The real test of this government will not be whether it stabilises the cedi, lowers inflation, or secures IMF praise.
Those are important, but they are only the first steps. The bigger challenge is whether it can transform our growth model from one built on extracting more resources to one driven by productivity, innovation, and human capital.
More gold, cocoa, and oil alone will not make this country prosperous. Sustainable growth comes when workers become more productive, businesses become more competitive, and education produces skills that match the demands of a modern economy.
The countries that broke free from the middle income trap understood this early.
Are we ready to make that choice ? That's a question for the gods.😁
José Aguyire Abonenga✍️
📤[email protected]
TOTAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS MUST BE WEIGHED AGAINST TOTAL ECONOMIC COSTS
Anything short of that is a distortion.
Every serious economist understands that cedi appreciation, like any policy decision, comes with trade-offs. The issue is not whether there are benefits, but whether the net outcome is positive after accounting for the full cost.
The argument being advanced by proponents of the Bank of Ghana and government communicators that the hefty losses incurred were justified by greater economic benefits ignores a critical issue. It fails to account for the implicit costs associated with these decisions.
Economic cost goes beyond accounting cost. While accounting cost focuses on measurable financial losses, economic cost incorporates what is commonly referred to as implicit cost. These include the trade-offs given up such as time, lost opportunities, reduced investment, and forgone growth.
The economic cost associated with heavy sterilisation and sustained currency stabilisation efforts is significant and cannot be overlooked. These policies may deliver short-term stability, but they come at the expense of broader economic activity, private sector access to credit, and long-term growth.
A. Agriculture and Import Distortions
The glut in agricultural produce this year has been exacerbated by import subsidisation driven by the persistent propping up of the cedi. In places like Fumbisi in the Upper East Region, locally produced rice is more expensive than imported polished rice. This is not because local farmers are inefficient, but because input costs remain high while currency appreciation effectively subsidises imports. That is a distortion against domestic production.
B. Cocoa Sector Impact
The cocoa sector is not exempt. Cocoa farmers are worse off when the cedi appreciates, as their export earnings decline in local currency terms. While some may argue that overall macroeconomic gains justify this, the cost to producers must be factored into any serious analysis. Ignoring this risks masking real income losses at the farm level.
C. Explicit and Implicit Economic Costs
The Bank of Ghana’s own accounts show the cost side of these policies. There is an accounting cost of about GH¢5.5 billion linked to exchange rate appreciation and revaluation effects on reserves. In addition, open market operations used to sterilise excess liquidity cost about GH¢17 billion.
These are explicit costs. But the deeper concern lies in the implicit costs.
Sterilisation reduces liquidity, which can suppress demand and slow economic activity. It also creates a crowding-out effect, where banks prefer lending to the central bank rather than the private sector due to attractive returns. The consequence is reduced credit to businesses, weaker investment, and ultimately pressure on employment.
Conclusion
The “total economic benefit” argument, as currently presented, is incomplete.
What is required is a credible, empirical cost-benefit analysis that demonstrates that these policy choices have delivered a net economic gain. Without that, the claim remains unproven.
Short-term stabilisation cannot come at the expense of long-term productivity. Policies that appear beneficial on the surface but undermine domestic industry and private sector growth carry significant risks.
You cannot pursue short-term gains for political expediency while suffocating indigenous production. The costs will eventually outweigh the benefits.
IMF raised concerns about trading shortfalls of $214 million last year.
Sammy Gyamfi: Oh, there have been no losses.
BoG subsequently reported losses of over 9 billion cedis recorded on gold trading sanctioned by Goldbod.
Sammy Gyamfi: We have terminated the DGPP for GANRAP, and that trading module will ensure our losses are drastically reduced, so going forward our losses will be minimal.
Me: Power exposes a lot. Opposition conceals a lot.
If not today, who would have thought Sammy Gyamfi, within just one year, would cause the state to lose this staggering amount of money. Over 9 billion cedis, and expects us to give him plaudits.
Just watch how Bernard Otabil, Director of Communications at the Bank of Ghana, is disgracing himself on national television.
The mess created in just a year is too glaring to be whitewashed. No amount of spinning or revisionist tactics will suffice.
The facts are bare.
The situation surrounding the Kpandai parliamentary seat, the High Court ruling, and attempts to override due process further raise questions about respect for the rule of law.
This administration has not unified the country. If anything, it mirrors a harsher version of what it once condemned.
The Attorney General’s office feels like a media theatre, trying cases in the public space before charges are even properly laid.
Selective justice has become the norm where political opponents are persecuted here and there. The Attorney Generale lost it when he offered nolle prosequi for party allies and is aggressively pursuing new targets. This undermines public confidence and rule of law.
