Akufo Addo’s Large Government And The 110 ‘Efficient’ Ministers

Introduction
Eureka, we made it! This perhaps was the feeling of many Ghanaians when the erstwhile NDC administration accepted defeat in the 2016 elections. We danced to ‘onaapo’ on the streets and in our bedrooms, because we knew that God has been merciful on us and he was going to do a ‘new thing’ in the history of this country by sending not the Messiah but one of his sons, perhaps, a Moses or a Joshua by name Nana Addo Danquah Akufo Addo. For many, his victory was an inspiration that there is always light at the end of the tunnel if one persists in efforts. Anything, and I say anything is possible! At least, many Ghanaians were confident that corruption, which has eaten all the meat and cracked all the bones would be uprooted and our scarce resources used in efficient ways that promised value for money to the citizenry.

However, we were shocked to the bone when the President announced the largest ministerial appointments in the history of Ghana to help him deliver the gargantuan promises he made to us. There was a debate about the efficiency of 110 ministerial positions in delivering the developments we so much desired. Some argued that, by this move, ministerial positions have become job for the boys and were going to be a source of government inefficiency due to possible duplication of efforts. For some people, the mere size of the government was going to be a drain on the public purse in the face of overcrowding in secondary schools, ill-resourced public health facilities, increasing cost of living and poor roads, among others. To others, a large government will not necessarily result in large government expenditure or compromise the delivery of the promises made. In the meantime, there was no way to verify the latter but to wait for time to validate or invalidate this untested theory.

So it came as a shock when parliament passed the over GHS1 billion budget for the Ministry of Government Special Initiatives but expressing concern about the bloated cost estimates of some of the expenditure items like the construction of boreholes and website development beside others. It is also clear per the expenditure items that this new Ministry is a duplication of some of the functions of the many Ministries we are used to; i.e. Agriculture, health, works and housing, etc. Why would this Ministry be procuring ambulances instead of the Health Ministry? Lawyer Kofi Bentil asked whether the ministry was the health ministry. What is it about the construction of markets, water closets and boreholes that the local government ministry cannot do? At this rate of impudence, many Ghanaians especially the floating voters whose votes may have brought this government into being may be gradually questioning their choice. Some however say it is early days to judge the performance of this one-year old government. So, why has the government duplicated the functions of many traditionally ministries?

The Devil is in the Details
Well, if one attempts to connect the dots backwards, an answer could emerge. And that is what I wish to provide in this brief note, which seeks to explore some speculative ideas and suspicions that are gradually forming into a theory that may explain government action (in the issue of ministerial appointments) beyond just jobs for the boys. First, it is a fact that Ghana’s civil service is in tatters. The civil service is perceived as a corrupt institution that has historically undermined the effectiveness of governments. That however does not mean that the absence of ‘angels’ in the civil service. I believe there are many angel Michaels that have fought and continue to fight the monstrous civil service, but have failed or may be failing because those you are for the system are more than those against it. We hear of some technical people in the ministries like the directors conniving to undermine the effectiveness of the government historically often because of ideological difference and their ‘personal economic recovery strategies’ just to borrow the words of Justice Dotse. Do you remember Muntaka’s ‘chinchinga’ scandal? What about the perennial scandals at the Sports ministry? I remember very well the President’s (Akuffo Addo) concern about work attitudes and ethics in the civil service.

This albatross around the neck of governments mean that the effectiveness of government is likely to lay either outside the civil service machinery in some form of alternative or in institutional reforms in the civil service, or both. In other words, for the government to be effective, the government must resolve the inefficiency in the civil service – the vehicle on which government runs. The approach adopted for resolution of the inefficiencies has serious ramifications for political capital formation and continuity. For example, any reform of the civil service institutions may not be without some job rationalization and subsequent reduction in the civil service, which may have effects on unemployment and labour unrest. In a country polarised on political party lines, any such attempt to reform civil service where these adverse effects are inevitable will give away too much political capital to the opposition. Remember the NPP is a master of this game. They criticised the erstwhile NDC government, particularly during the Atta Mills era, for placing an embargo on public sector jobs due to World Bank conditionalities. It subtly formed part of their campaign during the 2016 election period.

