Scrap ex-gratia - CPP, PNC submit but MPs disagree

Details

Created on Thursday, 23 December 2010 08:51

The controversy over emoluments for Article 71 office holders dominated Parliament and outside the House yesterday as the legislators rose for the Christmas holidays.

While representatives of the Convention People's Party (CPP) and the People's National Convention (PNC) argued, outside Parliament, that the idea should be scrapped, members from both sides of the House were angry that the committee formed by the House to work on their emoluments had delayed in submitting a report.

The report of the committee would be factored into the work of the Professor Ewurama Addy Committee, which was appointed by President John Evans Atta Mills to deal with the whole issue of emoluments for Article 71 office holders after recommendations by the Chinery-Hesse Committee had stirred considerable controversy.

While the legislators were at it, representatives of the CPP and the PNC argued that politics was a voluntary service to the nation for which Ghanaians needed not pay for the comfort of politicians on their retirement.

They also frowned on the constitutional provision mandating the President to appoint a committee to determine the emoluments of Article 71 office holders, and stressed the need for a permanent institution such as the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC) to discharge that responsibility.

The Shadow Minister of Justice of the CPP, Mr Bright Akwetey, and the General Secretary of the PNC, Mr Bernard Monnah, made the submissions in separate interviews With the Daily Graphic.

Mr Akwetey said the quantum of emoluments paid to ex-presidents and other political office holders at the end of their term in office was too much, pointing out that politics was a voluntary service that required no compensation.

"If you volunteer to take up an appointment to serve the nation, you should not make it your goldmine or source of comfort," he said.

Mr Akwetey said the big quantum of emoluments paid to the politicians sent a "wrong signal to other public sector workers that their services were not appreciated.

He stressed the need for a distinction between Article 71 office holders who were elected into office and those who rose through the ranks based on professional qualification, adding that the latter should be paid better emoluments than the former because of the long years of service they rendered to the nation.

Mr Akwetey said the mandate given to the President to appoint a committee to determine his own emoluments was inappropriate and called for an amendment of the constitution to allow a permanent body like the FWSC to discharge that responsibility.

He said such amendment would also require an enhancement of the mandate of the FWSC to enable it to cover all the public officers listed under Article 71.

For his part, Mr Monnah said in the spirit of equality and fairness, the salaries and other benefits of Article 71 office holders should be determined by the FWSC just like all other public sector workers.

According to him, many people are being attracted to politics not necessarily to serve the nation, but just to also benefit from the huge end-of-service package given to politicians at the end of their tenure.

He said the huge emoluments paid to politicians created the impression that politicians were profiteers whose primary interest was to amass wealth.

Mr Monnah said farmers were arguably the most hard-working Ghanaians but did not enjoy any kind of emoluments.

"It is totally unacceptable that the government should provide houses and vehicles for the President and the Vice-President upon their retirement; that cannot be tolerated," he remarked, adding that the President, Vice-President and the other Article 71 office holders should be paid what was due them while in active service so that they would cater for their own accommodation and other needs while on retirement.

He described as unacceptable the current constitutional arrangement whereby the President appointed a committee to determine his emoluments and those of other public officers listed in Article 71, and stressed the need for the FWSC to perform that function.

The Member of Parliament (MP) for Atwima-Mponua, Mr Isaac Kwame Asiama, raised the matter in Parliament after the Majority Leader, Mr Cletus Avoka, had finished presenting the Business Statement of the House for the first week of the next meeting.

MPs from both sides of the House were seen throwing their hand in despair with some demanding that the membership of the committee to produce the report on emoluments for MPs and the Speaker be re-constituted.

The committee comprises Mr E.T Mensah, MP for Ningo Prampram and Minister of Employment and Social Welfare, Mr John Tia Akologu, MP for Talensi and Minister of Information, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, Minority Leader and Mr Anthony Akoto Osei, MP for Old Tafo and Minority Spokesperson on Finance, with Mr P.C Appiah-Ofori, MP for Asikuma-Odoben-Brakwa, as a resource person.

The Speaker of Parliament, Mrs Joyce Bamford-Addo, informed the House that she had received a letter from the Ewurama Addy Committee on Emoluments reminding the House about the need to submit their report on the matter.

She said that was the third time the committee had written to her on the matter.

According to the Speaker, the Presidential committee had, in its letter, given Parliament up to January 4, 2011 to submit its report.

But the Majority Leader and Leader of the House, Mr Cletus Apul Avoka, explained to the House that it would not be necessary for the members of the committee to be changed, since they had gone far on the matter.

He said they would need just two days to submit the report and pleaded that members should be a little patient.

In the end, Dr Akoto Osei suggested that it would not be appropriate for the committee to submit its report straight to the Presidential Committee Without the MPs scrutinising it.

He said in that vein, it would be prudent for the House to write to the committee to plead for an extension for the report to be submitted to the House when it resumed next year for the MPs to make an input.

Some of the MPs later registered their displeasure at the attitude of their leadership towards their welfare but Mr Avoka explained that the committee was not the leadership of the House but comprised MPs who had immense knowledge about the subject.

source: Daily Graphic & citifmonline