Former Members of Parliament have apparently discovered that life after Parliament can be a rude awakening.
The phone
stops ringing as often. At public functions, nobody is scrambling to find them
a front-row seat. They may even have to queue like “mere mortals”, the people
whose laws they once passed.
This,
according to reports, has become a national emergency.
The
Association of Parliamentary Alumni of Uganda is asking for formal
identification cards, official recognition and monthly allowances of between
sh10m and sh15m. Former MPs argue that they are sometimes disrespected in
public and should enjoy benefits comparable to those provided to former
presidents, Speakers and judges.
The
association says the proposed arrangement would be contributory. It is not
asking for houses, vehicles or domestic workers.
How
restrained.
To be fair,
there may be a legitimate discussion about retirement arrangements for MPs who
served before the present parliamentary pension scheme was established. If some
legislators served for years under a system that made no provision for their
old age, there is room to examine the matter.
"But sh10m to sh15m a month is not a retirement discussion.
It is an entitlement discussion...
Assuming only
500 former MPs qualified, the scheme would cost between sh60b and sh90b every
year. If 800 former legislators qualified, the annual bill would rise to
between sh96b and sh144b.
That is
before administration, medical benefits and the inevitable demand to increase
the allowance whenever inflation bites or serving MPs review their own pay.
And we know
how these things work. A scheme begins as “contributory,” develops a funding
gap and eventually turns up at the Treasury asking for a bailout. What starts
as recognition becomes a permanent charge on taxpayers who were never invited
to the meeting at which the benefit was designed.
The average
Ugandan approaching retirement is told to rely on savings, children, a small
garden, a SACCO or whatever remains of the family business. He is reminded that
government cannot provide pensions for everybody.
The former
MP, however, wants sh15m every month, an identity card and official recognition
to protect him from the indignity of being treated like an ordinary citizen.
You cannot
make this stuff up.
Ugandans are
already carrying a heavy public wage bill, rising debt-service costs, domestic
arrears and endless demands from schools, hospitals, roads and local
governments. Every department says it is underfunded. Every district has an
unfinished health centre. Every ministry has unpaid suppliers.
Into this
situation walks the former MP, asking the taxpayer to maintain the lifestyle
and status that came with an elective office that has expired.
This column
warned in 2019 that Uganda was headed down a slippery slope. The danger begins
when leadership stops being understood as temporary public service and starts
being treated as membership of a permanent privileged class.
Once elected
or appointed to high office, the official begins to believe that the public
owes him not only a salary while he serves, but security, medical care, transport,
housing and allowances long after he has left.
Public office
becomes less of a duty and more of an investment product.
You put in
five years and expect a lifetime annuity.
"This is how extractive institutions are built. They do not emerge overnight. They grow allowance by allowance, privilege by privilege and exemption by exemption...
Drawing on
the lessons of Why
Nations Fail, inclusive institutions distribute opportunity widely
and encourage citizens to work, invest and create. Extractive institutions
organise the state around transferring resources to those with access to
political power.
The elite
redesign government around themselves. They receive subsidised vehicles,
generous medical insurance, travel allowances, sitting allowances, fuel
allowances, retirement packages and special access to public facilities.
The ordinary
citizen is given a speech about hard work.
This is why
the proposal has attracted so much anger online. Many Ugandans have asked why
former MPs cannot live off their savings, investments or businesses. Others
suggest that they join the Parish Development Model, Emyooga or the other
wealth-creation programmes Parliament has approved for ordinary people.
That sarcasm
is not entirely misplaced.
MPs are the
best-paid public officials in the country. Their positions provide access to
networks, information, influence and business opportunities unavailable to most
citizens.
"If, after five or ten years in that privileged position, a former MP cannot secure his financial future, what does that say about the financial advice Parliament has been giving the rest of us?
Perhaps
former MPs need an Unco Money seminar.
The case for
special recognition is equally shaky.
Respect
cannot be legislated. An identity card may get a former MP through a security
checkpoint, but it cannot force the public to admire him. Respect is earned by
what one did with the opportunity to serve.
Some MPs will
be remembered for defending the public interest and speaking when silence would
have been safer. Others will be remembered for sleeping through debates,
rubber-stamping waste and appearing in their constituencies shortly before
elections.
The public is
entitled to distinguish between the two.
Former MPs
argue that their experience remains valuable. That may be true. They can advise
political parties, mentor younger leaders, teach, write, join corporate boards,
work in civil society or conduct civic education.
If their knowledge is useful, society will find a place for it. A former title is not proof of continuing usefulness...
There is also
a dangerous assumption that retirement must preserve the lifestyle of office.
It does not. Retirement requires adjustment. Income falls. Consumption must
follow. The suit may remain, but the constituency allowance goes.
A sensible
solution would be a properly funded contributory pension scheme for serving
MPs. Members should set aside a meaningful portion of their generous earnings
while in office. Those who served before the current pension arrangements may
receive modest, targeted support, particularly for healthcare and genuine
hardship.
But Uganda
should resist another open-ended welfare scheme for the political class.
The country
does not suffer from a shortage of former leaders. It suffers from poor public
services, low household incomes and insufficient investment in the things that
would make ordinary citizens more productive.
Public
service should be honoured.
But it should
not become a lifetime invoice sent to the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment