Aboneka Writes

I have learned and read about officers responsible for disbursement of funds creating accounts on which they hold either people's salary or project money for months in order to earn an interest on the same. Project activities will stall and employees will not receive their salary for months just because some selfish individual is holding their money for his own benefit. Holding people's money first is wrong because they need to earn for the work done and it is unfortunate that some individuals will turn this into a fortune by making others suffer painfully waiting for money all in vain. These same officers usually use the excuse of late disbursement and yet the money was released. It is unfortunate that the Banks also allow these lucrative deals at the expense of others. The Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Finance promised to investigate the same and come up with an appropriate solution and hope it is soon. Immediate investigations should be carried out to find out

I have learned that Hon. Ekanya has moved a proposal to introduce Phone Tax of 5,000/= per year on every holder of a phone. In his argument, he stresses that this will increase government revenue and this came up because the EC wanted salary increase which money Ministry of Finance did not have at the moment! I think there is need for an objective test rather than the subjective while dealing with issues of taxes. 5000/= may look so small to Hon. Ekanya but very much to some one else. There is a new trend of shifting burden to tax payers in this country, first it was tax on kerosene for the reason that Diesel was being adulterated and yet we have a fully mandated institution, UNBS responsible for quality but again the Minister had to shift the burden to the tax payers! We already pay taxes when buying a phone, its accessories and also VAT on airtime, isn't this enough? I am sure the cost of collecting such tax will be more higher than the revenue and this is against the canon

Time Check: 01:10am Officer: How r u sir? Me: M fine Officer: We are checking for guns, do u have any in your car? Me: I don't carry guns and I love my country Officer: Do u love and support Mbabazi? Me: Why? Officer: U cannot claim to love Uganda today without supporting Mbabazi Me: Since when? Officer: Brother, drive safely...and do you have some water for me? Me: Sorry sir, i dint carry any in my car Officer: You know what I mean..because we people protect you on this road and at least water for me is oke Me: Nice talking to you Afande and bye-- Michael Aboneka Jr

As the ex-officio ministers grapple with pay rise, I also find it disturbing that the tax payers and voters at that have to pay their MPs shs 150,000 per plenary sitting. This to me does not make sense because we vote the MPs to represent us in Parliament and discuss issues affecting us and why should we then pay them to do their Job?The MPs receive salary, millage allowances, travel allowances, constituency mileage of 2.5m (even when some dont come to constituency), among others and paying them 150,000 shs per plenary is not only disturbing but misuse of tax payers money. Tax payers have to part with about 45M per plenary for about 300 MPs and 135M for 3 plenary sessions and this takes a toll on the public fiance and it is more disturbing to hear that a hospital has no power or water or doctors are not being paid yet money is being spent on MPs for the work they are paid to do! This is not a good example of equity in our country and much as allowances are good, this particular one is

I had read about the demand for pay rise by the ex-officio ministers who represent no constituency and I am disturbed especially with their reasons. Much as it is true that earnings should match with the economic times, justification for the same is crucial. I am saddened to learn that among other reasons for pay rise are that the ministers do not have enough to donate at public functions! For God's sake, is it the minister's role to donate at functions? It is his own doing so why does one bother tax payers for his own interests? I also find the reason on "Carrying high titles therefore higher payer" very lacking in reason! I am sure these ministers received an appointment letter to which they accepted to serve the country and we should pay for the work they do and not the title, who care about the title? All we care about is service delivered. Comparing the pay of their colleagues who represent constituencies is short of reason because the two can never be the same