We live in a world of extremes. Nothing new about that. In fact, it has been so since Adam and Eve disobeyed and got thrown out of paradise. Still, the stark differences do not cease to amaze, annoy, cause anguish - generally arouse some very extreme emotions.

In our own beautiful East Africa such extremes abound.

In one country, the representatives of the people spend an inordinate amount of time bickering over who has the right to fly the national flag on vehicles bought with public funds, who should be addressed as Excellency and who has precedence over the other. They are then paid a sitting allowance for squabbling over useless entitlements.

Hundreds of miles away from their comfortable chamber - red seats and matching carpet - (suggestion of the House of Lords and aristocratic privilege?) the people whose interests they are supposed to represent languish in uninhabitable grass-thatched hovels and worry about the next meal.

A former city mayor in another East African country once famously likened similar houses for the urban poor as birds’ nests. He was roundly criticised for what was considered arrogance and insensitivity.

A good number of the inhabitants of those rickety hovels are jigger-infested, some of them so badly that they can hardly move. Hundreds of deaths due to jiggers have been reported in several countries. And this is the twenty-first century!

One president in this region with a particular passion for history tells us that jiggers were imported from India. They came with the coolies who built what was then called the Uganda railway (Mombasa to Kampala railway).

One hopes the Chinese who will build the new railway line from Mombasa to Nairobi, Kampala and eventually Kigali will not bring some other terrible pestilence. We can do without such imports.

Meanwhile as people die from jiggers, there worthy representatives award themselves a pay rise and a constituency allowance and go back to their upcountry electorate, presumably to mobilize for development, but more likely to attend funerals. 

They actually use funeral contributions to justify their hefty salaries and allowances. Perhaps they are right. Death is never far away from famine-stricken and jigger-infested neighbourhoods.

And rather than seek an end to the obviously avoidable deaths, much time, energy and resources are spent trying to gain political capital out of their occurrence. The inevitable result of this is inaction and paralysis. That, I am told, is called democracy.

It is impossible not to draw a connection between the obsession with perks and poor services, between opulence and poverty, between irresponsible politics and stagnation.

Now, contrast this with what happens in another country in the region where the very notion of entitlement among politicians and government officials is anathema. The thought of self-aggrandisement is mortal sin and as with the latter the price can be costly – not exactly eternal damnation but equally effective silent condemnation.

Here the question is not whether cabinet ministers can fly the national flag on their cars or not. The issue is whether they produce results that can transform the country and improve the lives of citizens.

If you are a governor, the question is not whether you are 

"Excellency, Honourable, Chief” or any other honorific title. It is about whether you are able to deliver quality and timely services to citizens in your province; whether production is optimal; in short whether there has been any transformation.

And so in this country, the emphasis is on performance, not perks, on accountability, not aggrandisement of self or anything else.

It is not surprising to see ministers or high-ranking government officials having to explain themselves before citizens. It is normal to see them explain their shortcomings, apologise for this and pledge to do better in future. And this does not subtract from their standing in society.  On the contrary, it is enhanced.

Citizens, too, feel empowered because they can hold their leaders to account. They feel they are equal owners of the development and administrative processes and have a say in what is done in their behalf.

Here then is a good example of public accountability. Holding public office requires one to have a problem-solving mentality and the ability to deliver agreed programmes.

It is impossible not to draw a connection between accountability and performance, between citizens exercising their rights and service delivery. The outcome is visible socio-economic transformation.

I am informed by people who have an opinion on everything that this practice is bad and undemocratic. Looks like you cannot be certain of the meaning of certain words.

They can shift from one extreme to another depending on whether you have the exclusive right to determine the meaning. 

Not surprising since we live in a world of extremes.

Pomp and power have their attractions. Condemning people to live as the wretched of the earth for ever should not be one of them.

Being accountable and producing results can certainly be demanding, but also rewarding for both performer and that for whom that is done.

The choice between the two should not be difficult to make.

Twitter; @jrwagatare