BEFORE the birth of the multiparty dispensation, parliamentarians served on individual merit. They debated unimpeded by party rules or collective responsibility. Each expressed their argument without fear of being reprimanded for contradicting the official party position.
But things changed when the multiparty system was endorsed, forcing members into caucuses that sit before a major decision is tabled to hammer out the official party line.
Bukedea MP Albert Oduman Okello (FDC) concurs that although they would have loved to do better, they are constrained by the principle of collective responsibility that gives the NRM an undue advantage on every crucial vote.
“We would love to do better, but considering the circumstances, I think some of us did our best. I also think multiparty politics has become a problem where members are forced to toe a collective line and end up abandoning the cause to an extent that you cannot even appeal to their integrity,” he laments.
Besides MPs sticking to the official party line, there is the question of numbers. Even when the opposition has put up a sterling show during debates, the ruling NRM has by far outweighed the opposition when it comes to passing through crucial votes, because of the NRM has the majority MPs.
“The opposition cannot thrash the NRM’s numerical strength,” says Rubanda East MP Henry Banyenzaki, one of the MPs dubbed rebels for siding with the opposition on controversial issues, especially corruption.
He contends that while some NRM legislators are sympathetic with the opposition on some issues that would demand collective action, they have not been helped by the opposition’s stance on most issues.
“They mostly played boardroom politics and their way of doing things was in one direction. When they were defeated in Parliament, they just gave up and sometimes we were forced to play the oversight role, even where the opposition would have carried the day,” he said.
Compared to the Sixth Parliament, which the President accused of having blocked the passing of money for construction of dams (if that is to assess their negative impact), opposition members of the Eighth Parliament have by and large been plagued by defections to the ruling establishment or crossing from one party to another.
These MPs include former UPC stalwarts Aggrey Awori, Daniel Omara Atubo, Ben Wacha and Cecilia Ogwal. They have been so obsessed with their own political survival that they have not had enough time to concentrate on debate on the floor. “Even when they could have made an impact, they gave up early,” Banyenzaki contends.
Before the birth of the multiparty dispensation, parliamentarians served on individual merit. They debated unimpeded by party rules or collective responsibility. Each expressed their argument without fear of being reprimanded for contradicting the official party position.
But things changed when the multiparty system was endorsed, forcing members into caucuses that sit before a major decision is tabled to hammer out the official party line.
Bukedea MP Albert Oduman Okello (FDC) concurs that although they would have loved to do better, they are constrained by the principle of collective responsibility that gives the NRM an undue advantage on every crucial vote.
“We would love to do better, but considering the circumstances, I think some of us did our best. I also think multiparty politics has become a problem where members are forced to toe a collective line and end up abandoning the cause to an extent that you cannot even appeal to their integrity,” he laments.
Besides MPs sticking to the official party line, there is the question of numbers. Even when the opposition has put up a sterling show during debates, the ruling NRM has by far outweighed the opposition when it comes to passing through crucial votes, because of the NRM has the majority MPs.
“The opposition cannot thrash the NRM’s numerical strength,” says Rubanda East MP Henry Banyenzaki, one of the MPs dubbed rebels for siding with the opposition on controversial issues, especially corruption.
He contends that while some NRM legislators are sympathetic with the opposition on some issues that would demand collective action, they have not been helped by the opposition’s stance on most issues.
“They mostly played boardroom politics and their way of doing things was in one direction. When they were defeated in Parliament, they just gave up and sometimes we were forced to play the oversight role, even where the opposition would have carried the day,” he said.
Compared to the Sixth Parliament, which the President accused of having blocked the passing of money for construction of dams (if that is to assess their negative impact), opposition members of the Eighth Parliament have by and large been plagued by defections to the ruling establishment or crossing from one party to another.
These MPs include former UPC stalwarts Aggrey Awori, Daniel Omara Atubo, Ben Wacha and Cecilia Ogwal. They have been so obsessed with their own political survival that they have not had enough time to concentrate on debate on the floor. “Even when they could have made an impact, they gave up early,” Banyenzaki contends.
Leadership
The leadership of the opposition has not gone unscathed in the critique, with most members questioning its foresightedness and faithfulness to their cause. This criticism came mainly from the young turks like Odonga Otto, Geoffrey Ekanya, Elijah Okupa and Abdu Katuntu, whom the Leader of Opposition, Ogenga Latigo, referred to as having been “troublesome and undisciplined” under his tenure.
