A running joke in Africa is that most of its people have no concept of time. I vaguely remember organizing a focus group for my PhD, set for a specific time and date, and no one showing up. ‘They are not here because they are on “African Time”,’ my Ghanaian colleague laughed. ‘Go knock on the doors of their offices, and they’ll probably come in the afternoon.’ Sure enough, they did.
Sometimes I think our view of Africans’ perception of time extends – quite unfairly –to other somewhat unrelated situations. Take the Kenya Airways flight I took to Monrovia just over a week ago from Accra. The flight arrived late from Nairobi in Accra, was delayed further in Accra, and ended up arriving in Liberia really late. As we waited to be escorted off of the plane, one man – A Brit based in East Africa somewhere, I believe – decided to speak out loud, amongst other grumbling passengers. ‘This is the last time I take this bloody airline,' he said. ‘They leave when they want and arrive when they want. Next time, I’ll go through Brussels or Amsterdam.’ But would he say the same thing today? Because boy, what a difference a week can make.
On Saturday, my Kenya Airways return flight from Monrovia to Accra (where I am currently grounded), which left about two hours late, was completely full.
And there was no one complaining about it being late.
There was no one complaining about the typically-shocking food.
There was no one complaining about Kenya Airways as an airline.
In fact, everyone seemed happy to be in the air. Because a perpetually erupting volcano in Iceland, which has grounded European travel completely, has suddenly changed many people’s perception of the airline: it is a shining star, an airline that can do no wrong. One gentleman I spoke to, who was scheduled to travel through Brussels where he was supposed to transfer on to a connecting flight to Toronto, seemed quite upbeat about the Accra-Johannesburg-Dakar-Washington DC trip, a voyage which spanned three days, he had managed to sort out as an alternative. Countless others were no doubt jubilant over taking Kenya Airways in a southeasterly direction, further away from their North American destinations, into airspace unaffected by volcanic ash, to Nairobi, linking to South Africa, and finding their way back West. Every Kenya Airways flight not going to Europe is no doubt full with experimental travellers. Maybe people are flying from Nairobi to China and trying their luck getting on a flight to Vancouver or Seattle or LAX.
Who would have thought that travelling in Africa would be so coveted? Even those who believe that Africans have no concept of time are forced to admit, for the time being at least, that Kenya Airways is not only ‘The Pride of Africa’ but the envy of the airline world.
Monday, 19 April 2010
Friday, 5 March 2010
Managing Expectations
You can see it now. All of the NGOs applauding the Ghanaian Government’s move to double mineral royalties, from 3% to 6%, which should take effect this year. This is indeed something which is long overdue. It is no secret that African countries have achieved very little in the way of economic development through leasing their mineral-rich lands to international mining houses. The great disparity between the sector’s miniscule contributions to national GDPs and the value of the product they are exporting is testament of this. But the decision of the Ghanaian Government to do this now certainly raises eyebrows – or at least it should.
Of course, the move to change the royalty payment to 6%, though perhaps significant in practice, will entail only a slight amendment to extant legislation. At present, and as stipulated in the Mining Act, mining companies are required to pay between 3 and 6% as a royalty payment. As they are not charities, all pay 3%, with the exception of Newmont Ghana’s planned Akyem Mine, which, when it finally opens, will pay royalties in the range 3.25% as compensation for being situated in a – albeit contested – gazetted forest reserve.
But why make this amendment now, and not 10 years ago? Has it really taken the government this long to realize that the existing arrangement of 3% generates next to nothing economically for the country, or is it because of something else? It is certainly far more disadvantageous for the government to make such a change now than it would have been, say, a decade ago or even five years ago. All of mineralized sub-Saharan Africa has been partitioned to multinational companies in the past 10-15 years, and quite rapidly for that matter. Significantly, for Ghana, with gold, the principal mineral extracted in the country, being ubiquitous in the region, there is concern – or there at least should be – that, once the new mineral royalty rate takes effect, international mining houses will simply abandon their exploration activities and relocate elsewhere, such as Mozambique or Mali, where the investment climate is comparatively more attractive economically.
