Barely two weeks after the Members of Parliament (MPs) had reportedly submitted a proposal to the Presidential Committee on Emoluments, demanding GH¢8,000 monthly salary, information filtering in, indicates that the same MPs were given a 17% pay rise in October 2010.
The Committee for Joint Action (CJA), which is not happy with development, issued a press statement yesterday, condemning the over 150% pay rise being demanded by the Mps. “The CJA is aware that only last October, MPs were awarded a salary increase of 17%,” the pressure group noted. “In our view, the demand for an additional increase of more than 150% is unjustified on the following premises: At a time when public sector workers are being asked to tighten their belts and exercise restraint in their pay demands, it sends a wrong message when politicians make demands to suggest that they are loosening theirs.
It is morally wrong for the rest of the country to subsidise the personally promises that aspiring MPs make to their constituents during electioneering campaigns,” it added.
The CJA, therefore, proposed that the levels of any increase in the salaries of MPs must be set in line with the levels of increase in the civil and public service. “Finally, we propose to the President’s Committee on Emoluments, to offer a contributory pension scheme for members of Parliament, to which they, like all working people, can contribute a percentage of their salaries.”
The Director of Public Affairs of parliament, Mr. Jones Kugblenu, admitted in a telephone interview with The Chronicle yesterday that the MPs salary went up by 17% during the last quarter of 2010, but said that was not news, since it was publicized at the time.
He noted that MPs do not determine their salaries and was, therefore, surprised about the hullabaloo surrounding the proposal submitted to the Presidential Committee on Emoluments.
According to him, he, as Director of Public Affairs, was not aware of the proposal submitted to committee, therefore, the figures being bandied around cannot be confirmed.
He again noted that any figure that would be submitted to the President was just a proposal, which would have to be approved or otherwise, by the latter, before I becomes legally binding.
The Members of Parliament recently met in camera and proposed between GH¢7,000 and GH¢8,000 monthly to the Presidential Committee on Emoluments, in line with article 71 clause (1a) of the 1992 Constitution.
The MPs currently earn GH¢3,000 (about $2,000) a month. The figure, when compared with what their colleagues in Kenya and Nigeria earn, is nothing to write home about, but it has nevertheless, generated heated debates in the country.
The public is unhappy with the proposal, because salary levels in the country are generally low, therefore, to pay such huge sums of money to the MPs is not the best, especially, as salary for workers have not been increased.
The MPs have, however, come out strongly to defend the need to pay them well.The Member of Parliament for Okaikoi South, Nana Akomea, recently told the Ghana News Agency (GNA) that the salary of the Ghanaian MP was embarrassing, because for an MP to receive $2,000 a month was not enough.
According to him, there was a criterion used to determine the salary level that included a look at the relativity, with regards to the public and civil service salary structure, or the general salary level.“Which category is an MP equivalent to? Is it a Managing Director or an Editor of a public media organisation,” the GNA quoted him as asking.
Mr. Rashid Pelpuo, Deputy Majority Leader and National Democratic Congress (NDC) member for Wa Central also argued on a similar line.
The MP for Adenta, Mr. Adu Asare and his counterpart from Fanteakwa, Kwabena Amankwa Asiamah, also mounted a strong argument for an upward salary adjustment, on a recent Peace FM morning show, insisting that MPs had the right to call for a pay rise, because of the responsibilities they carry.
According to the duo, the constituents demand from their MPs school fees, funeral donations, donations to churches and health bills among others, which take the chunk of their salary away.Some of the MPs have also argued that in comparing their salaries to their counterparts in some African countries, the $2,000 they are earning was nothing to write home about.