Advertisement

Some ministerial nominees
Some ministerial nominees

Another vetting season

From tomorrow, Parliament will begin another series of vetting of ministerial nominees.

Over the years, the tendency has been focussing of what some members of the public consider to be trivial, such as the presentation of curriculum vitae, rather than focussing on what is material to the portfolio assigned to the individual.

For fear of being cited for contempt, many keep quiet even when they are not happy about the process of vetting and the line of questioning. Moreover, when the matter of vetting of carried-over ministers came up at the Supreme Court, our lordships held that vetting is not a term of art. That means that it is only Parliament which can determine the mode of exercising their authority in approving people appointed by the President for appointment as ministers of State.

It is even more confusing when the appointees are members of Parliament. The excuse that our honourable members have proffered has been that, the primary qualification for appointment as a minister of State is that of a person qualified to stand for parliamentary election. What it means, therefore, is that an elected member of Parliament (MP) is automatically qualified as a minister of state. If Parliament thinks that MPs do not need to go through the vetting process, they should say so clearly, such that the public will come to the understanding that for as long as the appointee is an MP, such individuals do not need to answer any questions before the Appointments Committee of Parliament.

It may be necessary for Parliament to come up with a process for the vetting of ministerial appointees so that the public will know what to expect from the process. There should not be any doubts in the minds of the public as to the processes and procedures adopted by Parliament as part of the approving process. 

As another vetting process begins from tomorrow, we would want to entreat our MPs to focus more on the competence of the nominees, their visions and policy initiatives which will enable us to improve upon things to ensure functional development. Indeed, on the surface, all the appointees of President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo are capable. What we do not know is their vision for the country. Therefore, we expect the vetting process to bring up answers to most of the challenges that have undermined our progress, especially our total dependence on imports for our basic living.

By all means, Ghanaians are going to criticise the process if their expectations are not met. However, as John Paul Richter advises us, “People will not bear it when advice is violently given, even if it is well founded. Hearts are flowers. They remain open to the softly falling dew, but shut up to the violent downpour of rain.”

By all means, we must criticise our MPs if their performance falls short of our expectation, especially when we belong to different political parties. We must, however, be guided by the fact that MPs are human and have emotions and predispositions. We must see wisdom in Frank A. Clarke when he submits that, “Criticism like rain should be gentle enough to nourish a man’s growth without destroying his roots.”

We must equally appreciate that MPs do not sit for examination to pass before they serve us. There are some of them who are very popular with the electorate but that does not mean that they know everything. We must thus accept the fact that their levels of competence would vary. We should not judge them by the same scale. That is what Albert Einstein encapsulates when he states that, “Everybody is a genius but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

It is my hope that the vetting process this time would be focussed more on what the appointees bring to the table as part of the agenda to take the country to the next level, especially policies that will empower our people to be less dependent on others for our basic needs. It is also time to have appointees who are willing and capable of growing our entrepreneurs to take over the commanding heights of industry and production.

After 24 years of sustained constitutional democracy, Parliament must improve upon the vetting process to the admiration of Ghanaians and get the best responses out of appointees; that will serve as the measuring rod for their evaluation as to whether they have performed creditably or failed.

The process must clearly underline the fact that we have now come of age and that the vetting process has matured.

Connect With Us : 0242202447 | 0551484843 | 0266361755 | 059 199 7513 |