The claim made by the Ghanaian Government that the move to modify the mine royalty rate stems from its desire to ‘boost revenues from the sector’ is purely a facade: it certainly did not become enlightened about the implications of a 3% royalty rate overnight. It is rather, and quite worryingly, as result of an confidence, which seems to resonate in many branches of the government, about the perceived viability of other sectors of the economy. Notably, the Atta Mills NDC-led government is convinced that it will net something from what has become a debacle with Vodafone, which now holds a 70% stake in Ghana Telecom. It is working to unravel what it claims was an unlawful deal forged between the previous NPP government and the company. Some allege the deal was consummated rapidly before the 2008 elections in order to compensate for finances siphoned by the previous regime.
But the biggest reason why the government is exuberating confidence is the belief that the country’s economic woes will be resolved in record time, courtesy of revenues brought in from oil. Oil could indeed change the face of Ghana forever – for the better – but it would require the implementation of a comprehensive policy recipe that hitherto has failed to materialize in sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, the government’s continued belief that offshore drilling, which is scheduled to commence in late-2010, will catapult Ghana’s economy along a new development trajectory entirely is one concern. A more significant concern relates to what appears to be a belief that revenues from oil will be an instant cure-all – or, more specifically, the projection of this message on to an expectant public. The overhyping of oil discoveries in the local media has created great expectations in Ghana. Every one of its citizens will be paying close attention to how the current government manages oil revenues in the months to come. This could be serious because it has already created the impression that the economic benefits will be instantaneous.
NGOs and community groups, therefore, should view the adjusting of mineral royalties with some trepidation. Whilst ten years ago, such a move could have set an important precedent in sub-Saharan Africa, doing so today could prove fatal for the Ghanaian economy.
Of course, the move to change the royalty payment to 6%, though perhaps significant in practice, will entail only a slight amendment to extant legislation. At present, and as stipulated in the Mining Act, mining companies are required to pay between 3 and 6% as a royalty payment. As they are not charities, all pay 3%, with the exception of Newmont Ghana’s planned Akyem Mine, which, when it finally opens, will pay royalties in the range 3.25% as compensation for being situated in a – albeit contested – gazetted forest reserve.
But why make this amendment now, and not 10 years ago? Has it really taken the government this long to realize that the existing arrangement of 3% generates next to nothing economically for the country, or is it because of something else? It is certainly far more disadvantageous for the government to make such a change now than it would have been, say, a decade ago or even five years ago. All of mineralized sub-Saharan Africa has been partitioned to multinational companies in the past 10-15 years, and quite rapidly for that matter. Significantly, for Ghana, with gold, the principal mineral extracted in the country, being ubiquitous in the region, there is concern – or there at least should be – that, once the new mineral royalty rate takes effect, international mining houses will simply abandon their exploration activities and relocate elsewhere, such as Mozambique or Mali, where the investment climate is comparatively more attractive economically.
The claim made by the Ghanaian Government that the move to modify the mine royalty rate stems from its desire to ‘boost revenues from the sector’ is purely a facade: it certainly did not become enlightened about the implications of a 3% royalty rate overnight. It is rather, and quite worryingly, as result of an confidence, which seems to resonate in many branches of the government, about the perceived viability of other sectors of the economy. Notably, the Atta Mills NDC-led government is convinced that it will net something from what has become a debacle with Vodafone, which now holds a 70% stake in Ghana Telecom. It is working to unravel what it claims was an unlawful deal forged between the previous NPP government and the company. Some allege the deal was consummated rapidly before the 2008 elections in order to compensate for finances siphoned by the previous regime.
But the biggest reason why the government is exuberating confidence is the belief that the country’s economic woes will be resolved in record time, courtesy of revenues brought in from oil. Oil could indeed change the face of Ghana forever – for the better – but it would require the implementation of a comprehensive policy recipe that hitherto has failed to materialize in sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, the government’s continued belief that offshore drilling, which is scheduled to commence in late-2010, will catapult Ghana’s economy along a new development trajectory entirely is one concern. A more significant concern relates to what appears to be a belief that revenues from oil will be an instant cure-all – or, more specifically, the projection of this message on to an expectant public. The overhyping of oil discoveries in the local media has created great expectations in Ghana. Every one of its citizens will be paying close attention to how the current government manages oil revenues in the months to come. This could be serious because it has already created the impression that the economic benefits will be instantaneous.
NGOs and community groups, therefore, should view the adjusting of mineral royalties with some trepidation. Whilst ten years ago, such a move could have set an important precedent in sub-Saharan Africa, doing so today could prove fatal for the Ghanaian economy.
