The discovery of oil and gas in commercial quantities off the west coast of Ghana in 2007 ignited hope in many Ghanaians because of its accompanying financial benefit which had the potential to address the enormous infrastructure challenges in the country and improve the quality of life of Ghanaians.
However, having witnessed the destructive consequence of oil wealth on the democratic development of neighbouring oil-rich countries, the anticipation was interlaced with some iota of anxiety lest Ghana repeated the mistakes of her neighbours and ended up suffering the same fate as them.
To ensure that Ghana’s story was different and with the mismanagement of the county’s mineral revenue over the years in hindsight, the Petroleum Revenue Management Act (PRMA) 2011 (Act 815) that seeks to guide the spending of the petroleum revenue, was passed in March 2011 and amended in June 2015 to provide a better framework for the management of petroleum revenue.
The Public Interest and Accountability Committee (PIAC) was birthed under Section 51 of the PRMA, to among other things, monitor and evaluate compliance with the Act.
The Committee was inaugurated and commenced work on September 15 , 2011, with one of its three core mandates being to provide space and platform for the public to debate on whether spending prospects and management and use of revenues conform to development priorities as provided under section 21 (3) of the Act.
The gap and impact on PIAC’s work
Yet, a decade after the setting up of PIAC, there seems to be a gap between the Committee and the public whose interest it represents thereby not helping the Committee to realise its full potential.
The Committee has representatives from various sections of the public. They include traditional leaders, labour unions, media, academia, religious groups, civil society organisations and industry.
They are to serve as the conduit between the people and the Committee by carrying out issues related to the management of oil and gas proceeds to the people they represent and relay feedback and inputs to the committee.
However, the Ghanaian public can be grouped into at least four when it comes to knowledge about PIAC. One group is totally oblivious of the Committee, another confuses PIAC with Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the third set knows PIAC but assumes it is a Civil Society Organisation championing its own course and then there is the last group which has painted the Committee with political colours. These four groups of people outnumber those who understand and appreciate the work of PIAC and are ready to support it dispassionately. The categorisation is easy to find in comment sections of online stories about the PIAC.
The consequences of this are that PIAC does not get the needed support of the people to champion the interest of the same people. This manifests when PIAC results are released. It does not generate prolonged discussion even in the media because people have not yet appreciated how the reports affect their lives.
The blame cannot be laid only on the doorsteps of the people because their representatives have not had sustained discussions with them to get them up to speed on happenings. How do we seek accountability when the people who should be worried are living in oblivion and misconceptions?
Unlike the Auditor-General’s report, that of PIAC gets the attention on the day of its releases and if lucky , a few days afterwards and then fizzles out until the next one is released thereby giving duty bearers an opportunity to escape real accountability. Even amongst the media, those familiar with PIAC are mostly those on the business desk.
Efforts to bridge it
The Technical Manager of PIAC, Mark Agyemang, acknowledges the gap and agrees that the Committee had not adequately carried the public along all these years thereby creating the disconnection.
He said PIAC, as part of efforts to connect to the public, had introduced media engagements, constituency, and general assembly meetings although there was room for improvement.
Ideally, he said, the representatives were expected to meet their constituents to discuss PIAC; for instance, religious leaders are to make time to create awareness about the committee to their members but it had not been the case.
According to him, the impact of the disconnection was that it was lacking a strong support base to drive the implementation of PIAC recommendations.
”But for the media, our work would have been very difficult because the media understands our work, your drive the agenda and push for some recommendation to be implemented, if we had the same support from the public on social media and other places, it would be good to propel the work of the Committee. If we had this support, the prosecutorial powers would not be needed”, he said.
As the Committee marks 10 years, he said, it has plans to deepen its relations with the public and rallied the public to collaborate with PIAC to ensure accountability in the management of oil revenue.
“The Committee is there to serve the interest of the public. At any point in time, the interest of the public is championed. We want the public to see PIAC as their body championing their interest”, he said.
Way forward
It is possible for the gap to be bridged. The PIAC needs to strengthen the constituency engagement especially before the compilation of the report and afterwards for the people to feel involved.
The media should be used as a tool to reach the public. This time around, PIAC should collaborate with some media houses to institute programmes that would discuss its activities and oil and gas issues in general.
In order to generate interest in its reports, PIAC could invite suggestions from the public by way of articles that could be published in its reports under the ‘Citizens Column’.
For the political colourisation to fade, the Committee should consider engaging the political parties so they would appreciate the work of the committee and whip their supporters who often bastardise the Committee in line. However, all these efforts would not come to naught if they are not sustained.
It is not by sheer coincidence that the two words; Public and Interest are in proximity in the name PIAC. They go hand in hand. The interest that rekindled in the hearts of the public when oil was discovered in commercial quantities must not wane. It must be sustained so duty bearers could be held accountable otherwise the country would commit the same mistakes of neighbouring oil-rich countries made.
BY JONATHAN DONKOR
