"Some MPs do not know why their constituents voted for them to be in parliament. see, usually, people are of the view that, the number one mandate of an MP is to make the law. I bet to differ and I disagree totally in its entirety with the people who hold the view that the core mandate of a Member of parliament is to make laws for the country. Per my reading of the law and the Act or the law that establishes a parliament, what I as an individual had noticed to be the number one mandate of a member of parliament is representation. They are there to represent their constituents first before their mandate to make laws for the country.so if you didn`t represent me in parliament you cannot make laws. this is what most people have missed. so the first mandate of an MP is to represent his| or her constituents first before seeing to the mandate to make laws for the country. Most at times, some MPs will tell you their work as an MP is to make laws for the country."
The presenter further stated that some MPs hold their political party in higher esteem than the people who voted for them to represent them in parliament. see there is something that a lot of people don't know. The fact is your political party members alone are not enough to send you to parliament, there are people who voted for you who are non-partisan and not because they belong to your political party. they vote for you because of your message or the promise you gave them during your campaigns. So if you are holding your party in higher esteem than your constitute, you are getting it wrong. Even though political parties play a major role in getting you into parliament, you don't go and represent them. if they are looking for party representatives, they know where to find them. they are in the constituencies, branches, poly stations, and the national level"
He again stated that the majority mislead the caucus to walk out of parliament when they should stay and carried out the mandate given to them by their constituents.
"Listing to the majority leader in parliament, he(majority leader) stated that, the minority leader admitted, some of the claims levels against the finance minister are not true for that matter they staging a walkout. As a matter of principle, why should the majority leader choose those that are not true over the ones that are true?
Is it not true that the finance minister presented different sets of documents to parliament and presented different sets to the IMF? This is true and it is a public document.
Is it not also true that the finance minister, Ken Offori Atta broke the physical responsibility Act? It is true and this is a public document.
Is it not true that , the money withdrawn from the contingency vote to finance the national cathedral is more than the amount approved by parliament for the contingency vote? it is true and it is a public document. the documents are speaking
0 Comments