Saturday, 5 December 2009
Child Labour in Ghana
This past week, at the second meeting of the International Working Group on Labour in Cocoa Farming, in Accra, Vice President John Dramani Mahama called for the US Department of Labour to remove Ghana’s cocoa from its list of goods produced by ‘child or forced labour’. Ghana’s cocoa regions have long been identified as ‘hotspots’ for child labour – that it is an industry comprised of children supposedly working in appalling conditions. The US Department of Labour has included Ghana’s cocoa on a list of 122 products from 58 countries on its Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (TVPRA List). ‘This is unacceptable and serves to undermine the efforts that we are making to address the issue of the worst forms of child labour as well as a disincentive for other countries to embark on any comprehensive effort,’ the Vice-President said. He continued by citing that the inclusion of Ghana and neighbouring Cote d’Ivoire on the list stemmed from the inability of stakeholders in the cocoa industry to agree on common indicators and benchmarks for measuring the impact of child labour.
On this issue, the Vice President may a point. People in the developed world, particularly those in the ivory tower, seem to have a distorted image of child labour in rural sub-Saharan Africa, seemingly unaware of the fine line between ‘child labour’ in the exploitative sense and children ‘going to farm’. We need look no further than Kanye West’s music video of ‘Diamonds are Forever’, which contains images of children being beaten whilst mining diamonds underground in Sierra Leone, despite the fact that there are no underground mines in that country, to realize how little Westerners know about the issue of child labour in sub-Saharan Africa. The suggestion made in Accra was exactly this: that the United States Government is completely unaware of the situation on the ground, drawing conclusions about situations it knows absolutely nothing about. Ironically, the Vice President is in no position to refute these claims because much like the US Government, he himself has not gone to the field to properly size up the situation. The Vice President’s claim, therefore, is about as reliable as the potentially-erroneous claims being made by the US Government.
But what is perhaps even more bizarre than two governments disputing over something they no absolutely nothing about is the idea of the United States Government actually accusing a country of trafficking individuals. After all, this is the only country, along with Somalia, that has not ratified The United Nations Convention on The Rights of the Child. Somalia can be given some reprieve here, given that it has not had a functional government since 1991 but what is the US’s excuse? Of course, ratification would mean cracking down on a series of US-based clothing companies, a long list of multinationals that include Walmart, GAP, Nike and Adidas, which, if reports are accurate, owe child labour for their hefty profit margins.
But have no fear: hope is on the horizon. Recently, US president Barack Obama described his country’s failure to ratify the UN Convention as ‘embarrassing’, and, much like the climate change issue, has promised to review it. Maybe when he does eventually get around to it, makes an eloquent speech from the White House, and organizes a conference in a world clothing capital like Paris or Milan, we should nominate him for another Nobel Prize.
On this issue, the Vice President may a point. People in the developed world, particularly those in the ivory tower, seem to have a distorted image of child labour in rural sub-Saharan Africa, seemingly unaware of the fine line between ‘child labour’ in the exploitative sense and children ‘going to farm’. We need look no further than Kanye West’s music video of ‘Diamonds are Forever’, which contains images of children being beaten whilst mining diamonds underground in Sierra Leone, despite the fact that there are no underground mines in that country, to realize how little Westerners know about the issue of child labour in sub-Saharan Africa. The suggestion made in Accra was exactly this: that the United States Government is completely unaware of the situation on the ground, drawing conclusions about situations it knows absolutely nothing about. Ironically, the Vice President is in no position to refute these claims because much like the US Government, he himself has not gone to the field to properly size up the situation. The Vice President’s claim, therefore, is about as reliable as the potentially-erroneous claims being made by the US Government.
But what is perhaps even more bizarre than two governments disputing over something they no absolutely nothing about is the idea of the United States Government actually accusing a country of trafficking individuals. After all, this is the only country, along with Somalia, that has not ratified The United Nations Convention on The Rights of the Child. Somalia can be given some reprieve here, given that it has not had a functional government since 1991 but what is the US’s excuse? Of course, ratification would mean cracking down on a series of US-based clothing companies, a long list of multinationals that include Walmart, GAP, Nike and Adidas, which, if reports are accurate, owe child labour for their hefty profit margins.
But have no fear: hope is on the horizon. Recently, US president Barack Obama described his country’s failure to ratify the UN Convention as ‘embarrassing’, and, much like the climate change issue, has promised to review it. Maybe when he does eventually get around to it, makes an eloquent speech from the White House, and organizes a conference in a world clothing capital like Paris or Milan, we should nominate him for another Nobel Prize.
