Hon Patricia Appiagyei
Asokwa

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on a matter central to our shared responsibility of ensuring accountability, transparency and impactful governance, that is, the urgent need to strengthen Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems across Ghana’s public sector.

In recent years, Ghana has witnessed increased public expenditure across various sectors, from infrastructure to education, health and social protection. Yet, the outcomes of many of these programmes remain disappointing. Why do so many well-funded interventions fail to achieve their intended objectives? Why do we continue to see projects that stall, investments that do not yield returns, and programmes that are rebranded and repackaged every four years?

Mr Speaker, the answer lies in our collective failure to institutionalise and prioritise robust Monitoring and Evaluation systems. As highlighted in the recent lecture titled, “Strengthening Monitoring and Evaluation for Effective Governance and Accountability in Ghana” by Prof Kwaku Appiah-Adu and Samuel Aning, Monitoring and Evaluation systems in our public sector are fragmented, underfunded, and often treated as afterthoughts rather than strategic governance tools.

Mr Speaker Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), are the bedrock of results-based management. Monitoring is the systematic collection of data on inputs, activities, and outputs. Evaluation, on the other hand, assesses outcomes and impacts. Together, they provide us with the evidence we need to answer critical questions: are we doing the right things? Are we doing them right? And are we getting value for money?

Mr Speaker, the failure to embed M&E in our governance systems results in policies being shaped by political instincts rather than empirical evidence. As noted by the World Bank (2020) in its report “Building Effective Institutions: The Role of M&E in Governance Reform”, countries that embed M&E into the heart of their decision-making process record higher development returns and greater public trust. This is not a matter of theory.

Across Latin America, for example, countries such as Mexico and Colombia have demonstrated how institutionalised national evaluation systems can be used to inform policymaking and budget allocations. In Mexico, the National Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy (CONEVAL) is empowered by law to assess all major social programmes and ensure that findings are acted upon. Ghana can and must emulate such examples.

Mr Speaker, the benefits of effective M&E are undeniable. Robust M&E systems, as seen in effective democracies worldwide, improve decision-making by providing credible data for policy design and resource allocation. They enhance accountability by tracking whether public funds are used as intended, thereby fostering public trust. They drive efficiency by detecting bottlenecks early and enable this Parliament to exercise its oversight role with independent and relevant information.

However, Mr Speaker, M&E in Ghana faces several systemic constraints: Ministries lack the technical capacity to design rigorous evaluations; M&E units, where they exist, are under-resourced; and the findings that emerge rarely inform budgetary decisions or policy corrections. Worse still, traditional paper-based reports and ad hoc site visits simply cannot deliver the timely and actionable data required to respond to evolving challenges in real time. There is also minimal linkage between performance data and budgetary decisions.

Mr Speaker, a study by the Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR-AA, 2019) indicated that only 38 per cent of Ministries in Ghana had functioning M&E frameworks and even fewer made their findings public. This reality is unacceptable in a democratic society where citizens expect results, not rhetoric.

Mr Speaker, if we are to safeguard public trust, curb corruption, and ensure value for every cedi spent, the Government must prioritise and Parliament must demand an overhaul of our M&E framework. I call for the following actions:

First, we must enact a National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy that mandates M&E components in all major policies and programmes. Amend existing legislation to require every Ministry, Department, and Agency (MDAs) to embed M&E components at the design stage and to publish regular, standardised reports on inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impact.

Second, Mr Speaker, this House must demand regular M&E reports from MDAs. Every MDA must be required to appear before the relevant Committee each quarter with evidence of M&E findings, highlighting successes, flagging challenges, and proposing remedial actions. These sessions must be made public to enhance transparency. These reports should form the basis of budget and policy hearings, ensuring that funding is tied to performance data. A national M&E system leveraging technology must be developed to provide timely feedback.

Third, we must create mechanisms to ensure M&E results inform parliamentary debates, audits, and policymaking. This will empower Hon Members to hold the Government accountable and ensure that public investments deliver results.

Fourth, Mr Speaker, budget allocations must be linked to performance data. The Government must institute performance-based budgeting, so that future funding is contingent on demonstrated progress against clearly defined indicators, ceasing the flow of funds to projects that fail to meet agreed milestones. This is a practice adopted in the performance-based budgeting model of South Africa. Fifth, the Government must provide training for civil servants and parliamentarians on M&E tools and the interpretation of findings. This will equip us to scrutinise Government performance effectively.

