Opposition needs funds, says Namah

THE Opposition Office has not received any funding since the budget was passed five months ago.
Opposition Leader Belden Namah raised the issue in Parliament yesterday, asking the Speaker to explain why the Opposition had not been receiving funding.
“The Opposition plays a very important role on this floor of Parliament. I’ve been Opposition leader three times and there has always been a lack of funding to the Office of the Opposition,” Namah said.
“Opposition plays a very important role to keep the Government in check, to make it transparent and accountable to the people of this country.
“So why isn’t the Opposition getting the funding it needs to run the Office of the Opposition?
“I have been in office for five months and we have not received any funding.”
Namah said the Opposition Office was supposed to get its funding directly from Parliament administered by the Speaker.
“Every time, my officers checks the Clerk and Parliament staff, they tell us there’s no funding.
“And this makes it hard for the Opposition Office to function.”
Namah said opposition MPs had to cover costs, including airfares, office administration and other operational rounds themselves. Namah said that the Office of the Opposition was not established under the constitution and it was 44 years since independence so it should now be established under the constitution.
“So that it can be properly funded in the budgetary process.”
He also asked if the Speaker could initiate a process for bringing a bill to Parliament for the Office of the Opposition to be established.
“It is not for me, but for the people of this country.
“If the Speaker cannot do it, then I will bring a private member’s bill.”
Speaker Job Pomat thanked Namah for raising the question and said that it was good that the Opposition leader had raised it in Parliament so that MPs in could also be aware of it.
Pomat said they would look into initiating a process for bringing a bill to Parliament for the Office of the Opposition to be established under the constitution.
He clarified that the Government had not fully funded Parliament and it was also short on funds and therefore, was unable to fund the office.