|
Ultimately, EPA debate stands on thin ground
2008-06-23 10:48:58
By Correspondent Ani Jozeni
Two things come to my memory in the first week of the on-going parliamentary session in Dodoma Region. First is the proposal by opposition Members of Parliament that the esteemed members` allowances realised from workshops, seminars, symposia, conferences and Parliament sittings should be taxed.
The proposal, according to the Opposition camp leader in the House, Hamad Rashid Mohammed, if adopted could generate 8bn/- to government coffers which could be used for other government activities.
Income Tax Act of 2004 clauses one and two of section (7), demands that every payment effected by an employer must be taxed.
That is a good suggestion but it has been delayed. It ought to have been voiced more than a decade ago. That would have largely boosted government revenues.
Businessmen and employees though heavily depended as far as tax is concerned, constitute only 2 per cent of the entire population.
The second issue is how the legislator for Same West, Anne Kilango-Malecela, has decided to call spade a spade or to use a polite language `spill the beans` on the question of EPA (External Payment Arrears) fraudulence.
The maverick legislator demanded that names of those, who benefited from two major scandals that cost the government 216bn/- (349bn/) be revealed.
That is a very sensitive issue. It\'s not clear whether it will be accepted by the majority MPs and adopted as provision or not.
A similar motion by MPs in neighbouring Kenya has already caused misunderstanding amongst them with some supporting and others opposing it.
Chances of such a proposition being adopted were minimal, or can be ruled out entirely, as it would make it impossible for Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) to maintain unity on that basis.
It will be necessary to let the matter be resolved by the government, as to how much money has been returned, and if there are premises for attribution of wrong doing, etc.
Fears have been raised if CCM will remain united in the face of this scandal, to which can be added a question, facing if not many CCM members then at least members of the public.
The issue is whether CCM should remain united behind principles, or just because it holds power, when it cannot defend principles.
While the budget debate itself has passed, there will be other moments for raising nearly the same issues, though with varying intensities.
The next major debate is the Prime Minister\'s Office (PMO) estimates, and further down the road there will be energy and minerals as well as natural resources.
Public sentiment is largely ranged behind the Same West legislator, but finally it is likely that institutions will have the final say.
Reducing the BoT payments issue to a list of beneficiary individuals makes it personal in character and there is no proof that this was the case.
Many people thought that after the death of ex-BoT governor Dr Daudi Balali there would be no more questions as to the reason why this or that individual benefited.
That isn`t the case as all documents or most of them are still around, but it will be hard to pursue the case in the same way, since the key link was the governor.
That is why there is something slippery about the contributions by Kilango-Malecela; if it was individual, then there is no one to question at the highest level, as finally it was the governor, who decided.
And if it was more than the governor`s decision, this engages the government through the political party to which she belongs.
In that case she must either affirm her loyalty to that party and that government, or switch camp to the opposition.
In Kiswahili they say you either plait or you shave, or in American political language, you put up (and resign) or shut up.
|