Mr Speaker, by adopting these measures, we will empower Parliament to exercise genuine oversight, deter corrupt practices and ensure that every programme delivers meaningful benefits for our citizens. I trust that this House will act decisively to strengthen the M&E architecture of our nation, thereby securing the integrity and success of public investments for all Ghanaians.

Mr Speaker, this House must be reminded that effective parliamentary oversight cannot be based on anecdotal claims, political allegiance or glossy project brochures. It must be based on verifiable, disaggregated, and timely data, which is the very essence of what M&E provides. If we are to regain the trust of the Ghanaian people, we must champion a new era of data-driven governance. The African Union’s Agenda 2063 envisions an Africa where development is driven by evidence-based policymaking and citizen-centred planning. Ghana, as a model of democracy in the sub-region, must lead by example.

Mr Speaker, let us reaffirm today that Monitoring and Evaluation is not a donor-imposed checkbox; it is a sovereign necessity. It is how we make sure that promises made are promises delivered. It is how we move from inputs and intentions to real, measurable and lasting impact for our people. Let us act now to institutionalise M&E as a permanent feature of our governance landscape. The stakes are high, but the rewards, for our democracy, our development and our citizens, are even higher.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity.

Hon Richard Acheampong
Bia East

Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity. Let me thank the Deputy Minority Leader for a very wellresearched Statement, talking about how to implement M&E.

Mr Speaker, we have talked about monitoring and evaluation for more than a decade. I remember the past Administration even created a Ministry for monitoring and evaluation. I remember at the Committee level, I raised this very issue. If we go to all the Ministries and look at their budget lines, we will see an expenditure in respect of monitoring and evaluation.

So, I asked if we are not duplicating efforts here, but the answer provided was simple: that they would create a dashboard, so, at the click of a button, they can identify whatever is happening in all the agencies. Physically, one does not need to travel to the MDAs; it is like what Ghana Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS) was put there to do, so that, at least, we can monitor what everyone is doing. Hon Akoto-Osei, may his soul rest in perfect peace—

Mr Speaker, by the end of the day, we could not achieve that expected result. But I saw a policy document in respect of that. So, we can still improve upon it. Because when we are talking about value for money, if we do not monitor what has been allocated to the agencies, how would we know what they are using those scarce resources for?

Mr Speaker, every year, StateOwned Enterprises (SOEs) sign a performance contract with the President and they give out the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), thus what they want to achieve by the end of the period. By the end of the day, many of them even run at losses.

Mr Speaker, can you imagine a state institution running at a loss and, at the same time, paying bonuses to workers? What informed that decision? Because payment of bonuses is hinged on profitability. How can a company run at a loss and, at the same time, pay bonuses to workers? It is because nobody is monitoring what is happening. We give budget allocation to institutions; we want value for money, but who is doing the monitoring for us? At the end of the day, we come back to square one. So, we need to get feedback.

We have Committees in place; we do the approval of allocation to MDAs. Even, sometimes, getting information from state institutions becomes a challenge. The former Minister for Information is here. We passed the Right to Information (RTI) Bill. Even the processes that one goes through to get some information—Sometimes, one needs to pay for some classified information before he or she can do his or her work. So, if I want to work for the state and I need some information, I need to pay money to get that information.

If I do not have a budget of my own, how can I be effective to do all these things? So, it is the right time to revisit this issue; as a House, let us see how we can navigate and get things done properly. Because, sometimes, when we are having a conversation with somebody and we complain about certain things, the question they ask is if were you not the same people who approve the Budget and the loans, so how can we tell them we do not know what they use that money for.

For example, we hear budget support, but we do not even know what they use that money for and the Minister will not come and give us a detailed account of the utilisation of those resources. So, these are some of the challenges we have as a House. But we can improve upon it and we can only do that when we come together. We should put aside our partisan politics and make sure that we demand accountability from state institutions. I remember we visited Takoradi for this market project. After doing the value for money audit on the original allocation that we gave to them, they made a savings of about US$3 million. They applied that US$3 million to expand the scope of work, so if we did not ask them to do the value for money audit, that US$3 million would never be accounted for. A lot is happening, but we have a lot to do as a House.

But at the end of the day, the resources allocated to state institutions are accounted for. I thank the Deputy Minority Leader very much for bringing this up. We need efficiency; let state institutions become resource-oriented institutions. So, at the end of the day, we can go to sleep that we have given money to people and there will be positive results from those resources allocated to them.

Mr Speaker, I thank you very much for the opportunity.