UWAZI (no, not the gossip paper) recently posted interesting statistics on MP primary election results for the 2010-2015 Tanzanian parliament, vis-à-vis MP performance during their 2005-2010 parliament. Based on UWAZI, performance was rated according to the number of basic questions, supplementary questions, motions proposed and additional contributions raised by MPs during the 2005-2010 parliamentary session.
It is striking to observe that MPs who underperformed during the 2005-2010 parliament were the ones highly revered and thus nominated for candidacy for the next parliament phase. In addition, a great proportion of those who were highly active were snubbed and dropped by party members who recently went to the polls. That is, an MP who sat through 5 years without much activity in the parliament-house had a high likelihood of being re-nominated to vie for that seat.
Their data reveal several interesting facts:
- Of the 10 least active CCM MPs, all won in the primary polls
- Ordinary MPs were more likely to lose than elected high level officials
- Male and female MPs were about as likely to win the preferential vote
- Active male MPs were less successful in the polls
- Active female MPs were more successful in the polls
- Seventy percent of the most active MPs lost in the polls
Performance in CCM primaries of ten least active elected ‘ordinary’ CCM MPs during the 2005-2010 sessions
MP Name Total Contributions Constituency Status
Ali Ameir Mohamed 11 Donge Won Mohammed Gulam Dewji 10 Singida Mjini Won William Jonathan Kusila 9 Bahi Won Abdallah Salum Sumry 7 Mpanda Magharibi Won Omar Sheha Mussa 7 Chumbuni Won Hassan Rajab Khatib 6 Amani Won Lolesia Jeremiah Bukwimba 5 Busanda Won Juma Suleiman N’hunga 5 Dole Won Salum Khamis Salum 4 Meatu Won Mossy Suleiman Mussa 3 Mfenesini Won Rostam Aziz 0 Igunga Won
Performance in CCM Primaries of the ten most active elected ‘ordinary’ MPs during the 2005-2010 sessions
MP Name Total Contributions Constituency Status Jenista Joakim Mhagama 362 Peramiho Won Job Yustino Ndugai 286 Kongwa Won Mgana Izumbe Msindai 222 Iramba Mashariki Lost Godfrey Weston Zambi 219 Mbozi Mashariki Won George Malima Lubeleje 197 Mpwapwa Lost Juma Hassan Killimbah 196 Iramba Magharibi Lost William Hezekia Shellukindo 187 Bumbuli Lost Prof. Raphael Benedict Mwalyosi 171 Ludewa Lost Siraju Juma Kaboyonga 162 Tabora Mjini Lost Mohamed Rished Abdallah 147 Pangani Lost
As we digest these figures I find it appropriate to comment that in reality the performance and role of parliamentarians should be assessed in several other matters as well. The frequency of in-the-house MP inquiries and activity do not necessary correlate to action and progress in their respective constituencies (someone should study this) – perhaps among the less active MPs we have quite iconoclasts! How active are MPs in their constituencies? Are they ever present? Are they accessible to their voters? How do they vote on bills passing in the parliament? It would be beneficial if the public get a survey on this.
Also, one can’t avoid but notice one ‘active’ MP dropped in these primaries and replaced by locals for a fresh, new face who signifies hope (and change (?)).
In any case their findings raise a lot of questions as to how party members value their MPs. Is it really a good sign that ‘we’ opt to retain underperformers? Is it ok to let-go of the representatives who actively, and vehemently contested motions, demanded answers, posted suggestions? Is it a liability to be outspoken? Ahh, well.
To read more about their analysis and other interesting Tanzanian parliament statistics see below:
- Do people prefer active MPs? MP performance in 2010 CCM primaries
- Do they work for us? (English version)
- Do they work for us? (Swahili version)
Kudos to UWAZI for performing these studies.
Source: www.uwazi.org
No wonder people are against any sorts of debates…
Thank you, Joji for sharing the reports, and KUDOS to Uwazi for the wonderful job. But the job isn’t done yet; things have just started I believe (from my point of view).
This is what I have been advocating (I am sure I am not alone) for quite a while here — it just sucks big time that the ONLY way to assess the MPs’ performance is by the number of ‘contributions’ or so- called inquiries (made) during parliament sessions?? Really?
I know it will take time to have a well-oiled system that will hold our leaders accountable.. for every single thing they do! But, somehow, it has to be implemented sooner rather than later.
Niliandika kuhusu “vielelezo vinavyopimika” wiki mbili zilizopita (natumaini wengi mlinielewa), na nisingependa kurudia. Nikipata muda nitaleta makala moja nzuri itakayojadili mfumo mzuri ambao unaonekana unafanya kazi Kenya vizuri tu; tukigelezea na kujifunza mawili matatu nadhani viongozi watashtuka.
Chaguzi za viongozi Tanzania mara nyingi ni za kishabiki tu. Sidhani kama wananchi wa Igunga wanajua kama mbunge wao hakutoa mchango wowote bungeni kwa miaka 5. Cha ajabu ni kuwa wengi ya hao walioshika nafasi za chini wameshinda kwa ushindi mkubwa tu majimboni mwao.
I think the operative word here is “active”. If by “active” we mean “MP who ask, contribute or speak more frequently in the parliament” then probably the most “active” really lost! But what if the MPs contributions in parliament do not correspond to activities in his constituency (like most of his verbal contributions have nothing to do with the people who send him there) then “being active” really is “being inactive”.. ! then they deserve to lose!
the opposite is true.
Nice one – thanks for posting, Joji.
There is little but interesting stuff out there on measuring governance. An important query that has risen out of the various debates on how to measure good governance is: Who is asking? Based on the response to this, subjective or objective measures can be used.
In the case of your article, Joji, it seems success of the MPs was measured subjectively. That is, the real constituents – the people, their livelihoods, and the socio-economic development of their respective areas – do not seem to be included in the success of the MPs, so there is no real objective way to say whether they did what they were supposed to do. Instead, their success has been measured against their own views… Eh, is this not somewhat a conflict of interest?
The other debate that I am seeing coming out of the discussion around measuring good governance is that of which indicators to use. This debate probably stems out of the question of measuring subjectively or objectively, but devising a coherent set of indicators – customized to the context (ie: people, land, resources, etc.) in question – seems appropriate. I doubt this has been devised for our parliamentary structure.
To read further, here are two interesting studies:
1. World Bank study titled Governance Matters (1999)
2. World Peace Foundation study titled Good Governance Rankings: The Art of Measurement (2003)
Mwanakijiji comment did hit right on the spot, it all depends on what spectrum we view our MPs to be proactive. Being an active participant in the house doesn’t entail leadership effectiveness.
For MP’s to be inactive would be an insult to the constituents which elected them, being active even if its a matter of contributing any debate is the the responsibility of any MP. For heaven sake that is why they went to the “Bunge” for, to raise people issues and concerns, to make the ministries responsible aware and maybe even take notice.
For CCM, being active and proactive means a nuisance, au kujipendekeza kwa wananchi! But the CCM top leaders do not realize its the people who elected those MP’s to air their views, the MP’s are just doing their jobs, they have to “kujipendekeza kwetu”, because we elected them for those reasons! No wonder our people are still extremely poor and lack even basic human needs essentials such running water, electricity, education, health and welfare.
And we still don’t see the true picture, our concern is just Dar es salaam, in fact in some parts of Dar, those services are still inadequate!
And if we still support those who kicked “active” MP’s out, heavens helps us! No wonder we are in such a state!