COVID -19 SAGA: President's address on sh10b was politicised

By Barbara Nambi

For the past months, COVID-19 has claimed so many lives globally. In Uganda, we cannot say we have been exceptional except for the grace of God. The hand of God has been upon this land for which we have to be grateful to save for the unfortunate incident of Francis Zake.  

What may have been so good, has now raised mixed feelings among so many. How would someone good or bad, friend or enemy, member of the ruling party or position have to be brutalized for a noble cause of giving food to the needy?

Resources have been injected towards the fight against the pandemic. Ugandans have made health public response. For once in a long time, the country has been in one accord. The opposition and ruling parties have all for once submitted to the President of the Republic of Uganda. The discipline of the populace has been incredible. The curfew has been observed and so many sacrifices made.

However, with all said, I find it disturbing how the issue of sh10b given to Members of Parliament has been interpreted. When the press published the story about MPs getting sh20m towards sensitisation on COVID-19" pandemic, my first question was, "how were the MPs going to sensitise on COVID-19.

Everyone was subjected to self-isolation, secondly, how were they going to do outreaches when the entire population is home.  On the other hand, what was going to be the work of the ICT ministry, who had been part of the supplementary budget, if MPs were to implement the same activity. I wondered if this wasn't a duplication of activities.

Shortly was I pondering about all these issues, when the President made an address to the nation on the same. In his communication, I beg to be corrected, if I am wrong, he mentioned of the sh10b as a constitutional right. He also acknowledged having met the Speaker of Parliament.  

However, he then mentions the time not being right, which he referred to as ‘being morally not right'. This to me cleared the air and I think for many of us who had questions going through our minds. But to the MPS this was perceived as a blow specifically to the electorate, I believe. What if the MPs had kept their cool, would the whole saga have passed unnoticed? Maybe yes. On the other hand, taking funds to the district, wouldn't be a way of fostering transparency and accountability?

However, with the elections coming soon, I see the President's address on the issue being politicized. To the MPs, it is the only moment for them to be seen doing something for the electorate.  Now using structures in place which to me is the best way of doing things became an obstacle for MPS to serve their people.

I personally think the idea of Parliament submitting funds to the district is a way of transparency and accountability. This gives MPs the mandate to demand accountability in case of misappropriation. One wonders if the MP purchases, then whom would they account to. Who does the checks and balances?

The writer is the director of Human Resource and Administration at Transparency International Uganda