Observation on the Performance of the Ellen J. Sirleaf Administration
Part II
How important is Annex C of the SES Performance Contract?
One of the key functions of the County Development Officer (CDO) is to monitor the full implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS - LIFT LIBERIA). And as indicated in Part I of this analysis, the PRS is one of the primary economic vehicles through which the World Bank (WB), The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the African Development Bank (ADB), and other donor organizations have adopted for use by Liberia to assist recover from its Civil War destruction. In a way of knowing whether or not the PRS is working, a tracking mechanism, comprising mainly of various indicators was put in place. There was the need to bring in a set of neutral watch dogs to police or track the overall progress of these indicators, and report same to the Project Implementation Committee (PIC). The CDO is one of such watch dogs. Who watch over the watch dogs? There is a Monitoring and Evaluating Office situated at the Planning and Economic Affairs (MPEA) that does that. And that M&E office reports to the SES. Included in the watch dogs, is also a team of statisticians from the Liberia Institute of Statistics & Geo-Information Services (LISGIS). What is this? LISGIS is an independent agency created on July 22, 2004, by an Act of the National Transitional Legislative Assembly (NTLA) of the Gyudi Bryant’s interim government. LISGIS is responsible to collect, compile, analyze, and geo-spatially disseminates data (http://www.lisgis.org/). To be candid, LISGIS could by itself watch over the implementation of the PRS. But there exists a potential room for conflict of interest. The Minister of MPEA heads LISGIS’s Board of Directors. These bureaucratic checks and balances are meant to reinforce integrity, a key donor expectation in the process. But they make government big and expensive to run too.
The donors wanted GOL to assume responsibility of the PRS. And to do so, they asked the government to foot a very small portion of the bill. Within the SES, GOL’s responsibilities are clearly spelled out in Annex C of the Performance Agreement. What is Annex C? Under the Aide Memoire, the Government of Liberia, through the Ministry of Planning, must provide operational vehicles, fuel, maintenance, office supplies, adequate communication facilities, etc. On their part, the CDOs were to perform by their terms of reference (TOR). Before going any further with this analysis, let me forthrightly tell you that the Government of Liberia has done nothing to fulfill this implicit expectation, till date. Now, you tell me whether or not the government of Granny Ellen is serious to develop Liberia through the PRS? But wait till I compare side by side, Liberia’s national economic recovery agenda, with that of Sierra Leone.
The Civil Service Agency of Liberia (CSA), Liberian Reconstruction and Development Committee (LRDC), Office of the President, Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA), and LISGIS, fully endorsed SES’s mandate by emphasizing, that to ensure the effective coordination and implementation of the national development agenda at the county level, structures like the County Development Offices, and the M&E Assistants engaged in the monitoring and evaluation processes, were to be strengthened (Source, Aide Memoire, 2008). Accordingly, the goal was to ensure the successful implementation of the PRS.
Why must Annex C be implemented?
Under the terms of the Performance Contract, the Government of Liberia through its affiliate agency, the Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs was to fulfill Annex C of the agreement (see SES Performance Contract, 2008). Not only has this important aspect unfulfilled, the failure to do so has now compromised the integrity of the process. The question becomes, is GOL willingly honest to be monitored? GOL assured donor partners that, it will meet its footage of the cost to run the PRS by July 2008, day one of the scheduled implementation of the PRS (July 2008 ends July 2011). Why did GOL consent to a piece of proposal it was not willing to honor in the first place? On the one hand, the Sirleaf’s administration inherited a national debt in excess of US$5 billion, pre-dating to the era of President Richard Tolbert’s. However, over the years, this has been reduced by about US$1.7 billion through debt cancellation. On the other hand, Liberia’s debts hamper its ability to further borrower from the IMF, and its key partners (World Bank AC, ADB, etc). Under HIPIC (highly indebted poor countries initiatives), Liberia could have its remaining debts waived, regained borrowing potentials, but provided she makes impressive benchmark progress toward the complete audit of key government agencies, creation and implementation of a public financial management law, extension of health services and education, nationwide. All of these key conditions are part of the CDO’s monitoring functions. In view of this, CDOs have no vehicles and other means with which to verify the successful implementation of these and other projects stipulated in their terms of reference. The Ellen’s administration failed to meet a key IMF requirement which calls for a year long monitoring of conditions set by IMF for HIPIC qualification. Regardless of this, Antoinette Sayeh, former Minister of Finance under the Ellen’s administration, now IMF’s Regional Director for Africa has given Liberia a-six-months extension to meet these conditions. By June 2010, Liberia through LISGIS should have conducted national account surveys to help establish only an estimated financial data of Liberia’s Gross Domestic Products (GDP). IMF visits Liberia in June? The question is, are we there yet?
Why is the Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s Government a Big Joke?
In one of my analyses, I differed with an army reform proposal that calls for an economically feasible army force of only 2000 manpower. I advocated for a substantial force majeure. In other words, you require a force size that represents current postwar realities, where strikes, armed robbery, riot or even war are frequent. Writing on warfare, Carl Von Clausewitz describes in his theory ‘fog of war’, that the uncertainty of whether your strength matches that of the enemy’s capability constantly hunt soldiers. In any event, nurturing a small sized army to save money should have been measured in tandem with a careful assessment of the probable threats to which the AFL would have to respond. There is a national security strategy in place, but there seems to be a lack of consensus regarding who responds first in the event of a war or threat to national security. The potential for insurgency to arise from discontented groups is there. Recently, UNMIL responded to a riot in Lofa. Rumors also went around that dissatisfied former AFL soldiers were held up in the Sarpo National Forest. A number of land dispute cases remain unresolved. The recently formed Emergency Response Unit (ERU), if capacitated, may have the wherewithal to handle emergency crisis. Nonetheless, recruitment and training within the ERU is slow. Besides, the role of the force is not underlined in the national security strategy.
