During the discussion on the Petroleum Amendment Bill, opposition members continued to reject the proposed bill, which seeks to establish a petroleum upstream unit in the office of the president.

AR MP George Kambala questioned provisions relating to royalty relief, accountability of petroleum officials, asset declarations and appeals against licensing decisions, warning of potential conflicts of interest and weak oversight.

Kambala proposed incorporating local content requirements into the bill, extending them to existing licenses, strengthening transparency and penalties, placing the petroleum unit under a responsible minister, and establishing an independent appeals mechanism.

"Our generation currently holds degrees and carries unemployment. A law that forgets us is a law about somebody else's future. We must own the data and control that data. The bill rightly creates additional petroleum regulation. Let Namibian geoscientists be the ones who read it, so we never depend on an operator's operation of what life we need our seabed for."

Swapo Party MP Willem Amutenya argued that Namibia's petroleum industry requires clear institutional responsibilities, technical capacity, and effective coordination as it moves towards development and production. 

The MP acknowledged concerns about accountability, separation of functions, and parliamentary oversight but maintained that the unit's authority derives from legislation rather than its location.

"The upstream petroleum unit does not derive its authority solely from its location in the Office of the President. Its authority comes from the act of Parliament. The bill defines the establishment, the objectives, and the functions of the unit, and it provides the responsibility of the leadership. So, when we ask if the UPU is appropriate, we should not just ask why it is in the President's office; we should ask what the act allows the UPU to do, what it requires you to do, and to whom it is accountable."