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
Rewarding the Rewarded
Rumour has it that John Agyekum Kufuor, the former President of Ghana, is a virtual shoe-in for the much-coveted US$5 million Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership.
Mo Ibrahim, an African himself and self-made entrepreneur, established the foundation as a ‘carrot’ to discourage kleptocracy on the continent. It is awarded annually to a former African Head of State or government who demonstrates ‘excellence in African leadership’ – basically someone who ‘steps down’ come election time. It is a US$5 million prize awarded over ten years, with the potential for an extra US$200,000 annually for life thereafter. Whilst I share Dr Ibrahim’s passion and desire to eradicate corruption in Africa, I disagree completely with the idea of a financial reward for ‘good leadership’ in Africa and anywhere else for that matter. What next – a Rolls Royce for paying your phone bill?
But the award process underscores everything that is wrong with the approach taken to resolve the continent’s problems to date. It is hypocrisy of the highest proportions: on the one hand, condemnation of the continent’s leadership but on the other hand, a willingness to forge deals with its corrupt elite, in this case, rewarding corrupt leaders for doing the jobs they have been elected to do. We do not want to be seen interacting with the big and bad Mugabes and Obiangs of the world but because we want their countries’ resources, we formulate development action plans to extract coveted raw materials under pretexts of transparency and ‘good governance’.
We need look no further than Kufuor to put into perspective how wrong the Mo Ibrahim Award is. Here is a man who, in his eight years in office, sold Ghana Telecom to Vodafone, sold what little remained of the large-scale gold mining economy to foreign investors, and negotiated unfavorable oil contracts which the impotent, newly-elected NDC Government cannot possibly change anytime soon. The most significant achievements made under his watch were the construction of a shopping mall in Accra, right across from his house; the installation of several roundabouts in his hometown of Kumasi; and providing moral support for the Ghana National Team, on site, at the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
The point is that Kufuor is nothing more than the ordinary man, an unspectacular leader who was more interested in accumulating air miles by travelling outside of his country. So why is going to be given US$5 million – for stepping down at the end of his rule? Rewarding people like Kufuor for doing virtually nothing almost concedes that we have given up on tackling corruption in Africa, and have accepted that the high-ranking people in the region who do their jobs are anomalous and should therefore be rewarded because, well, they do what they are supposed to do.
But I guess there is no reason to get upset over Kufuor having done nothing to get this US$5 million. After all, Barrack Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for doing little more than winning an election and assembling a handful a fairly-engaging speeches…
Mo Ibrahim, an African himself and self-made entrepreneur, established the foundation as a ‘carrot’ to discourage kleptocracy on the continent. It is awarded annually to a former African Head of State or government who demonstrates ‘excellence in African leadership’ – basically someone who ‘steps down’ come election time. It is a US$5 million prize awarded over ten years, with the potential for an extra US$200,000 annually for life thereafter. Whilst I share Dr Ibrahim’s passion and desire to eradicate corruption in Africa, I disagree completely with the idea of a financial reward for ‘good leadership’ in Africa and anywhere else for that matter. What next – a Rolls Royce for paying your phone bill?
But the award process underscores everything that is wrong with the approach taken to resolve the continent’s problems to date. It is hypocrisy of the highest proportions: on the one hand, condemnation of the continent’s leadership but on the other hand, a willingness to forge deals with its corrupt elite, in this case, rewarding corrupt leaders for doing the jobs they have been elected to do. We do not want to be seen interacting with the big and bad Mugabes and Obiangs of the world but because we want their countries’ resources, we formulate development action plans to extract coveted raw materials under pretexts of transparency and ‘good governance’.
We need look no further than Kufuor to put into perspective how wrong the Mo Ibrahim Award is. Here is a man who, in his eight years in office, sold Ghana Telecom to Vodafone, sold what little remained of the large-scale gold mining economy to foreign investors, and negotiated unfavorable oil contracts which the impotent, newly-elected NDC Government cannot possibly change anytime soon. The most significant achievements made under his watch were the construction of a shopping mall in Accra, right across from his house; the installation of several roundabouts in his hometown of Kumasi; and providing moral support for the Ghana National Team, on site, at the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
The point is that Kufuor is nothing more than the ordinary man, an unspectacular leader who was more interested in accumulating air miles by travelling outside of his country. So why is going to be given US$5 million – for stepping down at the end of his rule? Rewarding people like Kufuor for doing virtually nothing almost concedes that we have given up on tackling corruption in Africa, and have accepted that the high-ranking people in the region who do their jobs are anomalous and should therefore be rewarded because, well, they do what they are supposed to do.
