|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Inquirer’s sources in the new John Mahama administration agrees that while Mahama may be commended for reducing number of appointees and, for that matter, Minsters of State, the savings from that may not be too significant.
Experts in financial administration who made that point, however, admits that having a huge number of appointees would not necessarily result in efficiency or culminate in net savings in an economy that is culturally inefficient in terms of value for money tenets, philosophy and policy.
“The history of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) do not show on record savings from quality administration. What is manifest in both governments is that both have not markedly been able to contain or drastically fight misappropriation of funds and waste in the system.
That reflects the Annual Audit Reports that we have had as a nation which we have been unable to deal with over the tenures of the Fourth Republic.”
The only things that would change in the latest downsizing by the Mahama administration, according to analysts, is the name scrap, given that the Nana Akudo-Addo administration did not put-up new buildings to house his many ministries. At best, those workers in the ministries Nana Addo created would only be reassigned, and would still remain civil servants who would still draw their salaries from the already over bloated government payroll. Nothing significant would change.
John Mahama upon coming into office reiterated his commitment to reduce the number of appointees as existed on the list of the exited NPP administration. He fulfilled his promise and subsequently announced a reduction in the number of government ministries from then 30 to 23 now.
That commitment is reflected in his Manifesto as a tenet in fighting corruption, which is a shrill conversation on the political landscape, though any institutional fight has been largely talk-shop between the two political parties and among the entire political players in Ghana.
Both Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and JA Kufour ran large government with an intention to deliver.
While each administration made modest gains in development and economic growth, size of government has continued to be a tricky conversation on account of the perks related to it.
Both JA Kufour and Nana Addo had initially disdained large-sized governments but had to rescind their decision when they came face to face with the realities.
Mahama has stuck to his guns, damn those realities. What has not been made clear by him and his administration is whether downsizing per se would culminate in enough savings and reduction in the resources that go down the drain each year as the Public Accounts Committee sits to look at the financial records of government.