All these excesses cast a long shadow.
They do not inspire hope.
They do not build trust.
Ghanaians may not fully see it yet, but many will learn the hard way that this administration is not fundamentally different from the previous one.
In fact, even if intentions are debated, the previous administration was stronger in ideas. That point is difficult to dispute.
The honest truth is this.
I was once a vocal critic of the previous administration and, to some extent, a sympathizer of this government when it was in opposition.
What I do today is largely driven by disappointment.
This administration has not impressed me.
I understand why many Ghanaians believe this government is doing extremely well. The macroeconomic numbers explain that perception. Inflation has fallen significantly. The cedi has appreciated remarkably over the past year. Ex pump fuel prices are relatively lower, offering some relief to households and businesses.
On the surface, there are enough reasons for someone like me to be satisfied.
Yet, I am deeply disappointed.
The core issue is simple. I do not see anything fundamentally different between this administration and the previous one. In fact, when we cast our minds back, the previous administration arguably performed better within its first year in office.
It introduced ideas that were clearly out of the ordinary. Beyond macroeconomic stability, Free SHS emerged as a bold flagship policy. The moratorium on small scale mining in the fight against galamsey was a daring decision for a new government. Major road and infrastructure works were ongoing. The Ghana Card rollout by the National Identification Authority remains one of the most impactful reforms this country has seen in recent times.
2017 is not ancient history. We remember it clearly.
Now to the present administration and its shortcomings.
First, the failure to implement its flagship policy is very concerning, After reading two budgets, the 24 hour economy still exists only in speeches. It was meant to support businesses through time of use tariffs and create jobs under the promise of 1 job, 3 shifts and 3 people.
Today, not a single person can confidently say they were employed through that policy.
Electricity tariffs have rather increased. Households and businesses that paid about GH¢1,000 last year are now paying over GH¢1,300 for the same consumption.
Second, unemployment remains severe. Over 1.3 million young people are unemployed, according to the Ghana Statistical Service. This government Promised automatic posting of trained teachers and also the Minister of Education pledged to recruit 50,000 teachers and 10,000 non teaching staff by end year 2025 which still remains unfulfilled.
Third, the fight against galamsey has effectively been lost. The government appears overly obsessed with gold accumulation to support the cedi, even at the expense of our water bodies and biodiversity.
There is still no credible track and traceability mechanism to determine the source of the gold being purchased today by Sammy Gyamfi Goldbod. This narrow focus ignores the long term environmental damage the country will pay for.
On the legal front, the sheer disregard for the rule of law and natural justice displayed by this administration is sickening.
Many of the excesses this administration accused the previous government of have been replicated, and in some cases amplified, within a year.
The NDC in opposition consistently accused the NPP of packing the bench with party loyalists to undermine fair adjudication. Yet it took them less than a year to outstrip the judicial appointments made by Akufo Addo in four years.
It is instructive to note that the current dispensation made 65 judicial appointments within months of assuming office across the various jurisdictions.
They cried their eyes out over the removal of the former Electoral Commission Chairperson, Madam Charlotte Osei, and her immediate deputies, yet went ahead to maliciously remove the Chief Justice over inconsequential reasons and in an opaque manner that undermined her fundamental human rights.
This has set a very bad precedent. We risk making the Chief Justice, the apex of the Judiciary, a political appointee subject to executive control, just like ministers.
may exploit similar loopholes to remove justices deemed inconvenient.
Just because a decision is insane does not mean this government will not make it. 🤦🏽♂️
If COCOBOD says there is no money to sustain a fair producer price, how do we suddenly find GH¢12 million for football?
You cannot preach hardship to cocoa farmers and practice generosity elsewhere with the same cocoa money.
This is a slap in the face of the cocoa farmer.
At a time producer prices are being reduced and farmers are struggling with high input costs, diverting GH¢12 million of cocoa proceeds to sponsor cronies and elites to watch the Black Stars, while farmers continue to wallow in abject poverty and drown in debt because of a largely self-inflicted crisis at COCOBOD and questionable management decisions, is a cruel blow to the plights of the farmers.
Cocoa is not a side hustle. It is the backbone of rural livelihoods. If there is money, pay the farmer. If there is no money, then priorities must reflect that reality.🤦♂️
After all the noise and state sponsored praise singing over Sammy Gyamfi’s appearance on Joy News File, one thing is now obvious. Nothing has changed. The reported US$214 million losses are real and the good people of this country will ultimately pay the price.
@TwoTerty1 @Foreverbaakop3 You think sey the work dey groumd like that,the people dey the forest inside if you do operation here they go another place,dem plenty so you can't even do operations on them simultaneously. Upper East sef dem dey do galamsey but above all what needs to be done is to prioritize