The Mathematics Of Less Pay, More Corruption

It has been many years since I was a pupil in primary school at the then Forces Primary School, Burma Camp, Accra. An important concept of mathematics that I was taught at Forces Primary School has stayed with me and served me well in the years since Primary School. That mathematical concept, as we knew it then, was “Proportions”.

To make the learning of this concept easier, our teachers taught us a simple maxim: “if more, less divide; if less, more divide”.

I got to thinking about this elementary school mathematical maxim when I read in the news in the morning of November 18, 2013, that a pay cut of 10% had been announced for President Mahama, his Vice, and Ministers of State.

Compared to the rest of the population, the officials affected by the announced pay cut receive enviable compensation and benefits. Most Ghanaians have generally not been too grumpy about the salaries of their top public officials. I guess it is their belief that if these top officials, who have the greatest influence on the treasury and public finances, are decently compensated, there would be less incentive for such officials to be corrupt. From what I have learned from other sources, such a belief is not misplaced.

According to a common intuition, higher salaries for officials induce a lower level of corruption (Tanzi, 1998). The relationship has been statistically supported in an empirical study by VAN RUCKEGH and WEDER (2001). Using cross-country data, the aforementioned researchers found corruption, as perceived by businessmen, to be significantly higher in countries in which the public sector salaries are low relative to manufacturing wages. Some of the reasons adduced for this observations were:

• The higher the relative salaries in the public sector, the more an official loses if he is caught at corrupt activities.

• Low salaries in the public sector attract incompetent and dishonest individuals.

• When government positions are paid worse than comparable other jobs, the moral costs of corruption are reduced. Poorly paid public officials might find it less reprehensible to accept bribes than officials receiving a comparatively fair salary.

Perceived and actual cases of corruption against top government officials including Ministers of State in Ghana have never been higher than in the last five years. In the last five years we have heard of:

• Corruption of top Ghanaian government officials by Mabey and Johnson Ltd (a British engineering company) in the '90s.

• The corruption at the Ministry of Youth and Sports that led to the resignation of a minister of state.

• Judgement debt saga involving top government officials.

• Government agencies allegedly donating scarce cash to Mahama for President Campaign in the run up to the 2012 Presidential elections.

• GYEEDA, SUBAH, ISOFOTON .
• A dismissed Deputy Minister who was heard on tape saying words to the effect that she was not going to ruffle feathers in her political career, at least not while she had not made $1m.

And the list goes on.
There is a saying in Ghana that literally says that if one is unable to see God whilst lying down on one's back with the face looking up, what are one's chances of seeing God while lying prostrate?

If at the present relatively high level of compensation and benefits (for top government officials including the President), perception and the actual occurrence of corruption is this high and rife, then I shudder to think of the magnitude of the corruption perception and/or occurrence with the coming into effect of the pay cut.

So, my teachers in primary school were spot on when they taught me that “if less, more divide”. Except that in the Ghana politricks of today, it may be more apt to say: If less (pay), MORE (CORRUPTION) in high places.

Gilbert Adu Gyimah
[email protected]
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada