Don’t set bad precedence with BoU house giveaway
Members of Parliament during the special sitting to honour deceased Bank of Uganda Governor Emmanuel Tumusiime Mutebile on Thursday. PHOTO / DAVID LUBOWA
What you need to know:
- The issue: BoU house giveaway.
- Our view: To suggest that someone who earned billions in salaries over a period of 20 years and some more in all manner of allowances could not use some of it to secure a home for his family is an insult of mega proportions to a man who had such a sterling record.
On Thursday, Bukooli Central MP Solomon Silwany proposed that the official residence of the governor of Bank of Uganda be donated to the family of the late Governor Tumusiime-Mutebile, who passed on last Sunday.
Mr Silwany argued that Mutebile, who according to a leaked May 2015 report of Parliament Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (Cosase) was the highest paid government employee with a monthly salary of Shs53.3 million, lived a modest life, did not use his office to amass personal wealth and served as governor for such a long time, may have left the family with nowhere to go. He said it would be good if Parliament supported the family to get a befitting home.
It was a bizarre argument that surprisingly enjoyed the support of the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Ms Anita Among, and a host of other legislators who should know better.
There can never be any good around a wrong move. The Kololo house is public property maintained by the Ugandan taxpayer.
If anyone should be making decisions about it, it should be the owners – the taxpayers – and not a few individuals whose interest in this matter is highly questionable.
Bank of Uganda surely has a clear policy on gratuity and terminal benefits. Given the 20 years that Mutebile put in, the package due to the family should be enough to assist them get a befitting home.
Like the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, Mr Mathias Mpuuga, pointed out, the proposal was an insult, but not just to Mutebile’s legacy.
To suggest that someone who earned billions in salaries over a period of 20 years and some more in all manner of allowances could not use some of it to secure a home for his family is an insult of mega proportions to a man who had such a sterling record.
It is, however, a bigger insult to the ordinary hardworking taxpayer who walks home with a take-home package of less than Shs2 million per month, out of which he meets the cost of medication, education for the children, maintenance of the extended family and construction of a house.
It would be completely unfair to such a taxpayer for government to donate a house to the family of a man who has been earning such money, when it has never donated a house to the less fortunate.
Parliament should not be setting such a precedence, lest all families of long-serving office holders demand similar treatment.
