By Lawmakers on Parliament’s Budget Committee have expressed serious concerns regarding the government’s proposal to allocate funds for the procurement of new vehicles for State House and a portion of taxpayer money for donations. This debate surfaced following the presentation of the Presidential Affairs Committee report by its chairperson, Mr. Alex Byarugaba, on January 23, 2025.
The report, tabled before the Budget Committee, is part of the ongoing discussions on the 2025/26 National Budget Framework Paper (NBFP). These deliberations are critical to shaping the financial blueprint for the upcoming fiscal year.
State House Budget Shortfalls
According to Mr. Byarugaba, State House requires UGX 83.03 billion to clear pending donations. However, only UGX 53.03 billion has been allocated under the Medium-Term Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) ceiling, leaving a funding gap of UGX 30 billion.
“This funding shortfall is concerning, especially as many regions still await fulfillment of the Presidential pledges,” Mr. Byarugaba noted. “Failure to address this gap could tarnish the President’s image and disrupt the execution of these pledges, which are crucial to maintaining public confidence.”
Mr. Byarugaba also highlighted the aging fleet of State House vehicles, emphasizing the escalating maintenance costs. He argued that acquiring new vehicles is necessary to support the upcoming election season and to monitor key initiatives, such as the Parish Development Model.
Opposition Voices Concerns
The proposal faced opposition from Shadow Finance Minister Mr. Ibrahim Ssemujju Nganda, who questioned the timing and justification for the vehicle purchases.
“The Chairperson of the Committee claims that UGX 10 billion is needed for vehicles due to the election season and monitoring activities. However, this could be interpreted as using public funds to support campaigns for the National Resistance Movement (NRM),” Mr. Ssemujju said. “We must ensure that such expenditures are not camouflaged campaign tools.”
Kilak South MP Mr. Anthony Akol also raised concerns about the transparency surrounding the allocation of funds for presidential pledges.
“Each year, we allocate funds for these pledges, yet many remain unfulfilled. There is no clear criteria for prioritization, and Parliament is rarely given a detailed list of which pledges will be addressed. This creates a perception of mismanagement,” he stated.
Civil Society Weighs In
The Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG) echoed the legislators’ concerns, criticizing the priorities outlined in the proposed budget.
“When setting priorities, we should focus on critical areas rather than spending on donations and new vehicles. Splitting resources across such non-essential items undermines the overall efficiency of the budget,” said Mr. Julius Mukunda, Executive Director of CSBAG.
Next Steps
The Budget Committee has not yet reached a conclusive decision on these proposals. A closed-door session is expected to be held to deliberate further on the matter. The outcome of these discussions will play a significant role in determining the final allocations for the 2025/26 National Budget.
