Ayariga clashes with Afenyo-Markin over ‘discriminatory’ tag on President Mahama
An exchange erupted in Parliament on June 23, 2026, after Minority Leader Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin accused President John Dramani Mahama of discrimination over a planned meeting with only members of the Majority Caucus.
In response, Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga defended the planned engagement and disputed claims that previous presidents had held similar welfare meetings with only one side of Parliament.
Ayariga maintained that during former President Nana Akufo-Addo’s tenure, neither he nor his colleagues were invited to the Flagstaff House to discuss welfare matters, insisting that MPs’ conditions of service are determined through an established emoluments committee rather than direct meetings with the President.
He stressed that at no point during Akufo-Addo’s presidency were he or members of the Minority side at the time invited to the Flagstaff House to discuss welfare issues.
“Mr Speaker, for the record, I have been in this House throughout the period that Akufo-Addo was president. There was not a single occasion when I or any of my colleagues were invited to meet Akufo-Addo to discuss welfare matters.
“President Akufo-Addo never invited us on this side, at that time on that side, to go to the Flagstaff House to discuss any welfare issues. Our conditions of service are determined by a committee set up by the president, and that is the basis of the welfare of Members of Parliament. Mr Speaker, however, presidents make time to meet the leadership of both sides, and those meetings between the leadership of this side and that side at the time were held at the Flagstaff House under President Akufo-Addo,” he said.
The Minority Leader had accused the President of sidelining the Minority Caucus after it was announced that the President would be meeting members of the Majority Caucus in Parliament.
The Minority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, argued that such engagements should not be restricted to one side of the House, insisting that all 276 Members of Parliament deserved equal inclusion in discussions on welfare-related matters.
He questioned why the President would meet only one caucus, describing the move as unfair and inconsistent with the expectations of a unifying head of state.
He further maintained that matters concerning MPs’ welfare should involve the entire House rather than select groups.
“We are aware that you are going to the Presidency — very discriminatory call. We have a 276-member chamber. The president, who is supposed to be a father for all, decided to only invite his side.
“We know the welfare issues that are going to be discussed. Mr Speaker, I don’t know whether you’ve been invited, but Mr Speaker, it is only the 180-something that the president has invited.
“When we have a 276-member House, and you say you’re going for a meeting, which meeting? This side of the House is part of the country, and the president is only inviting your side to take care of you.
“Mr Speaker, is that how we run a country? A president who is discriminatory? Mr Speaker, we protest this matter. The Majority Leader has failed Parliament. How can you carry your side to the Presidency? We will not agree. If the president is inviting Parliament, all parliamentarians must be invited. And we will be there,” he said.
