Kampala — I was speaking to a Ugandan member of a committee which audits governance in Uganda.

There are those who would like to influence his findings, but they don't know how to leverage him. He is not a businessman, therefore he is not looking for any inside contracts or deals, he has no interest in any prime position which could be gifted to him, nor does he want money.

He, therefore, creates a problem for those who want to influence him and in frustration, someone had made the remark, 'That one - we don't know what he wants'. I thought this was a very telling statement in the context of Uganda today, where everything can be managed, so long as we know what benefit the other person wants.

If I want your support and I know that you need a certain amount of money, or a job, let us talk and make a deal. Or, if you work in Company X and by virtue of your position, you can ensure that I get a contract, what can I do for you in return?

Most people appear to work on the assumption, like the Mafia, that everyone has his price, but what happens when you meet a moral person who cannot be bought? When the prevailing attitude is that something which is mutually beneficial can be worked out, the most difficult person is someone, like my friend, who is not asking for anything. He is not corrupt, he cannot be bought or influenced and he, therefore, does what he believes is right.

The reality is that there are few people in this category and that most people can be influenced or induced in some way. On the other hand, there are many people who feel that they are owed such rewards, as their right, because of their history of support for one or other party.

And there are those who feel aggrieved that they are not getting their share of the spoils of war. In the words of the adage - You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time - we should know that it is impossible for everyone to be happy with the balance of power that happens to prevail at the time.

However, we should also recognise that dissatisfaction usually does not come simply because those who are in power are dishonest, while those who are not of power are honest.

More realistically it is because those who are out of power feel that they are not getting their share of the cake.

Finding an honest man who cannot be influenced either way and does not want any personal gain from his position is a rare thing and puts him in a very strong position.

One of the worrying tendencies in Uganda is the tendency for people to threaten violence, or resort to violence in order to get what they want, or they feel is theirs by right. In this respect the Irish and Ugandans are alike; both are very personable, friendly and sociable, yet both can be violent. This is in contrast to the English who like to sit down and talk and reach a compromise.

We had a practice known as knee-capping in Belfast, where people were shot through the knees for a minor grievance and if it was a major grievance, the shot went higher. Thirty years of violence got us nowhere, we simply ended up back where we started. I hope that Uganda can learn from our mistakes.

While my friend, who cannot be influenced by material benefits, may be in the minority and most people want to do the deal, or have their share of the cake, I am glad that there are still many people of integrity in Uganda. In the biblical story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, it was only a handful of righteous men who would have saved that city, but they were not to be found. I hope that we still have a sufficient number of 'righteous men' in Uganda.