Ghana Minority Accuses Government of Overpricing Free Sanitary Pads Project: Detailed Analysis

Introduction

In a heated parliamentary address, the Minority in Ghana’s Parliament has raised alarms over alleged overpricing in the government’s free sanitary pads distribution program. On November 25, Member of Parliament (MP) Vincent Ekow Assafuah from Old Tafo in the Ashanti Region spotlighted discrepancies in the Finance Ministry’s budget figures. The core issue: an allocation of GH₵292 million for 6.6 million sanitary pads, equating to approximately GH₵44 per pack—far exceeding the market price of GH₵15 per pack.

This controversy underscores critical concerns in public procurement transparency and value for money in Ghana’s menstrual health initiatives. The free sanitary pads project aims to support menstrual hygiene management (MHM) for schoolgirls, addressing absenteeism and promoting education equity. However, accusations of inflated costs have ignited debates on fiscal prudence, especially amid government claims of economic improvements lowering pad prices. This article breaks down the claims, verifies the math, and explores implications for Ghana’s public spending oversight.

Context of Ghana’s Free Sanitary Pads Initiative

Launched to combat period poverty, Ghana’s free sanitary pads program targets distributing pads to students, aligning with Sustainable Development Goal 5 on gender equality. Budget documents, including Appendix 4A of the Finance Ministry’s statement, detail the procurement, making it a verifiable public record.

Analysis

The Minority’s critique hinges on simple arithmetic from official documents. Dividing GH₵292 million by 6.6 million units yields GH₵44.24 per pad or pack—a figure MP Assafuah rounded to GH₵44-45. This contrasts sharply with market realities cited by government communicators earlier in the year, who celebrated a price drop from GH₵25 to GH₵15 per pack due to economic stability.

Assafuah referenced a tweet from the Minority Leader, Cassiel Ato Forson, highlighting the GH₵15 market price, and footage from Woezor TV confirming Yazz brand pads at that rate. He emphasized that consumers purchase packs, not singles, questioning bulk procurement economics. No evidence suggests single-pad distribution; standard packs contain multiple pads, amplifying the per-unit cost concern.

Breakdown of Budget Figures

Official budget: GH₵292,000,000 ÷ 6,600,000 pads = GH₵44.24 per unit. Market benchmark: GH₵15 per pack. This 194% premium raises red flags under principles of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in procurement.

Pedagogical Insight: Understanding Value for Money

In public finance, “value for money” (VfM) evaluates if expenditures deliver optimal outputs at minimal cost. Ghana’s framework, per the Public Financial Management Act, mandates competitive bidding and cost comparisons. Discrepancies like this prompt Auditor-General scrutiny, educating citizens on holding leaders accountable.

Summary

MP Vincent Ekow Assafuah accused the government of overspending on the free sanitary pads project, citing Finance Ministry data showing GH₵44 per pack against a GH₵15 market rate. He urged media and public interrogation of budget projections versus actual spends, framing it as evidence of profligacy contradicting anti-corruption campaign rhetoric. The claims rely solely on government documents, avoiding unsubstantiated allegations.

Key Points

Practical Advice

For citizens, journalists, and activists monitoring Ghana’s public procurement, adopt these steps to evaluate similar initiatives like free sanitary pads distribution:

Step 1: Access Official Documents

Download budget statements from the Ministry of Finance website (mofep.gov.gh). Locate appendices detailing line items for health or education supplies.

Step 2: Perform Basic Calculations

Divide total allocation by units procured. Compare against retail prices from supermarkets or wholesalers via apps like Jumia Ghana.

Step 3: Benchmark Market Rates

Track brands like Yazz or Always; use price aggregators or visit markets like Makola (“Malata”). Bulk discounts should lower, not inflate, costs.

Step 4: File Right-to-Information Requests

Under the Right to Information Act 2019, request tender documents from the Public Procurement Authority (ppa.gov.gh).

Step 5: Engage Oversight Bodies

Report to the Auditor-General or Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) for audits.

These tools empower pedagogical public participation in fiscal transparency, extending to other programs like free school uniforms or textbooks.

Points of Caution

While the math is straightforward, consider these caveats in the sanitary pads overpricing debate:

• Procurement Nuances: Bulk buys may include logistics, quality assurance, or customization (e.g., school-specific packs), potentially justifying premiums—but not tripling costs.
• Terminology: Budget refers to “pads”; MP clarifies “packs.” Verify unit definitions in contracts.
• Response Pending: Government has not publicly rebutted as of publication; await Finance Ministry clarification.
• Political Context: Minority (NDC) vs. ruling NPP; cross-check with bipartisan sources.
• Inflation Adjustment: Economic shifts post-market price claims could affect, but GH₵15 was recent.

Always prioritize verified data to avoid misinformation in Ghana procurement scandals.

Comparison

Juxtaposing procurement vs. market prices reveals stark contrasts in Ghana’s free sanitary pads project:

This table illustrates potential savings, highlighting why procurement comparisons are vital for MHM programs globally.

Legal Implications

Ghana’s Public Procurement Act 2003 (Act 663), as amended, mandates fair, transparent bidding and best-value sourcing. Overpricing could trigger:

• Auditor-General Investigation: Per Article 187 of the Constitution, audits budget execution.
• Public Procurement Authority Review: Assesses tender compliance; non-competitive awards risk cancellation.
• Criminal Probes: If fraud proven, Public Procurement (Amendment) Act penalties include fines or imprisonment.
• Parliamentary Oversight: Public Accounts Committee may summon officials.

No charges filed yet; accusations remain political, pending official response. Citizens can petition via CHRAJ for maladministration probes.

Conclusion

The Minority’s expose on the free sanitary pads overpricing—GH₵292 million for 6.6 million units at GH₵44 each versus GH₵15 market—exposes tensions in Ghana’s public spending. MP Assafuah’s evidence-based critique, rooted in budget documents, calls for rigorous scrutiny. This case exemplifies the need for transparency in menstrual hygiene initiatives, ensuring taxpayer funds deliver genuine value. As media and citizens engage, it reinforces democratic accountability, potentially reforming procurement for future programs. Stay informed on updates from official channels to track resolutions.

FAQ