There seems to be an unexplained interest shown on the National Security Agency headed by the President’s foster son. The agency is heavily funded by the administration. Studies in law enforcement have shown that under the classification of security operations, law enforcement organizations have a way of getting away with corruption. Those studies also show that security agencies serve as transit corridors and hot beds for corrupt individuals (Caldero & Crank 2004; Delattre 2001; Meese and Ortmeier 2004; Miller 2000). Besides, Apostolou & Thibodaux (2003) stated in their work, ‘Why Integrity Matters’, of the difficulties one encounters when auditing security organizations. In Liberia, there are compelling indications that make this issue difficult to ignore. Mostly in Monrovia, a number of commuters get around by way of inferior Chinese-made Scooters, also known as ‘pempem’. Some complain that before the advent of the Ellen administration, her foster son, who now heads the NSA frequently used this medium of transportation, to go after his business. Today, on the surface, the West Point graduate does not only own a farm outside of crowded Monrovia where he goes to cool-off on intervals, he has an exclusively plushy paid-for bungalow that is manned by some of the rarest breeds of dogs, surrounded by a corrugated high perimeter security wall, which grotesquely separates the structure from this community of mostly squatters. He constantly sucks on expensive Cuban Cigars, frequents himself with expensive toys and automobiles. These include a Haley Davidson bike (state of the art), classical cars dating as back as the 50s and 60s, upscale GM-Chrysler vehicles, and others.
Under the Bush administration, the government of Ellen enjoyed enormous financial support while maintaining closer ties with Washington. Not only did Ellen receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom Award, but according to Dana Perino, former White House Press Secretary, the US pumped in money for construction, security, education, disease prevention, etc. A total of more than US$740 million has so far been spent by the US on Liberia. In addition, Bush gave the Ellen government, one million textbooks for a country that has no library for kids; an incredible number of chairs and desks, enough to sit 10,000 school children (USAID). Ellen has received graciously from other donors, but showcases peanuts in return. There are overarching indications that the Obama frugal White House that is keener on putting its own domestic house in order is not so trigger happy to lavish US tax payer money behind a government in which “corruption is systemic (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/af/135961.htm)”. Part III of this analysis compares donations, development, and recovery in Liberia to Sierra Leone.
The Paris Declaration of 2005 seriously considered the effective use of donations during its deliberations. Problems of economic governance and ineffective use of donor funds, ranging from poor to disconnection with those they are to benefit the most; no coordination between line ministries, failure to harmonize and align programs and policies put out by the poorly funded governance commission. Poorly designed projects, ineffectually monitoring of donor sponsored projects, and others were some of the concerns raised at the conference. The inability of the Ellen’s administration to follow through with the monitoring process, coupled with its indifference to align and follow through with meaningful policies and projects are exactly what the Paris declaration frowned upon. For instance, both the Jallah Town and S.K.D Boulevard road projects were poorly done such that they immediately showed signs of wear and tear after construction. With donor money, the Jallah Town Road project was redone.
And as indicated earlier, while the government was focusing on identifying ghost names on its payrolls, it was preoccupied with creating new and cost effective agencies with overlapping functions. For instance, there is a Ministry of Justice, and there is the toothless Liberian Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) that does not provide criminal penalties for corruption. The Public Procurement Act on its part created the Public Procurement and Concessions Commission, and leaving the GSA up and running. This practice exists in every aspect of government. Such that, the functions of the police are also conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI); the narcotic division at the Liberian National Police (LNP) has an overlapping Drug Enforcement Agency partner. Where there is a Criminal Investigation Division, there is the National Security Agency and the Ministry of National Security. The government of Ellen is the largest since the founding of Liberia. In her campaign promises, Ellen emphasized that her administration will see that Liberia is decentralized with a small but effective government. In Liberia, nothing gets done in the other fourteen counties unless it was approved by a minister who sits in Monrovia. To make matters worst, President Sirleaf urged the Liberian Legislature to withdraw from allocating and implementing local development projects contained in the County Development Agenda. The closure of the County Development Funds (CDF) by Ellen has put a complete halt on local county initiatives, a huge pie of the Ellen campaign promises. Such a move on the part of Ellen, and by observers’ account, reclaims centralized edge over county development projects, which for most part have benefitted those county officials who are loyal to Ellen, than reducing poverty. The declaration made by this 74 year old granny to participate in the 2011 Presidential Elections puts all national projects on indefinite hold. No one must scratch the back of their head for a reasonable answer to the awkward move. That is the oldest trick in the book. They will come around to tell you about the future outlook of the PRS, and how granny is the perfect one to end the task. Don’t be fooled, she is not running because of that, but to satisfy the likes of the Morris Seytumah, Charles Clarke, the Estrada Bernard, the Aunt Martha, and so on. She owes it to them and not you. Well let’s see. At least my teenage son has now reached the voting age.
The question is where are these funds?
The following are the amounts that appeared on GOL Trial Balance Sheet: Out of US$1,099,648,084 total pledges made by donors, a total of US$946,416,402 was received, and US$692,038,915 is the last disbursement figure so far? Source: (http://www.afrodad.org/downloads/publications/Aid%20Mgmt_Liberia_Final.pdf)
The Trial Balance of the Donors indicates the following:
2004: US$363,530,455
2005: US$ 295,744,345
2006: US$407,692,998
2007: US$148,460,000
Total: US$1,216,417,798
Development in Sierra Leone between 2007 and now under the same PRS scheme has outperforms Liberia’s PRS efforts. Stay tuned for Part III
No comments:
Post a Comment