Survey 2019 Report PDF
Survey 2019 Report PDF
Survey 2019 Report PDF
The studies in Political Science adopts Mixed Method Methodology that is the use
of qualitative and quantitative through concurrent and transformative approaches.
5 Electoral areas were selected from each constituency with the exception of
Ayawaso North and Ayawaso East which have 3 and 4 electoral areas each.
The HAT Method was used to randomly select the 5 Electoral Areas per
constituency. This method was used to select all the 1, 375 Electoral areas for all
the 275 constituencies.
In all a total of 27,500 Ghanaians in selected electoral areas within the 275
constituencies of Ghana participated in the study.
SEX OF RESPONDENTS
SEX FREQUENCY PERCENT CUMULATIVE %
MALE 14,712 53.5 53.5
FEMALE 12,788 46.5 100
TOTAL 27,500 100 100
AGE OF RESPONDENTS
AGE PERCENT CUMULATIVE
18 - 24 11.7 11.7
25 - 30 19.4 31.1
31 - 35 17.1 48.2
36 - 40 15.4 63.6
41 - 45 11.3 74.9
46 - 50 8.8 83.7
51 - 55 6.2 89.9
56 - 60 3.9 93.8
61 and Above 6.1 99.9
TOTAL 100 100
RELIGION OF RESPONDENTS
RELIGION PERCENT CUMULATIVE %
CHRISTIANITY 74.5 74.5
ISLAM 19.9 94.4
TRADITIONAL 2.8 97.2
NON-RELIGIOUS 2.7 99.9
OTHER 0.1 100
TOTAL 100 100
EDUCATION OF RESPONDENTS
EDUCATION PERCENT CUMULATIVE
LEVEL %
NONE 19.6 19.6
PRIMARY 41.3 60.9
SECONDARY 26.2 87.1
POST - SECONDARY 7.3 94.4
UNIVERSITY 5.4 99.8
POST-GRADUATE 0.2 100
TOTAL 100 100
NATURE OF RESPONDENTS
Are you a registered
voter FREQUENCY PERCENT
YES 26,645 96.9
NO 462 1.7
YES 88.7
NO 11.3
TOTAL 100
SOME CAMPAIGN PROMISES THAT HAVE BEEN
FULFILLED
FULFILLED PROMISES PERCENT
Building Hospital/Clinic 6.5
Road Construction 11.2
Employment 7.5
Provision of water 12.2
Provision of electricity 8.4
Completion of uncompleted projects 3.7
Increase in the prices of farm produce 0.3
Provision of capital for business/farming 2.4
Building of Schools or Classrooms 10.7
SOME OF THE PROMISES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN
FULFILLED
UNFULFILLED PROMISES PERCENT
Build Hospital/Clinic 16.6
Road Construction 58.1
Employment 37.9
Provision of water 28.2
Provision of electricity 15.8
Completion of uncompleted projects 12.6
Increase in the prices of farm produce 3.7
Provision of capital for business/farming 11.1
REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF ACTIVITIES CONSTITUENTS HATE ABOUT THEIR
MPs’
Do not visit the Promoting the Arrogant Do not contribute
Selfishness and
REGION constituency interest of only behaviour after to debate in Corruption
greediness
frequently party members winning parliament
JUNE, 2019
Introduction
Ghana has received much praise for being a model of successful democracy in Africa. It has
not only scored high points for holding seven relatively successful general elections and
alternated political power but also the role played by governance institutions such as the
Electoral Commission and Ombudsman has been acknowledged. Yet, the burgeoning
literature on Ghana’s democratization has over-focused on elections to the virtual neglect of
the democratic institutions such as the Judiciary and Parliament that provide anchorage for
nurturing citizens’ democratic behaviours and norms. Indeed, of the three arms/organs of
government, the legislature or parliament is the most under researched albeit its centrality in
the governance process. In dividing governmental functions among the three organs of
government, Ghana’s 1992 Constitution allocates law-making, control of public purse,
deliberative, oversight of the executive, representation and investigation responsibilities to
parliament/legislature. However, the larger Ghanaian voters have their own expectations
about the duties of their Members of Parliament (MPs). Some of these expected duties of the
MPs emanate from campaign promises as well as the wave of heat generated by the social–
economic conditions of life in the country.
