Editor,

RE: "AU Summit Kigali: when a miracle became reality” (The New Times, July 25).

Very good piece of article but the person who was suggesting that "the money on the project (Kigali Convention Centre) would have served a better purpose” should maybe shed more light on the meaning of "better purpose”.

I am convinced that the idea of building such magnificent complex in Kigali resulted from the same visionary approach of doing "unusual” things that only visionaries understand better (future tangible or intangible economic benefits).

For illustration, Mr. David Pilling wrote in the Financial Times a few months ago and I quote "…This month, Rwanda received a further accolade when the World Economic Forum held its regional event in Kigali. Organisers said that, in East Africa, only tiny Rwanda had the facilities and organizational capacity to host Davos-in-Africa. That is no small thing to say of a country that, just two decades ago, went through one of the most horrifying eruptions of genocide in modern history”.

Isn’t that enough to justify why Kigali Convention Center was necessary?

Jean-Marie

–

People talking about a "better purpose” are either less informed about the mechanism of development or capital accumulation, so here I humbly oblige myself explaining what I also had to learn:

1) The only way to get out of financial problems is to make wealth increasing investments—that holds at an individual, company or societal level (it does not help arguing one's poverty for the failure to invest even his energy);

2) Wealth attracts wealth full stop. (I am proud of our President and the party, who understood that, unlike other African governments, that posing as poor to get more aid is what will make you going…that is a non starter).

Think the last time you had better revenues, then you, your parents moved into a better neighborhood, school, restaurants etc.. If wealthier people coming to Kigali don't see the wealth and are not properly accommodated, why should they think of staying there? If they can't stay, why should their money stay at all?

Gill