Ugandan political discussions have intensified after comments made by Norbert Mao regarding the controversial Shs100 million financial facilitation reportedly given to Members of Parliament ahead of the new legislative term.
Mao explained that the money, linked to President Yoweri Museveni in his role as National Chairman of the National Resistance Movement, was intended to reduce financial pressure on newly elected MPs.
According to Mao, the purpose of the funds was to ensure that legislators are not easily influenced or compromised during critical political processes, especially the election of the Speaker of Parliament.
He made these remarks during a media engagement in Kampala, where journalists questioned him about the purpose and impact of the money distributed at a retreat in Kyankwanzi.
One journalist specifically asked whether Mao himself had benefited from the funds and what his view was on the gesture.
Mao responded that he had not received any money and was uncertain whether he qualified for it, since it was reportedly meant for NRM MPs and affiliated independents.
He clarified that his presence at Kyankwanzi was in the capacity of a special guest rather than a beneficiary of the facilitation.
However, he said he would still seek clarification from party officials to understand his position regarding the matter.
Mao went on to give his interpretation of why the President may have chosen to distribute such a large sum of money to MPs.
He suggested that Museveni was aware that MPs often face financial difficulties during the period between elections and their official swearing-in.
According to Mao, this financial vulnerability can make some legislators susceptible to influence from external actors offering money in exchange for political support.
He alleged that in some cases, MPs are offered small amounts of money to record videos endorsing certain Speakership candidates.
Mao described the practice as dehumanizing, saying that participants are sometimes required to submit videos for approval before they are allowed to circulate them publicly.
He further explained that payment for such political messaging varies depending on influence, with some individuals reportedly receiving larger sums based on their perceived impact.
Mao argued that the Shs100 million intervention was meant to reduce this kind of manipulation by easing MPs’ financial stress.
In his view, this would allow legislators to make independent decisions when voting for parliamentary leadership positions.
He also suggested that the President’s public acknowledgment of the money was meant to prevent misinformation and political manipulation by other actors.
According to Mao, this transparency was intended to stop individuals from falsely claiming credit for influencing the financial support given to MPs.
He added that the move could help level the political playing field, especially for candidates who may not have strong financial backing.
Mao ultimately avoided condemning the President’s action, instead presenting it as a strategic move within a complex political environment.
He even suggested that the gesture could reduce unfair advantages in the Speakership race.
The comments have since sparked discussion among political observers, who continue to debate the role of money in parliamentary decision-making.
As the 12th Parliament prepares to take shape, attention remains fixed on how financial influence, political alliances, and leadership contests will unfold in the coming weeks.
