Uganda’s parliamentarians are not famous for avoiding bad publicity. Once again they are in the news for the wrong reasons: Legislation that could see them walk off with billions of shillings in unpaid taxes.

Their argument is simple. They pay taxes on their hefty salaries already. They are proposing that their allowances be spared the taxman’s knife. Why on earth do they think they merit special treatment given that other Ugandans who work in the formal sector and earn far smaller incomes are unable to escape?

These “honourable” men and women, some of whom spend as much time outside parliament doing their own things as they do inside it doing what took them there in the first place, claim that the money they want protected is not for “eating.” It is meant to “facilitate” their work, they argue.

The proposed legislation, currently pending approval by the president, is perhaps the most discussed since the Public Order Management Act (POMA). The government rammed POMA through parliament against stiff resistance, and has subsequently put it to good use keeping public spaces free of potentially destabilising political agitators.

Members of the general public, already unhappy about paying taxes whose benefit to them individually is hardly obvious given the famously poor quality of services and public goods they receive, are in no mood to stomach yet more privileges for people they already look at as selfish and greedy.

Assorted ordinary citizens, albeit still small in number, have been seen waving placards denouncing their elected representatives.

News media have been quick to join in, producing horror stories of what the MPs’ demands imply for service delivery if granted. Estimates have been bandied about of the thousands of health workers whose salaries could be paid annually using the money MPs want to pocket rather than hand over to the tax authorities.

According to one source, “without money the health sector will collapse.” Civil society groups, never ones to miss an opportunity to knock the government, have joined the fray with sharp critiques of their own.

By highlighting the likely impact on health care, the activists know what they are doing. Nothing tugs more strongly at the heartstrings of members of the public than reports of a dysfunctional health sector in which they may one day find themselves caught up. So anyone seeking to whip up adverse publicity against the government need look no farther than the health sector.

There is, however, a sense in which the discussion is misguided.

Let us first consider the impact the MPs’ tax dodging is likely to have on the health sector. Clearly, to raise the quality of the services it delivers, the sector needs as much money as can be pumped into it.

However, if service quality currently leaves much to be desired, lack of money is only part of the explanation and is arguably less important than popularly imagined. Also, while it is easy to state what the money could do if MPs were prevented from pocketing it, proving that it would be put to good use if given to the tax authorities is another matter.

This is not an argument for MPs to be allowed to dodge taxes. Rather, it is to point out that while whipping up emotions may influence the President into not signing the Bill into law, it is not enough to ensure that the money saved will be invested in things that matter to the taxpayer.

Ensuring that this happens requires a more sophisticated approach than waving placards and denouncing the very MPs we members of the public have turned into walking charities and ATM.

We beg constantly from our MPs. Once someone is elected MP, there are people who, unable to find school fees for their children, will seek help from them.

Others with medical bills to pay but who have no idea where the money will come from, look to their MP. Young people who graduate from universities and feel they must throw parties but have no idea how to finance them, look for MPs to “contribute something.”

Those who want to marry and stage lavish weddings, also beg from their MPs. There are also reports of people visiting Kampala from upcountry and ending up at the homes of their MPs to be lodged and fed. Of course, there are MPs who will not tolerate such demands.

Few, however, are re-elected. Voters generally do not like MPs who “eat” alone.

The mass begging and hassling, however, affects not only individuals who have already been elected. It starts from as early as when a prospective candidate declares their intention to contest for a seat.

Any candidate wishing to enhance his or her chances of being elected must prepare to be generous with their money. Where they get it from is their problem. Many borrow heavily or even sell assets to buy their way into parliament.

For many MPs, therefore, seeking tax exemptions is merely one way to recoup their losses and continue to meet voters’ demands for money and freebies.

Frederick Golooba-Mutebi is a Kampala- and Kigali-based researcher and writer on politics and public affairs. E-mail: [email protected]