The Rwandan government has given itself until the end of May to enforce their anti-thatch campaign. The government says the policy to eradicate all thatched roofs 'is about decent housing for all'.
Corrugated iron is replacing thatched housing across the country but critics have said it has left many of Rwanda's most marginalised people without shelter. Thatched roofs have been traditionally used all over Africa. It's cheaper and some say more practical. Is it right that tradition be sacrificed in favour of modernisation? Should thatched really be banned or should it be a personal choice? Have you ever lived in a thatched house? Did you aspire to have a more modern house? If you would like to debate this topic LIVE on air on Tuesday 31 May at 1600 GMT, please include a telephone number. It will not be published.

Comment number 1.
At 19:49 30th May 2011, KANAMUGIRW wrote:It is unfortunate that we are now forced to live a pretending life in our own country where we are forced to even walk the style that Kagame's government wants. It first started with the issue that all Rwandans must speak English from the traditional French language that our forefathers, our fathers and us were educated in. They imported 50000 Ugandan and Kenyan mechanics to come and teach English. That one went unnoticed. Next it was the Kagame government told us that we are not supposed to wear patapata or sleepers in the city of Kigali. All poor people were banned to step in the city centre forever. Then came the city cleaning crusade that saw all poor people in slums being forced out of their ancestors land to pave a way for Tutsi elites involved in mineral business in DRC to come and erect their houses on our fathers land. my family was the victim and we were never compensated. We had to go back to the village and beg for a piece of land where we all settled in 1acre in Musanze. my mother died of heart attack and my father went to court protesting. He was jailed without charge. That was not enough, recently the government asked all Rwandans, mostly young people to practice castration with its euphemism "vasectomy" those who opposed this forced family planning which target the poor who are mostly Hutus who comprise 85% of Rwandan population and make the majority of the poor who have no genocide survivor's funds to start business in the country, to comply if not I have been seeing young people being arrested and whisked away by the Rwandan police, simply because they have refused to go and undertake forced vasectomy. Now recently I got a casual job that pays me $2 a day working in pyrethrum farms , I have to use all wages to buy corrugated roof for my 2 room houses because the government came to our village in Musanze and set the entire village on fire in their anti thatch campaign in February 2011.
I want to ask the audience to advice me. Rwanda is poorer than her neighboring countries such as Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. These countries still have thatched houses across their borders and yet Kagame is saying that we must demolish our houses and build modern houses and yet we do not have money to do so. This is creating market for Kagame's Tristar company which owns the monopoly of making and importing Mabati in Rwanda, but where will us poor go? every body wants to live a decent life but 60% of Rwandans are living in dire poverty. How are we going to survive this dictatorship if we cannot even feed our children 2 meals a day? Is the international community really care about the plight of basic human rights such right to reproduce? BBC give us answers
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 01:27 31st May 2011, Elizabeth Kuranchie-Mensah wrote:The real world is turbulent, requiring countries, regions, districts and people to undergo dynamic change and change is inevitable. There are some changes that an individual has no control or influence like governmental changes.But I believe there should be much education about the need for the change and the pros associated with it.Though modernisation does not necessarily mean doing away with thatch. People wear hat made with thatch. Does it mean they are not modernised? And I even enjoy thatch hut a lot. [Personal details removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 12:24 31st May 2011, Howard Ayo wrote:I think forcing the Rwandan people is a violation of right to freedom of choice. I know the government is mandated to protect the rights of its citizens and ensure adequate housing and standard of living achieved by all, but in circumstances where questions of sustainability comes in...i think the Rwandan government is making a big mistake. I have lived in a grass thatched home all through my life and back here in Uganda, it is becoming a luxury to even afford grass thatched housing. This is so because of the beautify and cultural significance attached to it and with modern architechure, you can have more than a home with grass thatched housing. I advise Rwanda to articulate between the two other than eradicate grass thatching..let them come to Northern Uganda and see how beautiful the place is.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 13:50 31st May 2011, mayulu wrote:No it should not be forced because our children should know how their grand-parents lived in the villages.This will help them learn more about the village concept not just cooking on an electric stove and a bulb lighting house. I love the village as well as modern structures, this has made me to be a real-original woman in terms of food preparations I don't pretend but come out as a true African woman. Regards to you all guys!!!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 13:55 31st May 2011, mayulu wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 10:59 1st Jun 2011, Sahawe wrote:I think modernization like every other concept has to grow from within the people. There are a number of requirements to lead people on to that road to 'modernization' per se. If people are educated, healthy, have a stable source of adequate income, a manageable family size, civic rights, gender equality and the necessary infrastructure, then it is okay that people can replace some of their building materials as in this case with iron sheets. But in a country still struggling to achieve that kind of position, getting rid of community grown resources to acquire iron sheets that they cannot afford is an infringement of their human right to freedom. Grass thatched houses are eco-friendly and local people do not have to worry as to where to get the resources for constructing one. I think enhancing the nature of grass thatched huts would have been more acceptable in order to reflect modernization. I think there are other bits of African culture like polygamy that need to go but not grass thatched houses. Probably Government advisers are blind to the fact that a person grows using the resources they have and do not have to depend entirely on other people to look after them. This has long been the mentality in post-colonial Africa. So when these iron sheets need replacing, are people going to collect them for free at the Government depot. Rwanda needs to rethink some of her priorities.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 00:54 7th Jun 2011, yemti ndienla wrote:This is all about pride not modernisation. Ruwandians need job campaign not thatch - campaign. Who is to replace the corrugated sheets? Government? And at who's expence? Even if it were the government, what would happen to those living under if they have no jobs? Modernisation should not be forced. It comes with time! and means!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 18:08 12th Jun 2011, l0ul0u wrote:My my my, go to the blog for `poor kids` and the UK think the poor are hard done by!..Seems everydays is a struggle in Rwanda.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)