So, the wise and rational politician will ignore this option of civil service reform, which does not even guarantee effectiveness and efficiency (in the short-term) in the first place. So consider the government’s ameliorating disposition in the ECG privatisation issue. When ECG workers complained about the potential job losses, government had to negotiate further for job security for these workers even when it will hurt the balance sheet and efficiency of the new company. I believe that the government’s disposition is somewhat driven by a need to maximise political capital, which may only be achieved by maintaining an inefficient civil service. Therefore, the default option then is to implement the alternative of sidelining the civil service by duplicating its functions under the Executive arm of government, which the President has an immediate control over. By this alternative option, the government could to a greater extent mitigate the effect of the weaknesses of the civil service on its effectiveness.

This may explain why the Finance Ministry procured the services of a South African Consultancy firm McKinsey and Partners to help in preparing the government’s Asempa budget. Why didn’t the government completely resort to using the civil servants at the Finance Ministry? Moreover, why is the new Ministry of Government Special Initiatives allocating GHS2,500,000 to budget preparation and reporting? Similar questions can be raised about the legal services to be procured when there is an Attorney General and Ministry of Justice to provide these services. Are these items not likely to be estimated consultancy fees? Perhaps, the government is going to procure the services of privates consultants like the McKinsey and Partners again! If this is the case, it could effectively reduce the impact of saboteurs in the civil service on government planning and overall effectiveness, at least with respect to these projects. In areas where procuring the services of consultants is difficult, like revenue collection at the ports, the government is computerising to reduce the civil service human interface that corrupts the systems.

Hence, it appears the operating principle is to keep the existing inefficient civil service but create a parallel system to execute the government’s agenda. Therefore, for the government to increase the likelihood of being effective in deliverying its promises, it must trade off any desires for a lean government. It is within this reasoning that a large government makes sense while eliminating any chance of political capital depreciation. This is but one way of understanding or better still reconciling Akuffo Addo’s critique of the civil service and his government’s subsequent use of extractive ad-hoc institutions and mechanisms to deliver his promises. Unfortunately, these institutions and mechanisms are coming at avoidable costs and the loss of opportunity to develop our weak institutions. If this is true, then government is not committed to institutional reforms that can improve the efficiency of the civil service, either for its benefit or the benefit of future governments. I must say this approach is a variant of the extractive institutions that the colonial masters established to tap our resources, which constrained the establishment of strong institutions to promote growth like they did in settler colonies as the Development economics literature reveals. In fact, it is these ad-hoc solutions that have contributed to the development of weak institutions in Ghana.

When the Executive and Parliament are in Bed

While we are still trying to understand the need for a large government and the outrageous budget of the Ministry of Special Development Initiatives, I wish to point out that all of these have become possible as a result of our weak parliament. Correlation, a statistical measure of the relationship between two variables is an important concept, which has implication for checks and balances in government. Diversification is important in many aspects of life. A zero correlation or a low negative correlation is necessary to maximise the diversification benefits of putting two variables into a portfolio; in this case the Executive and Parliamentary arms of government. In government, checks and balances provide the needed diversification to efficient allocation and effective use of national resources. In this vein as per theoretical design, parliament must serve as a check on the Executive.

For this to happen, we must have a low negative correlation between parliament and the Executive. However, this is not the case when you have the President coming from the political party with the majority in parliament. This is even worse when there is a constitutional requirement for most ministers to come from parliament. And since, no one would appoint an enemy to hold vital positions in his government, he will appoint people of so-called like-mindedness from his party. So, since independence, there has been a high correlation between the Executive and Parliament, thus, effectively making the latter a ‘rubber stamp’ of the whims and caprices of the Executive. I believe sincerely that there could have been a better check on government if the opposition were the majority in government. I think it is time we began looking into how to review those aspects of our constitution.

Conclusion
In conclusion, I wish to submit that Akufo Addo’s seeming inefficient elephant government is a trade-off to the inefficient civil service machinery. It might be a deliberate move to duplicate the civil service machinery to insulate itself from its inefficiency and politics. The rubber stamp parliament, which is dominated by members of the ruling government provides ineffective check on the thirty Executive and to some extent has facilitate this the whims and caprices of the Executive even if detrimental to state coffers. However, a vital question to ponder on is that would we consider the elephant government as inefficient if it eventually delivers on its promises?