A section of legislators is disappointed that some of their colleagues are letting down the House with the poor debate with the majority of the submissions lacking facts and evidence.
The reservations come at the backdrop of accusations that many of the Legislators in the 11th Parliament do not read extensively before contributing to the debate in the House.
On a number of occasions while chairing the House, the Speaker Anita Among and her Deputy Thomas Tayebwa have been challenging legislators to strive to make the 11th Parliament one of the most effective, responsive and pro-people centered Parliament.
This is in addition to the need for legislators to conduct research while carrying out their core roles of legislation, oversight and appropriations before asking for an opportunity to articulate them on the floor of parliament.
But to a section of legislators, it’s disappointing that some of their colleagues are letting down the House with the poor debates as majority of the submissions lack facts and evidence.
The lack of evidence on a given matter is also responsible for the majority of the bills that have been returned to the House by the President.
This poor quality of debate is now compelling some legislators to agitate for the amendment of rules of procedure to have an increment in the time allotted to each of the Legislator while submitting on the floor of parliament if evidence based submissions are to be realized.
Majority of the legislators say the two or three minutes accorded to each of the legislator is too little for a member to give a substantial submission.
The problem is, is it the time given which should determine the quality of debate or the level of one’s education?