General News of Wednesday, 7 January 2015
Policy think tank, IMANI Ghana, has explained why the Chief of Staff topped the list of worst performing public sector leaders in the country.
IMANI Ghana this week released a list of what it describes as the top 10 best and worst public sector leaders in the country.
The list named the Controller and Accountant General’s Department (CAGD) , the National Service Secretariat, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice(CHRAJ),the Auditor-General,the Bank of Ghana, the Sports Ministry, the National Pensions Regulatory Authority and the Social Security and National Insurance Trust in the group of “top worst performers.”
Speaking on Eyewitness News on Tuesday, President of IMANI Ghana, Franklin Cudjoe insisted that the Chief of Staff, Prosper Bani lacked the leadership capabilities to regulate the rest of the public institutions hence his ranking, adding that the work of the Chief of Staff “goes beyond just setting up meetings for the president.”
Comparing it with the erstwhile Agyekum Kufuor’s administration, Franklin Cudjoe observed that “the presence with which the Chief of Staff comes to job is essentially unfortunately lacking in the present scheme.”
“Showing leadership also means, being financially prudent and to the extent that the Chief of Staff leads the charge in this wasteful enterprise than qualifies, I suspect partly of the reasons he occupies the number position.”
The Chief of Staff’s department has received public bashing for over spending budget allocation to the tune of about $40 million.
Franklin Cudjoe who said that move put the Chief of Staff on top of the list asked “do you know how much that money would have been used for?”
He explained that a number of shady deals that went on within some public institutions including the National Petroleum Authority and the Civil Aviation Authority and the Chief of Staff failed to sanction officials.
“If you take the Ghana Civil Aviation for instance, we all heard the unfortunate decision that was made to award some board members a lot of allowances when they traveled to the UK when they had no business to travel in the first place and then the wishy washy argument that are being made,” he said adding that “we didn’t reach this decision lightly.”