What Sort Of Nation Has Ghana Become?

THE first concern of those to whom the British handed over Ghana in 1957, was to prove that they could run the country as efficiently as the British had done before leaving. Or even better -- because they LOVED their new nation.

To run the country efficiently, they did not hesitate to employ expertise from any corner of the globe where such efficiency could be found. Citizens of the US, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the West Indies and South Africa (so long as they renounced apartheid) got good short-term contracts with the Ghana Government. The understanding was that they would train Ghanaians to take over from them. In fact, an incentive was built into their contracts to spur them to train Ghanaians. Sir Robert Jackson (Australia), R J Moxon (UK) and David Balme (UK) and W Arthur Lewis (theCaribbean) were some of these.

The Ghanaians who understudied these people were grateful for the opportunity to work alongside people whose efficiency was up to international standards. Some took over from their foreign bosses and ran Ghanaian Ministries and departments as well as they had been taught to do. Other Ghanaians were so good that they were head-hunted to become members of the staff of the United Nations, the IMF and the World Bank, and other international organisations that had a mandate to reflect their international nature through the content of their staffing policies.

And these Ghanaians strove to prove worthy of the trust placed in them by their government and the international community. At the highest levels, people like A L Adu (Deputy Secretary-General of the Commonwealth); Ken Dadzie (Deputy UN Secretary-General) were the people who paved the way for Kofi Annan to become Secretary-General. At home, Enoch Okoh, Michael Dei-Annang, Archie Winful and others manned the top levels of the administration, managing the political choices of their Ministers in a way that reinforced their democratic right to make decisions on behalf of the people, without compromising the “national project” – namely, the efficient and sound navigation of the ship of state. They would not allow their Minister to be publicly disgraced -- because that reflected on THEMSELVES too. And "proud Ghanaians" did not accept disgrace as an option in public service.

Of course, mistakes were sometimes made. But these were corrected quickly and with resolve. When Ministers like F Y Asare (Agriculture), J A Braimah (Works) and Deputy Ministers like Atta Mensah or Ohene Djan misbehaved, no-one shielded them. Enormous sums were spent building Tema Harbour; the Akosombo Dam; the Accra-Tema Motorway and other big projects, most of which sprang out of the First and Second Development Plans, each of which had been meticulously put through the mill of cost-benefit analysis, before implementation. Financing -- including international borrowing -- was done with absolute transparency and personnel were trained to acquire requisite skills before they were let loose on the projects.

(Just imagine trying to pull a fast one -- like the AMERI deal -- over the wily bussinessman, Komla Gbedemah, who was Minister of Finance for over 10 years!)

Parliament too did its job. Every day of every meeting of every session began with Questions, which Ministers were obliged to come to the House and answer. Urgent Questions could be asked without notice. Fridays were devoted entirely to Private Members' Motions, which touched on every subject imaginable -- so long as it was of public interest..

There was no “Whistle-blowers' Act” nor a ”Freedom of Information Act” . But schemes like the Schokbeton Housing Scheme and the Savundra Insurance scam which appeared tainted with corruption, were interrogated thoroughly in Parliament and then abandoned. Important party chieftains, such as Krobo Edusei, or A Y K Djin, had their wings clipped, after projects in which they were involved were publicly exposed to be not quite above board.

What is indisputable is that almost everyone in government wanted to achieve something concrete, if not to increase his prestige, at least to obtain re-election. For at election time, the voters would ask: what have you achieved for us since we elected you into Parliament? And how could you provide amenities for your people if you had , in the meantime, managed to cleverly to steal the little money available with which to provide amenities?

The progress we made in providing water and electricity to the rural areas; in building roads, schools, health facilities and providing other social amenities such as telephones and postal facilities, were all predicated upon the urgent meed felt by our political leaders and their civil servants, that they “must do something!” Budget hearings thus became a competitive enterprise, through which Ministers tried to convince their Cabinet colleagues and eventually, Parliament, that the projects their Ministries had drawn up as a priority, were indeed crucial for the overall development of the nation.

I must admit that when I look at our political system today, my heart sinks. The AMERI power deal, however barmy or corrupt it appears to be, is but a SYMPTOM of a financial administration system that is rotten to the core. There are so many questions about it that I do not know where to begin asking them. But let me try:

How can a project that will cost the nation about $500 million not be put to public tender? Is that constitutional? If so, then the constitution is bogus and fraudulent!

Was the ENTIRE AGREEMENT sent to Parliament for approval before being signed? Or was an ANNEX to it withheld and if so, why?

How long did Parliament take to peruse the Agreement? Was the normal time devoted to it or was pressure put on the House and/or its committee(s) to approve it with ultra-speed because Dumsor was used as an emotional blackmail gambit to exert pressure on Parliament? Reading between the lines of some of the things Kan-Dapaah and K T Hammond have been saying, this appears to have been what happened, as far as Parliament is concerned.

Why did the Ministry of Power choose to finance such an important project through third parties, when the Government of Ghana has been borrowing money on the Eurobond market – with most of the borrowings oversubscribed – instead of using some of the money raised through these bonds to finance a project that everyone would have agreed was of the utmost importance?

Are there any rules regarding the winning of public contracts by companies owned by people associated with Ministers and/or the President or influential public servants? Does the Constitution have anything to say about obligatory declarations of interest? If it doesn't, then it is bogus and fraudulent.

Why were the details (now published) of the Agreement not made available for public discussion until a Norwegian newspaper had published it? Are we to take it that a Norwegian newspaper has Ghana's interests more at heart than our own Ministry o Power? Does the constitution have anything to say about that? If not, then it is ....

On whose behalf was the Ministry of Power acting? Was it not on behalf of the people of Ghana? If it was truly acting on behalf of the people of Ghana, why had it been keeping us in the dark (so to speak) until a Norwegian paper broke the silence for us?

Is it not a shame that citizens of Ghana should be pushed to go to court to demand that their Ministry of Power should publish information relating to a project which should be supported by every sane Ghanaian, because it is supposed to deliver us from our terrible Dumsor situation?

Is the Minister of Power proud of himself for calling a meeting to inform the public of his side of the story, such as it was, ONLY AFTER he was sued in court to provide information? Do our Ministers think that just because they have been elected and/or appointed Ministers, they owe us no duty of telling us how they want to use our taxes, until we find out about their shady dealings and ask questions?

Eh? You call this "democracy" [government of the people, by the people for the people]?