Prof Gyampo critiques Bawumia's address, highlighting contradictions

Ghanaian

Political Science Lecturer, Professor Ransford Gyampo, has analyzed Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia's address delivered on February 7th, pointing out sections that raise serious questions and serve as an indictment on the current government, in which Dr. Bawumia plays a key role.

Gyampo echoed existing criticisms against the government, emphasizing the contradiction in Dr. Bawumia's pledge not to exceed 50 ministers while

Read full articlebeing part of a government with over 100 ministers. This inconsistency, according to Gyampo, warrants scrutiny.

The political science expert also highlighted Dr. Bawumia's promises to eliminate specific taxes, including the Emissions tax, Gaming Tax, E-Levy, and VAT on electricity consumption. Gyampo sees these commitments as aligning with the longstanding criticisms regarding the government's size and the need to eliminate what he deems "nuisance taxes."

Reflecting on the past, Gyampo noted that individuals who supported Dr. Bawumia had previously opposed similar objections raised by critics.

He posed a rhetorical question, questioning whether these same supporters would now direct their critiques toward Dr. Bawumia himself, given his current stance aligning with earlier demands for a reduction in government size and the elimination of what he considers burdensome taxes.

Read the full analysis of Prof Ransford Gyampo below:

Bawumia’s Address – A Preliminary Analysis

1. This essentially was an articulation of achievements and vision, fundamentally in the broader area of Digitization and honestly, the various manifestations of this overarching policy, and what it can do to promote development, is indubitable and enormous. No doubt it formed the interwoven central theme of the presentation.

2. Unfortunately, Ghanaians had to wait to be told more about what digitization has done for them by the man himself, in a manner that makes many of the achievements which should have been long known, sound new. Consequently, there may be the need to fact-check many of the claims in order to be sure.

3. It appears DMB is the only one who has a firm grasp over the policy, as the party itself has either been ignorant about the claims about Digitization or has been incompetent in communicating its achievements to fester in the psyche of Ghanaians. Unless the party begins to undertake remedial tutorials about Digitization and its achievements for the purposes of political communication, the work will be difficult for DMB.

4. Despite what it can do, Digitization is not the sine qua non to development. Other key interventions such as good governance and deliberate efforts to seal the leakages and slippages, fight corruption, exemplary leadership that first tightens its belt, rather than living bourgeoisie, etc should have been emphasized more than being treated nearly as appendages.

5. Parts of the presentation was an indictment on the government of which he is part, in a manner that raises serious questions and vindicates those of us who have been critics of the government. Promising to have not more than 50 Ministers when you are part of a government of over 100 Ministers; and promising to abolish some taxes like the Emissions tax, Gaming Tax, E-Levy, VAT on electricity consumption etc makes some of us feel vindicated for criticizing and calling for downsizing of government and the abolition of such nuisance taxes. DMB’s supporters came after us for such criticisms and I am wondering whether they will go after him, now that he’s taken a position that responds favorably to our criticisms on the size of government and nuisance taxes.

6. But the more important question is, why do these great interventions tomorrow, instead of today that they are greatly needed? Does the answer still lie in the claim that he’s not the one in charge? Well, in that case, then karma is not good at all. There was then absolutely no basis for the 170 questions posed to Veep Amissah-Arthur because, he was also a mate and wasn’t in charge.

7. DMB still blames our challenges on COVID and Russian-Ukraine war and there is no doubt at all that these have had negative effects on many countries including Ghana. But a more convincing explanation could have also focused on an admission of what was done wrong domestically, and a promise to refrain from our own contributions to the challenges. It cannot be entirely accurate for us to blame all other than ourselves for our challenges.

8. Finally, there were great ideas that were espoused including the need for a national development plan, a move that was initiated by the predecessor government but was jettisoned. All the other contenders in the 2024 elections also have great plans. But it appears great plans wouldn’t really matter. Available empirical survey reports show that many Ghanaians now, do not believe in political promises, as many of them are merely vote garnering gimmicks. What would therefore be the decider in the 2024 elections, would be a side by side comparison of the trustworthiness, credibility and achievements of the various contenders.

In my next post, I will now offer a sharper focus and properly interrogate some of the policy vision outlined. Where they deserve commendations, we would commend and where they must be fact-checked and critiqued, we will do so.