Legally bind govts to 40-year dev’t plan
Members of the Ghana Institutes of Planners (GIP) have called on Parliament to enact a law to legally bind successive governments to implement the country’s 40-year national development plan.
Advertisement
According to them, a binding national development plan on all governments is the only way to guarantee its implementation to speed up the socio-economic development of West Africa’s second largest economy.
Currently, the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC) is collating views and inputs from Ghanaians of all strata to draft the 40-year national development plan, which many development experts believe is the surest way turn the country’s future around.
The President of GIP, Mr Alfred Kwasi Opoku told the Graphic Business in an interview that unless the long-term development framework binds on the governments, it will be extremely difficult for the country to implement.
He stated categorically that the long term national development plan must be binding, alluding to the fact that the country had seen a number of development plans mostly medium plans in the past but because they were not binding on the governments, their implementation was not good.
“After the preparation of the plan document, what we could do is that the agreed document could go to Parliament where a law will be enacted to make it a national document and accepted by all”, Mr Opoku stressed.
Constitutional clauses
The GIP President cited Article 35 clauses seven of the Directive Principles of State Policy of the 1992 constitution to compel successive regimes to follow development initiatives started by previous governments.
Therefore, this is going to ensure that whoever comes into power is going to follow it. The language should be in a regulatory form such that no government can bypass it, he maintained.
For instance, Mr Opoku noted that; “someone can take the government to court if the constitution is flouted because of the way it is couched. So, if this national development plan is made that way, so that somebody can say that this is our vision which we spent time and effort to build you (the government) cannot go beyond that if he does he can be taking to court”.
Again, once that plan is made every party must develop its manifesto out of the mother national development plan so that once your manifesto has come out of it then you even will not dare to go beyond that if you go beyond that since there are checks and balances and clauses in there, the citizens can take you to court that this is what we have agreed to do and you cannot do the other way.
“This is what the GIP is putting across, that it should be participatory and then it will also be binding and you cannot easily flout it”.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Private Enterprise Federation (PEF), Nana Osei-Bonsu who agreed with the views expressed by the GIP Fellow and Vice President added that the private sector was that despite all the red herrings, if the country does not have a legal binding on the leadership all the documentations and the participation and the grassroot canvass and consultations would not going to add too much to it.
“What we are saying is that let’s look at a comprehensive plan that has a bind on the leadership who will make the decisions and he cannot deviate from it”.
Cycle of aborted plans
There have been numerous such plans in Ghana’s history: They include the first seven-year development plan by Governor Gordon Guggisberg (1920-30), Seven-Year Plan (“Work And Happiness”) of 1963and the two-year “Rural Development Plan” of 1971.
Ghana’s fourth republican democratic dispensation has witnessed various governments preparing national development agenda. They include Ghana’s Vision 2020 (1996-2020), Ghana Vision 2020: The First Step (1996-2000), the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS I) (2003 – 2005), the Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS II) (2006 – 2009), and followed by the Ghana Shared Growth and Development Agenda (GSGDA) which ends in 2017.
The National Development Planning Commission (NDPC) in August last year launched the process of the GSGDA’s successor, the 40-year National Development Plan (2018 – 2057).
But the Director-General of the NDPC, Dr Nii Moi Thompson said Parliament would reserve the right of sanctioning political parties since they passed the law on the need for a long term national development plan.
“In terms of the issue of whether it is binding or not binding, Parliament passed a law Article 815 2011 which said there must be a long term national development plan approved by parliament.
“I will like to think that if parliament approves something, it is binding on all of us. If parliament passes a law, there are regulations as to how the law is to be implemented. So once parliament approves the plan, it will be their responsibility to prescribe sanctions”.
BUSAC Fund Support
Currently the Business Advocacy Challenge Fund (BUSAC Fund) is assisting various institutions and business associations to advocate for the enhancement of better of a better regulatory business environment. This is to support the growth of the private sector.
Tracing development planning culture in Asia, the Executive Director of the Institute of Democratic Governance (IDEG), Dr Emmanuel Akwetey said: “If you go to South Korea even probably you go beyond that even the Indian Development Planning Commission-these are super-nationals.— GB
The development plans themselves usually have a strong political leadership behind them and also supported by technocrats, especially in South Korea, India, and Malaysia”.
In all these countries, they are like super ministries and have enough power which they drive from the laws or from their founders, he added.
Furthermore, Dr Akwetey explained: “Before setting up the institutions, they were able to conceptualize their roles. As the planning authorities of those countries have access to MDAs, and when they set targets that must be followed and monitored.
