Government may give MPs a sh30m car loan
Dec 27, 2006
The National Taxpayers and Tax Protection Organisation appeals to the Honourable MPs not to breed bad blood between them and the President, Speaker or Minister of Finance over the sh60m for their car scheme.
By Joseph Kasibante
The National Taxpayers and Tax Protection Organisation appeals to the Honourable MPs not to breed bad blood between them and the President, Speaker or Minister of Finance over the sh60m for their car scheme.
In two separate petitions to the Speaker of Parliament, we, as a body that cares to see that taxpayers’ money is not wasted indiscriminately, appealed to the Hon. Speaker, the President, the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance not to grant the sh60m ransom demanded by the MPs for vehicles when the models and make are not specified for the following reasons:
The taxpayers view the scheme with suspicion as different MPs vowed to use the money for other purposes.
Such insinuations are a diversion of public funds drawn from the Consolidated Fund for a specific purpose and requiring specific accountability.
It is on this ground that we decided to guide the Government on the project.
We proposed to the Government that to avoid abuse of the scheme, it should give out vehicles in kind with customised number plates of a specific MP’s constituency.
We also proposed that the vehicles should be of the same model, make and colour and should be returned to the State after the expiry of the MPs’ term, upon resignation or death, for the successor to take over.
We thought it wise that the vehicle becomes constituency property, with the MP paying for the licence and fuel from the mileage allowances.
We later found out that the sh60m was a mere proposal by the MPs of the Parliamentary Movement Caucus to consider how much the Government would contribute.
We then proposed sh25m as the amount the Government should contribute to each MP.
But still we demand that even the sh30m be accounted for through the usual procedures.
Spare a thought too; let’s check on the 7th Parliament car loan transactions. Remember, the sh20m advanced to the MPs during that term was a car loan, not a grant. They were supposed to pay back from their allowances.
However, it is feared that as recoveries are suspected to have been halted just after some months with no explanation, the MPs still owe taxpayers the car loan money.
We, therefore, demand that the Minister of Finance and the Auditor General tell us how the money is to be recovered. Taxpayers demand accountability. We are copying this statement to:
• The President
• The Prime Minister
• The Speaker
• The finance minister
• Auditor General
Our final stand on the MPs’ vehicle scheme is that: -
1. The scheme can go on at sh30m, subject to production of a pro-forma invoice for the intended vehicle by each MP from a reputable supplier as prescribed in the Public Procurement Act.
2. The sh30m should be a loan.
3. MPs who never completed the repayment of the sh20m advanced to them in the 7th Parliament for the vehicle loan scheme should have their allowances and payments attached for the taxpayers to recoup what was taken. Even those who never made it to the 8th parliament must be followed up to recover for the taxpayer.
4. As generally feared by many taxpayers that all MPs of the 7th Parliament who got the sh10m Constituency Development Fund have not accounted for it, let them do it now. Only the dead should be forgiven.
That way, we can entertain MPs who query other government officers for accountability and for living cosy lives. In the same vein, we shall respect the parliamentary public accounts committee for their officious queries about judges’ salaries and allowance increments, which they say was never approved by Parliament (refer to The New Vision, Thursday, November 30, 2006).
The writer is the president of the National Taxpayers and Tax Protection Organisation
The National Taxpayers and Tax Protection Organisation appeals to the Honourable MPs not to breed bad blood between them and the President, Speaker or Minister of Finance over the sh60m for their car scheme.
In two separate petitions to the Speaker of Parliament, we, as a body that cares to see that taxpayers’ money is not wasted indiscriminately, appealed to the Hon. Speaker, the President, the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance not to grant the sh60m ransom demanded by the MPs for vehicles when the models and make are not specified for the following reasons:
The taxpayers view the scheme with suspicion as different MPs vowed to use the money for other purposes.
Such insinuations are a diversion of public funds drawn from the Consolidated Fund for a specific purpose and requiring specific accountability.
It is on this ground that we decided to guide the Government on the project.
We proposed to the Government that to avoid abuse of the scheme, it should give out vehicles in kind with customised number plates of a specific MP’s constituency.
We also proposed that the vehicles should be of the same model, make and colour and should be returned to the State after the expiry of the MPs’ term, upon resignation or death, for the successor to take over.
We thought it wise that the vehicle becomes constituency property, with the MP paying for the licence and fuel from the mileage allowances.
We later found out that the sh60m was a mere proposal by the MPs of the Parliamentary Movement Caucus to consider how much the Government would contribute.
We then proposed sh25m as the amount the Government should contribute to each MP.
But still we demand that even the sh30m be accounted for through the usual procedures.
Spare a thought too; let’s check on the 7th Parliament car loan transactions. Remember, the sh20m advanced to the MPs during that term was a car loan, not a grant. They were supposed to pay back from their allowances.
However, it is feared that as recoveries are suspected to have been halted just after some months with no explanation, the MPs still owe taxpayers the car loan money.
We, therefore, demand that the Minister of Finance and the Auditor General tell us how the money is to be recovered. Taxpayers demand accountability. We are copying this statement to:
• The President
• The Prime Minister
• The Speaker
• The finance minister
• Auditor General
Our final stand on the MPs’ vehicle scheme is that: -
1. The scheme can go on at sh30m, subject to production of a pro-forma invoice for the intended vehicle by each MP from a reputable supplier as prescribed in the Public Procurement Act.
2. The sh30m should be a loan.
3. MPs who never completed the repayment of the sh20m advanced to them in the 7th Parliament for the vehicle loan scheme should have their allowances and payments attached for the taxpayers to recoup what was taken. Even those who never made it to the 8th parliament must be followed up to recover for the taxpayer.
4. As generally feared by many taxpayers that all MPs of the 7th Parliament who got the sh10m Constituency Development Fund have not accounted for it, let them do it now. Only the dead should be forgiven.
That way, we can entertain MPs who query other government officers for accountability and for living cosy lives. In the same vein, we shall respect the parliamentary public accounts committee for their officious queries about judges’ salaries and allowance increments, which they say was never approved by Parliament (refer to The New Vision, Thursday, November 30, 2006).
The writer is the president of the National Taxpayers and Tax Protection Organisation