1
Table 2: MPs represent the people
Region Upper West Bono
Percentage 58 1.6
2
Yet, when voters were asked to indicate which of the campaign promises have been
delivered, only 6.5% referred to building of hospitals/clinics and 10.7% mentioned building
of schools. Road construction and water provision recorded 11.2% and 12.3% respectively
(See Table 6). There is something to be said about the low percentages’ scores for the
delivery of campaign promises. The general disappointment of the voters in respect of the
delivery of campaign promises by the MPs reflects in their responses to the question about
unfulfilled campaign promises. Top of the list of developmental projects the MPs have failed
to deliver is construction of roads (58%) followed by provisions of employment 37.9% and
quality drinking water (28.1%) (See Table 7).
It is the case that a large number of MPs have absented themselves from their constituencies’
activities. Indeed, 44.2% are certain that their MPs have never visited their constituents since
3
the last election, 22.2% indicated that their MPs come to the constituency once in every four
months. Only 2.2% and 1.4% see their MPs weekly and bi-weekly respectively (See Table 9).
Also, voters in Western North (32.2%), Upper West (30.1%), North East (26.7%), Savannah
(22.7%) and Bono (21.6%) said their MPs make visits every three months to their
constituencies. Interesting, MPs in Greater Accra are the worse absentees (65.7%) followed
by Oti (55.1%), North East (52.8%).
Frequency weekly bi-weekly Monthly Every two Three months Never visited
months and above
The infrequency of MPs’ visits to their constituents is characteristics of both the NPP and
NDC. The respondents did not find significant difference between the NPP and NDC MPs.
For instance, only 10.7% and 8.7% of the respondents indicated that NPP and NDC MPs visit
their constituencies once in a month (See Table 10).
MPs’ visits are often connected to particular activities in the constituencies. Therefore, MPs
do not visit their constituents for consultations on governance related issues but rather
activities of which the MP is politically obliged to attend. MPs’ visits to their constituents are
directly linked to party activities (27.3%), meeting with groups (19.7%) and funerals (12.3%)
(See Table 11). Upper East MPs attend party programs (43.8%) more than Western North
(41.4%) and Bono East (40.2%) than Volta (29.1%) and Ashanti MPs (28%).
Provision of constituency office makes for easy MPs’ interactions with their constituents. In
many established democracies, MPs’ constituency offices are the congregation/meeting
4
points with the constituents. However, in Ghana most MPs do not have constituency offices.
Close to half of respondents (44.9%) said their MPs do not have offices in their
constituencies. Only 25.4% indicated the presence of MPs’ offices in their constituencies and
29.7% did not know of any MP’s office in the constituency (See Table 12). Of the
respondents who said there are no MPs’ constituency offices, a whopping 92.7% were from
Ahafo, North East (81.2%), Upper East (69.8%), Bono East (67.1%) and Savannah (61.9%)
regions. The non-availability of MPs at the constituency may be the reason for their non-
interactions with their constituents.
Responses No Yes
When respondents were asked to indicate whether the NPP and NDC MPs have provided
offices in their constituencies, only a minority 27.7% and 21.8% confirmed that the NPP and
NDC MPs have constituency offices respectively. It is interesting that 44.8% and 54.1% said
the NPP and NDC MPs have no constituency offices (See Table 13).
Table 13: Does NPP and NDC MPs’ Keep Constituency Offices?
Responses Yes No
In Ghana, having an MP constituency office may not guarantee regular/frequent visits to the
locality by the politician. When respondents were asked to indicate how often their MPs
come to the office, only 21% said their MPs’ visits to the office range from weekly to
monthly while 18.5% indicated between two months and four months and 9.8% ruled out any
visit. Also, it is possible that the office structure is conspicuously located in the constituency
headquarters without real political activity – the office may not be open at all. Thus, little
interaction occurs between the MP and constituents after the former has firmly entrenched
him/herself in parliament but it assumes prominence during electioneering campaign period
when the MPs needs their consent to secure re-election.
Also, having an office in the constituency is different from its functioning. It is expected that
MPs will keep the office open for grassroots interactions. Even though majority of the MPs
have not provided offices in their constituencies, the few offices available in some
constituencies have been active for consultation (Table 14). These respondents made
reference to NPP and NDC MPs. For instance, 62.4% and 62% of them said NPP and NDC
MPs keep their constituencies’ office active while 19.7% and18.4% did not think the NPP
5
and NDC MPs open their constituency offices for voters’ interaction. Again, there is little
difference between the MPs of the two parties about how they maintain their constituency
offices (See Table 14).
