Once again, Steve Mallory is out with his Political performance Index (PPI) on our Parliamentary members making it the second in two years and am thinking it is going to be an annual exercise. Grading systems are good for any institution down to individuals because with the hindsight that you will be graded at a stipulated time makes you diligent in your endeavor and also elicits a degree of commitment depending on what your motivation is and even the legacy you seek to leave behind for your audience or predecessors.
There are calls from social commentators and the Parliamentarians themselves downplaying the credibility of the Performance Index system and some even admonishing the public to treat it with the contempt it deserves. I do not think it’s much of a problem because they have good reasons that may be warped in your opinion or otherwise. Some are questioning the authenticity of the whole exercise with regards to the methods employed at arriving at the final grades.
There are several research methods with regards to what you are researching on and among the myriads of methods available are Experimental, Observational, Descriptive, Correlational, Surveys, Questionnaires, Developmental methods among others. And all these research methods like any other field of discipline have ethics governing them and anything short of the conventions and policies thereof renders your results or findings null and unacceptable.
The objective of the Descriptive research method is to describe how things happen e.g. ‘how do birds mate?’, The second being Correlational seeks to find how two variables are related or are dependent on each other for functioning, example, ‘Are men’s horniness dependent on their relationships with females?’. Experimental methods and Developmental research methods which has cross-sectional, longitudinal, sequential and micro-genetic methods as sub-methods also seeks to know how changes occur as the years passes by and its related ethics. Some of the ethics are informed consent, debriefing, doing no harm to your subjects, naming your source of sponsorship and outlining the objective of your research.
Not to bore you with all these scientific underlinings but which also forms the basis of my essay and every research, Steve Mallory and his AfricaWatch Magazine has to avail to us how they came by the results which forms the debriefing aspect of the ethical principles governing every research. They also have to tell us if they used the Observational, Interview or Survey methods to come by these results. The validity of the results is also questionable since they will not detail us on their research.
I do not think it should be treated with the contempt it deserves but I think the institution should be taken on because the Parliament is the highest legislative body on our land and to think that a group of individuals somewhere can make mockery of it anytime they like is no joke. It is also alleged that he declined the invitation extended to him after his first release by the Parliamentary Privileges Committee which to me is an affront to the eminent house.
Having said that, why are the Parliamentarians ranting about the grades they were awarded if it’s a sham? Why are they so worked up if they think these grades are not valid? What have they achieved in their constituencies to think that they are undeserving of those grades? Almost all of them have performed abysmally and do not deserve a second term. They are just playing on our innocence because they are immuned by the laws of the land and cannot be subjected to account to the electorates what they have been doing to be paid by the tax-payer’s money. We did not elect them to legislate on our behalves but rather to champion the developmental agendas from the constituencies they represent.
For the Regional Ministers, I do not know what they do. Here is a case where a Minister deems it appropriate to go on leave in the face of unrest in his ministry and I wonder if he would have done same if his own company was on the verge of being plunged into an abyss?
Some sections of them want Steve Mallory to be hauled to Parliament to answer questions. It is just a ploy for some of them to acquaint themselves with him so they can be giving him money to grade them favourably that is if he is not going to relent on his bogus research.
There has been so many researches by Think Tanks in the country and no one has asked them to avail their methods and what made up the results because it favoured a group of people. Ex-President Kufuor awarded about 241 men and women with the highest award of our dear nation and no one asked him to avail his criteria for short-listing and eventual selection which saw ‘Agya Koo’ among the awardees. Agya Koo is hilarious but is he the best actor or comedian in the country? I doubt if he is even a comedian.
Recently, the sitting President Atta-Mills decorated about 197 ‘distinguished’ Ghanaians in various fields of endeavour and no one has questioned his selection method but somehow it’s been accepted and life has returned to normalcy, so why is Steve being hauled to the privileges committee?
Is it an issue of what is good for the goose not being good for the gander? Methinks the Parliamentarians must be tasked with a target to achieve in their four year term. They also have to be in touch with their constituencies because by default, they qualify for an Ex-gratia award at the end of the four year term.
Let us as a nation be serious for once and participate in the nation building process because certainly the 309 Politicians are not a repository of knowledge that can steer the nation to where it belongs, and to the Parliamentarians who have distinguished themselves, I say AYEKOO!
No comments:
Post a Comment