The minority disappointed a number of people anxious to watch the latest protest-maneuver they had reserved for the 2015 State of the Nation Address (SONA) presented by President John Mahama.<\/p>\n
Contrary to expectations of placards, shouts and fist-shaking heckling, the MPs were well composed. According to the Minority Leader this was to protect the integrity of Parliament and of the Presidency.<\/p>\n
Their action was laudable and a new brick in our state construction effort. Besides, here is the point which was most significant in the Minority Leader\u2019s statement \u2013 in the same speech he negated the principle which informed their positive self-composure by announcing the presentation of their own version of the SONA to occur the following week after the President\u2019s. Now in principle there is nothing wrong with everyone presenting their own version of the state of the nation, say about twenty-four million State of the Nation Addresses.<\/p>\n
This will of course deepen freedom of speech but will beget confusion. Since confusion will be the logical outcome of multiple SONAs what then explains the Minority\u2019s intention to pursue this path? Three reasons account for the trend of multiple SONAs and underline persisting challenges to the realization of functional institutions and laws.<\/p>\n
Lack of Confidence in Institutions Responsible for SONA <\/strong><\/p>\n The contrast in the Minority Leader\u2019s speech is very interesting as it reflected sincerity and determination to protect the integrity of institutions of state \u2013 he mentioned Parliament and the Presidency in particular, but could be inferred he meant all state institutions. Immediately after stating this position came the blaster \u2013 the Minority will present its own State of the Nation.<\/p>\n Now let\u2019s note that presenting a counter SONA is not equal to debating the constitutionally provided SONA presented by the President. What it means is a rejection of the President\u2019s SONA and a presentation of your own. Something similar to the rejection of state education and health care in favour of private school education and medical care; due to the lack of confidence in these institutions. But can we provide for ourselves our own private SONAs? The situation of lack of confidence in institutions responsible for preparing the SONA is based on perceptions about how the institutions are run (processes) and who run these institutions.<\/p>\n Deepening of Confidence-Crises by Unclear Processes <\/strong><\/p>\n Agreement on procedures and processes in administering state business is as important as the business itself if not more. Processes and procedures when agreed upon and followed lend credibility to state business. This could be how the integrity that the Minority Leader rightly desires for state institutions can be achieved.<\/p>\n The 1992 Constitution made a general demand on Presidents of the Republic to report annually on the state of the nation with some specific areas to report on but it did not spell out the processes to be followed; as in what framework should be used for reporting, how data on progress of work in the different sectors should be captured and reported as well as which data are to be captured.<\/p>\n What is needed beyond the law is a bipartisan dialogue to define processes and a framework for generating the SONA. I am aware that at a higher level, the UNDP is supporting discussions on this subject including support to use of ICT for real-time monitoring of Government projects. It is important to speed-up and widen this effort to help in avoiding multiple SONAs<\/p>\n Challenge of Bias with Internal Evaluation of SONA<\/strong><\/p>\n Avoiding the situation of everyone rendering their own SONAs will require space and means for participation in the constitutionally provided SONA. The President\u2019s SONA in essence is to evaluate and measure progress of state business in the respective sectors and to set new milestones based on completed and outstanding works. In this regard the question of who does what or participates in the monitoring of Government projects is very important. As of now, a chunk of the inputs into the SONA are derived from reports from the sector ministries. They can afford to tell their \u2018success\u2019 stories anyhow they see fit and the President reports as such to the nation. The system employed for verification is at present not very clear.<\/p>\n This situation gives rise to others presenting counter SONAs. There is therefore the need to broaden the scope of monitors of the SONA to include different actors whose reports on Government projects could be channeled into an established independent monitoring and evaluation framework, external to the sector ministries. A monitoring and evaluation unit of this nature could be built within the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC).<\/p>\n The Commission, aided with the requisite, resources can assist the President with a framework and network for the monitoring of state projects and a format for reporting. The network of monitors can include NGOs, labour unions, professional associations, political parties, student unions etc. The process issues regarding rules and parameters for monitoring and reporting could then be settled between these actors and Government.<\/p>\n Avoiding Twenty-Four Million SONAs \u2013 Way forward <\/strong><\/p>\n Avoiding the specter of different versions of the SONA every year will require hard work at building the needed confidence through the determination of processes and rules that should underpin preparation of a common SONA. A resolution or undertaking to be of good behaviour for the integrity of state institutions is bound to be contradicted by actions to the contrary. The NDC in opposition provided its version of the state of the nation, the NPP now in opposition is also rendering its own.<\/p>\n With different templates and individual definitions of parameters there will be no conversation between the parties with the result of cross-talks \u2013 talking at each other and with no one. As is usual with this type of monologue each will keep and stick to their versions without regard to the other\u2019s.<\/p>\n The matter will therefore end abruptly with accountability flying out of the window. On the other hand, from a common template and agreed definitions of parameters, conversation and debates on issues become easier and constructive. Accountability in the handling and reporting on state business is also realised.<\/p>\n The processes being supported by the UNDP for the country to reach this type of convergence on the SONA and support for use of ICT for mass participation in the monitoring of Government projects are laudable ideas that should be hastened to realize benefits from timely implemented projects for citizens.<\/p>\n By: Leonard Shang-Quartey <\/em><\/p>\n The writer is a Policy Analyst with the Integrated Social Development Center (ISODEC). <\/em><\/p>\n Email: \u00a0leonardshangquartey@yahoo.com<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The minority disappointed a number of people anxious to watch the latest protest-maneuver they had reserved for the 2015 State of the Nation Address (SONA) presented by President John Mahama. Contrary to expectations of placards, shouts and fist-shaking heckling, the MPs were well composed. According to the Minority Leader this was to protect the integrity […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":94839,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[8],"yoast_head":"\n