katende-Magezi, dubbed ‘The impact of second hand clothes and shoes in East Africa’ published by the Geneva based CUTS International this year, shows that cotton produced in the EAC is spun and woven in Asia, converted into apparels and shipped to USA and EU to be worn for 2-3 years and shipped back to Africa (EAC) as used clothing, to clothe up to 70% of African population.
In Africa, the EAC is one of the biggest importers of second hand clothes from US, UK and China. In 2013, the EAC total percentage of global used clothes trade amounted to 8%, with 3 % for Kenya, 1.9% for Uganda, 1.9 % for Tanzania, 0.6 % t for Rwanda and 0.2 % for Burundi.
This is the main reason that spinners have consistently expressed concern that there is low demand for fabric because the EAC fabric market is choked with imported second hand clothes which has also led to the closure of several textiles mills that were, for example, performing well in Kenya and Uganda such as Raymond, KIKOM, Mulco, African Textile Mills, Rayon Textiles, and Lira Spinning Mill leading to loss of millions of jobs.
These US threats are unbelievable and audacious. I’m at a loss for words. Used clothing are not good at all. People get all kinds of diseases such as skin rash and eczema so why would you want Africa to continue depending on your used underwear and clothing? Please rethink your decision and allow all these sovereign states to plan their economies and luves of their people. Otherwise it amounts to bullying. US President has banned the importation of steel and aluminium to the US. What do you say about that.
As an American concerned about environmental degradation and an advocate for sustainable development, I must say that I agree with you, Araba. The U.S. politicians referenced are concerned (and have been trained to do so) with the profits of the clothing industry, which includes multinational retail corporations that unfortunately promote advertising conveying the message that unsustainable consumption brings happiness while painting over the gross human rights violations and environmental issues that many of these MNCs commit. Most consumers are simply unaware of the life cycle of their clothing, its impact on farmers, other countries’ clothing industries, or the greenhouse gas emissions it emits during decomposition. This is slowly starting to change as educational awareness campaigns grow here. However, there has been a strong need for both regulation and a paradigm shift in the West for some time. Perhaps, this ban will force us to look more closely at the intrinsic, systematic issues and bring change. While I do agree with the plan, perhaps a strategic plan on phasing it out as the textile industries develop will help mitigate some of the possible negative side effects. Great article. Very interesting read. Thanks for sharing this knowledge. 🙂