Could this and other weaknesses of the opposition explain why Latigo lost his seat to James Okot (NRM) in the recent parliamentary elections? Addressing journalists at Parliament, he said losing an election did not mean that he was out of politics.
“Losing an election does not mean I am out of politics. Obviously, I will miss Parliament. But I have made big contributions in Parliament. When Bills were presented, a few of us remained to sort them out. That means I will not be there to do that. I regret that,” Latigo said.
He said as the leader of the opposition, he faced challenges from what he described as ‘indisciplined” opposition MPs, mainly from FDC. Latigo said some MPs declined to attend meetings, while others violated meeting resolutions. He cited an incidence when an opposition caucus meeting agreed to challenge the creation of new districts, but he was surprised when some FDC members demanded for districts.
He observed that the workload for his successor in the Ninth Parliament would be light since most of the MPs who won the elections are ‘mature’. Latigo said he spent a lot of time grooming members who lacked mutual respect for party leaders. “I had problems guiding young people, especially FDC members. UPC and DP members were disciplined,” Latigo said.
He attributed his political loss to the State, which he said, assigned the wife of a senior cabinet minister to plan his downfall.
Objection
Banyenzaki, who ranks the opposition performance at 30%, refuses to acquit Latigo completely of blame.
“They (opposition) have also been let down by the leadership because in almost all important debates, the leader of opposition would be away. Take the CHOGM debate for example, Latigo was conspicuously absent, yet that was an important and big report.
“And when he was around and a disagreement arose, he would lead the entire opposition to storm out of the house. This raised questions as to how some of the opposition leaders took issues,” he says.
Banyenzaki, however, absolves a few individuals who, he says, stood out for carrying the entire opposition burdens on their shoulders. He cites Nandala Mafabi, who put up a spirited fight to save public resources.
“Nonetheless, we need to give them credit because their work is stressful and arduous and needs a high level of commitment,” he says.
Opposition view
One of the most ardent and critical opposition MPs, who was also shadow minister for finance, Oduman Okello, takes exception to Banyenzaki’s stinging remarks, opining that members’ cohesion was often broken by the many individual obligations, if not the fight for political survival.
“We also needed to operate in unison as a government-in-waiting, but we were quite often scattered. You would more or less find that we were acting individually,” he says.
Taking blame, he pleads for forgiveness for shortcomings they could have committed, but takes solace in the fact that this is Uganda’s first multiparty parliament in 25 years.
“I believe our brothers and sisters in the Ninth Parliament will learn something from us and take the struggle forward and ensure that the presence of the opposition can make a difference,” he says.
But Oduman, being the assertive character he is, does not take the blame lying down. Despite their shortcomings, he notes, the opposition influenced government policy by and large.
“Over 70% of what the Government does is xeroxed from opposition presentations, especially so when it comes to the national budget. Many of the issues we raise as urgent budget needs are embraced by the Government. Donors will not do anything for the Government until they get a response from the opposition,” he asserts.
Uganda’s Eighth Parliament has seen grand debates and eloquent speeches pertaining to a diversity of proposed legislation.
But like one commentator observed, the public or electorate out there do not gauge performance by how eloquently their representatives hammered out an issue, or the level of acrimony an MP was able to raise in the House.
Rather, this performance is measured by referring to major issues pertaining to the people’s lives that were successfully resolved, the number of petitions an MP was able to push through and actually made an impact. This is one of the strong points that people like the new Kampala mayor and erstwhile Kampala Central MP, Erias Lukwago, employed.
Points against which MPs should be judged
The functions of Parliament against which members should be judged are, but not limited to:
1. Passing laws for the good governance of Uganda.
2. Providing — by giving legislative sanctions, taxation and acquisition of loans — the means of carrying out the work of the Government.
3. Scrutinising the Government’s policies and administration.
4. Pre-legislative scrutiny of bills referred to the parliamentary committees by Parliament.
5. Scrutinising of the various objects of expenditure and the sums to be spent on each.
6. Ensuring transparency and accountability in the application of public funds (Chogm and Temangalo probes, for instance).
7. Monitoring the implementation of government programmes and projects.
8. Debating matters of topical interest, usually those highlighted in the President’s State of the Nation address.
9. Vetting the appointment of persons nominated by the President under the Constitution or any other enactment.
Published on: Saturday, 30th April, 2011