Table 14: Does your MP open the constituency office for local interaction
Responses Yes No
% of NDC 62 18.4
Even for the 31.5% that have communicated with their MPs, more than two-thirds (75.4%)
expressed dissatisfaction with the responses obtained from MPs to solve their problems.
Those who were satisfied with MPs’ responses to calls to attend to their problems constituted
just 24.6%. The two political parties have failed to solve the problems emanating from their
constituents. For instance, 59.4% and 60% of respondents said the NPP and NDC MPs do not
attend to their problems respectively. Only a minority of respondents 31.9% and 30.9% said
NPP and NDC MPs attend to their problems respectively (See Table 15). The table (15)
shows that both the NPP and NDC MPs have not given enough attention to the problems
coming from their constituencies.
Table 15: If you have a problem, are you able to communicate with your MP?
Responses Yes No
% of NDC 30.9 60
6
Nevertheless, of those that received attention to their problems by their MPs, majority of
them expressed satisfaction to their MPs’ response. For instance, 74.9% and 76.1% of the
respondents indicated being satisfied with NPP and NDC MPs’ response to their problems
respectively (See Table 16).
Table 16: Satisfied with NPP and NDC MPs’ response to your problems?
Responses Yes No
MPs of the two political parties have not dome much to provide the infrastructure to engage
their constituents. For instance, majority of respondents 73.5% and 68.1% disclosed that the
NPP and NDC MPs have not held public fora in their constituencies. The fact that only a
minority of respondents 17% and 21.4% of respondents alluded to organisation of public fora
by the NPP and NDC MPs suggests low MP-constituency interface (See Table 17).
Table 17: Does your MP hold regular public fora (meet the people)?
Responses Yes No
% of NPP 17 73.5
7
Public education is an essential responsibility of MPs. As the chief policy maker, the MP is
expected to descend to the constituency to bring to the attention and knowledge of their
constituents important policies of the central government. The public fora/meetings are
therefore platforms for educating constituents about the government policies. The lack of
public fora suggests that the people have not received education on pertinent government
policies such as IVID and IVIF. For instance, only 17.8% indicated that their MPs have
educated the local people on government policies while the majority 68.2% denounced their
MPs for failing to explain government policies to them. There is little difference between the
two dominant political parties’ public education activities with their constituents.
Respondents knew that both NPP and NDC MPs have not carried out regular public
education in their constituencies (See Table 18).
Responses Yes No
The MPs have also made little progress with the execution of development projects from
other funding sources. For instance, only 8.1%, 7.3%, 4.2% and 4% said their MPs have
carried out one particular development project such as road, provision of electricity, building
of hospital and school respectively in their constituencies. Certainly, the result shows MPs’
failure to prosecute real development projects in their constituencies. The inability of MPs to
stimulate change in the development agenda of their constituents suggests nothing has change
by way of development projects in the rural communities since the last election
It is also disappointing that of the few development projects pursued in the constituencies,
MPs did not consult or involve their constituents in the selection and execution of the project.
Thus, MPs continue to alienate themselves from their constituents in the making of decisions
about issues that concern the people.
8
Provision of employment to unemployed in the Constituency
Provision of employment to the unemployed youth in the constituencies has been on the
priority agenda of all governments. In all the regions, the unemployed are looking for job
opportunities. But, because it is generally believed that political intervention can open
employment avenues, the unemployed in the constituencies look up to their MPs for job
openings. The situation paints a bloomy picture about MPs ability to provide jobs for the
unemployed in their constituencies. On 28.2% of constituent respondents admitted to the
provision of employment to constituents by their MPs but 52.8% said their MPs have not
assisted them to obtain employment and 19% said they did not know of job creation by their
MPs. Regions most affected by the lack of employment creation by the MPs are North East
(79.4%), western (60.2%), Eastern 59.5%and 59.3%. The failure of MPs to provide job
opportunities for their constituents suggests unchanged unemployment complexion of the
constituencies.
It is common knowledge that incumbent MPs – some of who are ministers have access to job
than opposition MPs. However, the study shows no significant difference in voters’ responses
regarding their MPs’ ability to find jobs for them. When closely examine, only 30.1%
claimed that NPP MPs have assisted them to get employment. Even in NPP administration,
25.2% said NDC MPs managed to get them jobs. Despite this, the majority of the respondents
(51.6% and 54.8%) claimed that NPP and NDC MPs have not supported them with their job
search (See Table 19).
Responses Yes No