By Barbara Among

THE Government and the donor community yesterday welcomed the performance rating of MPs by the African Leadership Institute, calling it a “vital information tool” that can enable citizens to make informed decision and better choice in elections.

Speaking at the launch of the report, Prime Minister Apolo Nsibambi said the assessment can enable MPs to know their strong and weak points and how to address them.

The donors noted that the scorecard provides citizens with impartial information upon which they can assess the performance of their MPs and hold them accountable.

Nsibambi, however, criticised the content of the report, saying it concentrated on quantity, leaving out quality of activities carried out by MPs. “An important area which the scorecard has not given adequate attention to is that MPs play an important role in monitoring the implementation of government programmes which help to transform the lives of Ugandans,” he said.

Nsibambi said the study does not capture the fact that MPs get financial demands from their constituencies such as paying school fees, medical bills, funeral expenses and fundraising. “MPs are forced to spend a lot of their valuable time addressing these demands, which affect their performance.”

Nsibambi also wants the study to capture and award bigger scores to backbenchers who introduce private member’s Bills in the House.

He cited the example of Chris Baryomunsi (NRM), who moved the prohibition of female genital mutilation Bill that was passed into law.

The Prime Minister also noted that the scorecard is silent on the performances of the Speaker and deputy Speaker of Parliament.

He wants the study to capture their performances at constituency level.

Other issues he wants captured were the quality of contributions made by MPs, the length of time MPs attend plenary sittings and the role of development partners in the performance of MPs.

“I wish to state that when Parliament faces a statement, we negotiate outside Parliament for a compromise with the opposition, a measure which increases effectiveness of Parliament in disposing of Bills or issues. The scorecard does not capture these diplomatic measures,” Nsibambi noted.

The Netherlands ambassador, Jeroen Verheul, said the scorecard “is a mechanism for making the institution responsive and holding it accountable. He added that the assessment is a “mechanism that allows citizens to participate actively and responsibly in selecting their representatives and holding them to account”.

The latest report, the third of its kind, which was officially launched yesterday, covers the period between May 2008 and July 2009.

It points out that the general performance of Parliament had improved. Plenary attendance increased to 52% from 45% last year and debate influence improved, with MPs contributing more during debates.

It also found that the MPs were more accessible to their voters and attendance of committee meetings had improved to 44% from last year’s 40%, though participation had gone down.

Verheul scoffed at the critics of the scorecard, saying: “Don’t shoot the messenger if you do not like the message. Shoot at the methodology that underlies the message.”

He, however, said the methodology had greatly improved over the years.
Elly Karuhanga, the AFLI board of directors’ chairman, announced that the institute was planning to extend the scorecard to include the Judiciary and other government institutions.

Voters can also access the scorecard by SMS. However one needs to know the code of their MP to do that. Each MP has been assigned a code that voters will use to access the details on their performance.