But I guess there is no reason to get upset over Kufuor having done nothing to get this US$5 million. After all, Barrack Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for doing little more than winning an election and assembling a handful a fairly-engaging speeches…
Monday, 6 July 2009
H2O, Anyone?
One of the most perplexing and infuriating things about Canadians is their obsession with washing their driveways. It seems that, every Saturday during the Spring and Summer seasons, after washing their cars and lawns, Canadians turn their focus to their driveways. Some actually throw soap on the asphalt for good measure, seemingly upset with the quantity of dirt on their driveways, oblivious to the fact that they are located outdoors and adjacent to their soil-filled gardens.
Canada, which has about a half a percent of the world’s population, is endowed with twenty percent of the world’s fresh water. It has endless supplies of fresh water in its Great Lakes and numerous rivers, as well as countless glaciers. This is why, I guess, Canadians have not had to think twice when it comes to washing their cars or driveways.
Let us compare the Canadian case to say, that of Chad, where only 27 percent of the population has access to fresh water; or, Burkina Faso and Fiji, where only 42 percent and 44 percent of the populations, respectively, can access safe drinking water. Other serious cases include: Ethiopia (24 percent), Mauritania (37 percent), Papua New Guinea (42 percent), Laos (37 percent), Oman (39 percent) and Cambodia (30 percent).
These thoughts come to mind as I watch one of my parents’ neighbours wash her driveway so thoroughly and methodically. I am waiting for her to finish so I can go tell her to continue washing the road and the sidewalk, which also deserve a good scrub…
Canada, which has about a half a percent of the world’s population, is endowed with twenty percent of the world’s fresh water. It has endless supplies of fresh water in its Great Lakes and numerous rivers, as well as countless glaciers. This is why, I guess, Canadians have not had to think twice when it comes to washing their cars or driveways.
Let us compare the Canadian case to say, that of Chad, where only 27 percent of the population has access to fresh water; or, Burkina Faso and Fiji, where only 42 percent and 44 percent of the populations, respectively, can access safe drinking water. Other serious cases include: Ethiopia (24 percent), Mauritania (37 percent), Papua New Guinea (42 percent), Laos (37 percent), Oman (39 percent) and Cambodia (30 percent).
These thoughts come to mind as I watch one of my parents’ neighbours wash her driveway so thoroughly and methodically. I am waiting for her to finish so I can go tell her to continue washing the road and the sidewalk, which also deserve a good scrub…
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
Why no one cares about Akwatia
This news just in: Akwatia is pretty much dead. Not that anyone would have noticed anyway. Ghana’s once-vibrant epicenter of diamond production is now a shell of its former self. I thought that the Belgium Market, once a bustling centre for diamond sales and exchange, where people in well-dressed clothes from the streets of Accra and abroad met rag-tag bunches of miners, was in a deteriorated state last year. But this year, it is even worse.
Akwatia is a classic example of what happens when donors simply do not care. An injection of donor funds could do a lot for the town. It could reenergize quite quickly if provided with just a small amount of support. Give me US$300,000 and I will set up an equipment-sharing scheme, which will provide the miners with the pumps and excavation technologies needed to access the diamonds located at lower depths which they are currently unable to extract with their shovels and buckets.
But the IFC is not interested because, well, de Beers and BHP Billiton are not interested, so there is no quick money to be made. The UK government is too fixated on fortifying Koidu Holdings in Sierra Leone, whilst the Canadians are enjoying watching their mining companies pillage developing countries of their gold. The Danes, meanwhile, believe that the key to development is the borehole, so 95 percent of their development work in sub-Saharan Africa seems to lead to the construction of a borehole (I am convinced if asked to build a road in Ghana, that DANIDA would somehow find a way to build at least three boreholes instead). The Chinese? It is not controversial enough (i.e. it is not a dam), so there is no chance of assistance from them.
Is not development for Africa about providing for Africans? Well, as the case of Akwatia shows, when there is nothing in it for the donor, it will not attract funding.
