SEVEN QUESTIONS: Energy minister, oil authority can co-exist, says MP Werikhe

The Speaker of Parliament, Ms Rebecca Kadaga, suspended Parliament last week after the legislators failed to agree on clause 9 of the Oil Bill. An investigation was instituted to find out who started and participated in this chaotic scene. Parliament will sit again next week to debate the same issue with hope that they can get a harmonised position. Sunday Monitor talked to the chairperson of the Natural Resources Committee, Mr Michael Werikhe under whose docket, the Bill falls.

1. Does the current disagreement between Parliament and the Executive show a move by the latter to usurp the powers of the former?
The government presented their Bill which we are using to debate before we come up with a harmonised position. The committee came up with a recommendation in the report based on the bills that were presented. Out of that report, discussion and debate ensued and that’s what we have been considering.

2. What prompted the National Resistance Movement Caucus to meet after Parliament had debated the report?
The committee presented the report and made their own recommendations. Parliament has the report. As a committee, we didn’t agree with the Bill entirely. There are clauses we agreed with the minister. There are some we rejected and there are those which we stood over in order to harmonise through different stakeholders. Every stakeholder has an interest in this Bill. We are representatives of the people as parliamentarians, government has its position and civil societies also have their interests.
As Executive, which is going to manage the resource through an enabling law with mandate from the people, is cautious when such law is being made. We did involve each and every stakeholder and in the end, we came up with various different positions on different clauses. There are 189 clauses. We finished all 188 clauses with agreed positions. There is only one clause which we haven’t finished.

3. The disagreement is whether the minister should take both regulatory and licensing powers. Who do you think should have these powers?
There are proposed functions of a minister in the Bill. The functions of the authority are also well spelt out. There are distinct functions of the minister and those of the authority. For example, on licensing, those are powers of the minister under the Bill. Negotiating and endorsing the agreements are under the minister. Those are the only two that we have not agreed on. According to 1985 Act, there was no authority.
The minister was performing all these functions. But there is an authority coming into place, which is supposed to be a regulator. There are those who say these powers should be with the minister while some say it should be with the authority and, yet, others say both parties should share. That’s where we are.

4. As the chairperson of the Natural resources committee, which one is a better option?
The better option would be checks and balances. That’s what I can say. If we are to benefit as a country, we should have checks and balances.

5. There are those who say that giving the minister powers would not be good because the President can influence. Isn’t it the same thing because the authority is appointed by the President?
The concern is not on the appointment. It’s on the mandate of each institution. Let’s forget about that. You can be my son and after appointing you, you do different things from what I appointed you to do. Therefore, it’s not in the appointment, it’s on distinct functions of each institution. The institution of the minister is different from the authority. The authority, actually, is a regulator. The minister is a supervisor of the sector. But I have given the answer, which is checks and balances. It’s healthier to have these checks and balances.

6. Where do you see this ending?
We will come out of this with a harmonised position. It’s good for us to debate and come out with a harmonized position. We can have different positions and interests in this but in the end, we must come out with a good law for the sector and Ugandans.

7. Will it be good for the country if the minister gets the powers spelt out in the Bill?
The minister can work in conjunction with the authority over certain issues. That’s the answer I will give you even if you ask me a 100 questions. The issue is how do we have these institutions work together. If we pass a law that gives one institution too much powers and in the end we fail, that’s not good for the country. Like I said, for the last two decades, it has been the minister to perform all these functions of regulation, licensing and others. But with the authority coming into place, they need to share the powers. We think these two institutions can co-exist.