The promise contained in the 2024 manifesto of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) to cap the size of Ghana’s Parliament is a timely intervention that must be embraced by all Ghanaians.
As captured in the manifesto, the plan by the NPP and its presidential candidate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, to amend the relevant laws to separate the creation of constituencies from districts, offers a sustainable way forward in cutting down public sector expenditure.
Currently, Ghana has 275 Members of Parliament and the number is likely to be increased to 276 next year, due to the addition of the Guan constituency in the Oti Region.
Article 47 of the 1992 constitution mandates the Electoral Commission (EC) to review the division of Ghana into constituencies at intervals of not less than seven years, or within twelve months after the publication of the enumeration figures, after the holding of a census of the population of Ghana, whichever is earlier, and may, as a result, alter the constituencies.
For us, the promise by the NPP to cap the size of Parliament is one of the standout aspects of the party’s 2024 manifesto. In our opinion, the creation of districts, municipalities and metropolitan assemblies should not automatically lead to the creation of more constituencies, though we concede that it’s a constitutional provision the EC has always been following.
The opinion of the framers of the constitution that larger constituencies should not be handled by one MP is not tenable. MPs are law makers and not development agents. The developments of the constituencies are in the hands of the respective assemblies, headed by a chief executive officer.
Unfortunately, to prove to their constituents that they are helping them, almost all the MPs have turned themselves into development agents. This is what is fueling the perception that one MP cannot handle a constituency considered to be big or densely populated.
A cap on the size of Parliament, we dare say, would not only save taxpayers money, but would also streamline governance. We believe that the decision by NPP to limit the size of Parliament is driven by the escalating cost associated with an expanded legislative body. Every new Member of Parliament means increased expenses, from salaries to administrative support, infrastructure and security, all of which must be borne by the state.
With Ghana’s economy facing its own set of challenges, there is the need to reduce the burden on the taxpayer in all sectors. Already, there have been calls for a bigger chamber than what we currently have, to be able to contain the demands of the work of Parliament. Could it then be assumed that if the size is not capped, years later, we may have to construct another bigger chamber?
Ghana, with a population of 35 million people, has 275 MPs whilst Nigeria, which has a larger population of approximately 223 million population has 496 members at both their Senate and House of Representatives.
South Africa also has a population of about 61 million with 490 MPs and the United States, with approximately 336 million populations has 535 members at its Senate and House of Representatives.
Other examples can be cited. This shows that the size of a country’s parliament does not necessarily correlate directly with its population.
We believe that the promise to cap the size of Parliament will move in tandem with the lean government Bawumia has promised. This is something we support and we will urge Ghanaians to also support it to enable us prioritise good governance, reduce waste and allocate public resources more effectively.
A cap on the size of Parliament will align with the broader principle of responsible and accountable governance. Ghanaians are increasingly demanding value for money in terms of the services the government provides.
By curbing the automatic expansion of the legislature, the NPP is acknowledging these calls and committing itself to better governance. They should thus fulfil this promise and the National Democratic Congress (NDC), which has also pledged to scrap the payment of ex-gratia, should also not disappoint the voters if given the nod.
We think that a smaller Parliament has the potential to be more responsive and attuned to the needs of the people. We must ensure that Parliament remains a body that serves us, not a growing financial burden.
We, however, hope that the pledge to cap the size of Parliament is not just a political promise, but the necessary step towards a more sustainable and accountable governance.
