Abstract:
The District Assemblies Common Fund (DACF) was introduced in 1993 to assist the Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies (MMDAs) to perform their functions and responsibilities. Over the years, a portion of the Fund has been allocated to Members of Parliament (MPs) to be used in their various constituencies. However, there has not been any regulation or requirement on how the MPs Constituency Project Fund (MPsCPF) should be used. This has led to an abuse of the Fund, as the MPs have the discretion in determining which projects are to be funded, and the individuals that benefit from it. This gives grounds to assertions that the MPsCPF has frequently been used as a campaign tool for MPs.
Against this backdrop, the study examined how the MPs Constituency Project Fund (MPsCPF) was spent between January 2013 and December 2016, and its effects, if any, on the electoral performance of MPs in the 2016 parliamentary elections. It covered the 52 constituencies in the Brong Ahafo and Central Regions of Ghana. The study employed the quantitative method of research and relied on secondary data, where the expenditure records of the constituencies were collected and analyzed vis-à-vis the outcomes of the 2016 parliamentary elections.
The findings indicate that MPs spent more frequently on personal needs of their constituents even though in monetary terms, they spent more on public projects. Also, MPs who were inclined towards spending their share of the MPsCPF on personal needs of their constituents did better in the parliamentary elections. However, the highest expenditure was not recorded in the election year (2016). Rather it was recorded in 2015, and MPs who spent more in 2013 and 2014 did better in the 2016 parliamentary elections than those who had their highest expenditure in 2015 and 2016. These findings therefore raise some questions on the applicability of a ‘political business cycle’ in the context of the study. In short, the findings show that even though the extent and direction of the relationships differ, the expenditure patterns of the MPsCPF actually have a relationship with MPs’ performance in parliamentary elections.