Akwatia is a classic example of what happens when donors simply do not care. An injection of donor funds could do a lot for the town. It could reenergize quite quickly if provided with just a small amount of support. Give me US$300,000 and I will set up an equipment-sharing scheme, which will provide the miners with the pumps and excavation technologies needed to access the diamonds located at lower depths which they are currently unable to extract with their shovels and buckets.
But the IFC is not interested because, well, de Beers and BHP Billiton are not interested, so there is no quick money to be made. The UK government is too fixated on fortifying Koidu Holdings in Sierra Leone, whilst the Canadians are enjoying watching their mining companies pillage developing countries of their gold. The Danes, meanwhile, believe that the key to development is the borehole, so 95 percent of their development work in sub-Saharan Africa seems to lead to the construction of a borehole (I am convinced if asked to build a road in Ghana, that DANIDA would somehow find a way to build at least three boreholes instead). The Chinese? It is not controversial enough (i.e. it is not a dam), so there is no chance of assistance from them.
Is not development for Africa about providing for Africans? Well, as the case of Akwatia shows, when there is nothing in it for the donor, it will not attract funding.
Saturday, 6 June 2009
Why The Big Bully Could Not Keep Quiet…
It was only a matter of time before Jerry John Rawlings said something.
This week, the volatile ex-president of Ghana, who craves the spotlight and whose soul has failed to languish in the wake of numerous political changes, called upon the newly-elected NDC government to prosecute former ministers of the previous NPP regime. Screaming and foaming at the mouth whilst speaking to fanatical supporters at a rally in Kasoa in the Central Region of the country, ‘J.J.’ labeled all former NPP ministers ‘criminals’, and called upon President Atta Mills to act quickly. ‘Some of the crimes are obvious and yet, the government is saying, “we are investigating”,’ the founder of the NDC party cried. ‘NPP was almost collapsing the moral fibre of the country with corruption until Ghanaians threw them out.’
Whilst NPP and NDC propaganda always has good entertainment value, the matter to which Rawlings alludes is a serious issue indeed. Why? Because all eyes are now on Professor Mills, who did such a good job of divorcing himself from Rawlings during pre-election campaigns and shedding his image as a ‘Rawlings puppet’ – in the process, alienating some die-hard J.J. supporters and nearly costing himself the election. But it appears that he has finally caved into the demands of the former president. As if following instructions, Professor Mills scrambled this past week to appoint a three-member commission to investigate issues related to the Ghana@50 celebrations, which were under the control of the former Chief of Staff, Kwadwo Oyyere Mpiani.
Here is the problem, however. There is little doubt that NPP ministers embezzled funds during their grueling tenure; and, it is likely that the corruption could be traced back to the president’s office itself. A recent article published in the April 2009 issue of the New African condemns critics of the NPP regime, pointing out that under President Kufuor’s eight-year watch, Ghana’s GDP quadrupled and how when he left office, there was a national reserve of US$2 billion, compared to the US$230 million left by the previous NDC government. It of course fails to mention how much of this revenue came at the expense of large-scale privatization (principally in the mining and utilities sectors); that GDP is not a very good indicator of quality-of-life, and how, despite the increase in national GDP, the gap between the country’s rich and poor actually increased during the NPP’s rule; and how President Kufuor spent more time abroad delivering speeches from luxury hotels in the likes of America, Holland and the UK than in Ghana dealing with domestic issues. Also noteworthy, under his watch, Kufuor approved the spending of close to $20 million on Ghana@50 festivities, and even approved the construction of the Accra Mall, which contains expresso bars, a Shoprite and a Nike store – I repeat, a Nike store – on the other side of the Achimota Roundabout, directly across from his house and his son’s hotel. The article also praises the ex-president for ‘passing the torch’ to Atta Mills of the rival NDC party upon announcement of vote results, seemingly overlooking that these things are supposed to happen in a democracy.
But for Jerry Rawlings and his wife to talk, publicly, about how the NPP government was corrupt is more than a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Here is a man who has five mansions and countless cars, which he surely did not purchase on his airforce salary alone. He also financed several questionable development projects during his even more grueling 18-year rule, and, like Kufuor, shelled out millions on a celebration of his own: Ghana@40. In order to give some credibility to the accusations being made of the NPP, therefore, someone other than Jerry Rawlings needs to voice them.
