Members of Parliament have voiced strong criticism over the UGX109.256 billion budget proposed for the Parliamentary Commission, describing it as excessive and urging that the funds be redirected to more pressing national priorities.
During a heated plenary session on April 15, 2025, Erute South MP Jonathan Odur presented a Minority Report flagging what he referred to as unnecessary and inflated allocations within the proposed budget for the 2025/2026 financial year. The report stemmed from the Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs’ scrutiny of ministerial policy statements.
Odur expressed concern that key oversight functions of Parliament, handled by its 28 committees, remain under-resourced with only UGX25 billion allocated to them. In contrast, he pointed out that Parliamentary Commissioners were set to receive UGX5.488 billion in “personal-to-holder” benefits—translating to about UGX1.372 billion per commissioner.
“The current budget setup undermines the effectiveness of our oversight role,” Odur noted. “We recommend a comprehensive review to prioritize committee work and prevent misuse of public funds.”
He also questioned the justification for a UGX52.868 billion bump in Parliament’s development budget. The funds include UGX4.179 billion for refurbishing a car park and toilets, UGX25.8 billion for the purchase of new vehicles, and UGX22.889 billion for office equipment and tech upgrades.
Odur was especially critical of a UGX10.9 billion allocation to public relations initiatives aimed at improving Parliament’s image. “Let’s focus on doing the right thing—the image will follow. We don’t need to throw billions at PR,” he said.
Backing Odur, Tororo District Woman MP Sarah Opendi referenced public dissatisfaction over previous budgetary decisions, including the controversial UGX500 million service awards given to each Parliamentary Commissioner. The new budget proposal, she said, shows a continued trend, with UGX5.4 billion once again earmarked for the same officials.
“We cannot justify giving individual MPs billions while the rest of us carry out oversight without any additional compensation. We must ensure accountability and fairness within our own institution,” Opendi asserted.
However, not all MPs were in agreement. Nyendo-Mukungwe legislator Mathias Mpuuga, a Parliamentary Commissioner and former Leader of Opposition, criticized Odur’s report, accusing him of basing his remarks on unverified information.
“If members come to this House with data they haven’t cross-checked, then we risk misleading the public,” Mpuuga retorted. “Debate should be constructive, not a show for applause.”
Despite the backlash, Odur remained composed and reaffirmed that all figures cited were drawn from official budget documents. He proposed a closed-door meeting between the Parliamentary Commission and MPs for a more candid discussion.
“We need an honest conversation—just us and the documents,” he urged. “Let’s have a genuine budget dialogue.”
The contentious debate reflects growing internal dissatisfaction with Parliament’s financial priorities, as pressure mounts for more equitable and transparent allocation of public resources.