The irony of the unnecessary, protracted verbal war between the NPP and NDC, which too often results in violence in the country, is that both parties are more similar than they are willing to admit: both have done a great job of selling the Ghanaian economy to Westerners, albeit under different circumstances; neither has managed to establish policies with donors capable of facilitating positive growth in Ghana for Ghanaians, the former forging highly-inequitable agreements and the latter, alienating support bodies altogether; and both have to date, identified the poor as the centerpiece of their agendas, yet have done next to nothing to alleviate their hardships.
One thing that is for sure, however, amid the J.J. rants and NPP chopping: that Nkrumah is turning in his grave, wondering ‘what happened?’…
This week, the volatile ex-president of Ghana, who craves the spotlight and whose soul has failed to languish in the wake of numerous political changes, called upon the newly-elected NDC government to prosecute former ministers of the previous NPP regime. Screaming and foaming at the mouth whilst speaking to fanatical supporters at a rally in Kasoa in the Central Region of the country, ‘J.J.’ labeled all former NPP ministers ‘criminals’, and called upon President Atta Mills to act quickly. ‘Some of the crimes are obvious and yet, the government is saying, “we are investigating”,’ the founder of the NDC party cried. ‘NPP was almost collapsing the moral fibre of the country with corruption until Ghanaians threw them out.’
Whilst NPP and NDC propaganda always has good entertainment value, the matter to which Rawlings alludes is a serious issue indeed. Why? Because all eyes are now on Professor Mills, who did such a good job of divorcing himself from Rawlings during pre-election campaigns and shedding his image as a ‘Rawlings puppet’ – in the process, alienating some die-hard J.J. supporters and nearly costing himself the election. But it appears that he has finally caved into the demands of the former president. As if following instructions, Professor Mills scrambled this past week to appoint a three-member commission to investigate issues related to the Ghana@50 celebrations, which were under the control of the former Chief of Staff, Kwadwo Oyyere Mpiani.
Here is the problem, however. There is little doubt that NPP ministers embezzled funds during their grueling tenure; and, it is likely that the corruption could be traced back to the president’s office itself. A recent article published in the April 2009 issue of the New African condemns critics of the NPP regime, pointing out that under President Kufuor’s eight-year watch, Ghana’s GDP quadrupled and how when he left office, there was a national reserve of US$2 billion, compared to the US$230 million left by the previous NDC government. It of course fails to mention how much of this revenue came at the expense of large-scale privatization (principally in the mining and utilities sectors); that GDP is not a very good indicator of quality-of-life, and how, despite the increase in national GDP, the gap between the country’s rich and poor actually increased during the NPP’s rule; and how President Kufuor spent more time abroad delivering speeches from luxury hotels in the likes of America, Holland and the UK than in Ghana dealing with domestic issues. Also noteworthy, under his watch, Kufuor approved the spending of close to $20 million on Ghana@50 festivities, and even approved the construction of the Accra Mall, which contains expresso bars, a Shoprite and a Nike store – I repeat, a Nike store – on the other side of the Achimota Roundabout, directly across from his house and his son’s hotel. The article also praises the ex-president for ‘passing the torch’ to Atta Mills of the rival NDC party upon announcement of vote results, seemingly overlooking that these things are supposed to happen in a democracy.
But for Jerry Rawlings and his wife to talk, publicly, about how the NPP government was corrupt is more than a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Here is a man who has five mansions and countless cars, which he surely did not purchase on his airforce salary alone. He also financed several questionable development projects during his even more grueling 18-year rule, and, like Kufuor, shelled out millions on a celebration of his own: Ghana@40. In order to give some credibility to the accusations being made of the NPP, therefore, someone other than Jerry Rawlings needs to voice them.
The irony of the unnecessary, protracted verbal war between the NPP and NDC, which too often results in violence in the country, is that both parties are more similar than they are willing to admit: both have done a great job of selling the Ghanaian economy to Westerners, albeit under different circumstances; neither has managed to establish policies with donors capable of facilitating positive growth in Ghana for Ghanaians, the former forging highly-inequitable agreements and the latter, alienating support bodies altogether; and both have to date, identified the poor as the centerpiece of their agendas, yet have done next to nothing to alleviate their hardships.
One thing that is for sure, however, amid the J.J. rants and NPP chopping: that Nkrumah is turning in his grave, wondering ‘what happened?’…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)