Persistent fault lines in Ghanaian Politics

Even before political independence a fault line characterized Ghanaian politics. A rift developed between what may be called the conservative camp with elitist views on national development and the social democratic camp with left-wing views. The former camp was peopled by the JB Danquahs and the Busias under the UP/NLM banner, who felt entitled to inherit the governance apparatus of the nation from the colonial government. That camp has always believed in promoting unrestrained personal wealth accumulation. They handle themselves as if they have a pre-destined royal and divine right to rule Ghana. This camp is on the rightwing of the political fault line with an entitlement mentality. The present face of this camp is NPP, which is led by the progenies of the old UP/NLM clique.

On the leftwing of this fault line was CPP which, antithetical to the former’s conservative stance, derived its legitimacy from a groundswell of ordinary citizens and had a populist tinge to its approach to governing Ghana. While the progenies of the CPP do not constitute themselves under a neo-CPP banner in the same manner as the progenies of the UP/NLM faction, the closest political party in Ghana with similar people-centered approach to governance is NDC. Thus, for practical and comparative purposes the NDC could be said to have inherited CPP. The CPP/NDC camp has social democratic leanings and sees development more in terms of government's role in providing infrastructure and social services that cushion or improve the living conditions of the masses of citizens. While, the CPP/NDC camp does not discourage private business and the accumulation of wealth by a few elitist individuals, its economic and social policies favor a distribution and an extension of opportunity to as many citizens as possible.

A Contrast of Economic and Social Ideologies in Practice

Over the past 14 years, a new era of governance, we have had a unique opportunity to see these two camps (call them ideologies, if you like) take turns to govern our country. In the first 8 years of this era, we've seen the NDC try as much as possible to cushion the hardships of life in Ghana among the poor. Inspite of the slow pace of external donors to embrace the fledgling experiment with democracy in the early to mid 1990s, and the consequent meager inflows of financial assistance therefrom, NDC, true to its social democratic leanings, spent much of the financial resources at its disposal to promote policies and to undertake projects that were clearly intended to benefit the masses of our citizens. Water and electricity were extended for the first time beyond the Accra-Takoradi-Kumasi triangle. For the first time water and electricity became available in most of our regional capitals. This was a period of no monuments and presidential palaces, just projects with purely utilitarian value to our folks. This was a period of expansion of tertiary education backed by the national treasury, not an age of proliferation of dollar-denominated mushroom private universities. This was the time when colleges in Winneba and Tamale became public accredited universities, giving a fair shot to Agya Mensah's poor but brilliant son from the interior. This was an age of building a national theater for the citizens and the beautification and refurbishment of Kumasi with dual carriageways and street lights, not presidential palace and office complexes.

Fast forward to the last 6 years and the contrast in ideology and mentality comes into very sharp focus. Under JAK and NPP (latter day UP/NLM/PPists), what we see is an aberration and the jettison of all economic policies with a social and utilitarian benefit to the masses of Ghanaians. As if to make up for lost time, an extreme form of liberal economic regime has been instituted in Ghana, where the only incentives entrepreneurs have from the government is a license to seek as much monetary profit as possible within the shortest possible time. Under this economic regime, it pays better for rational businessmen to import goods from abroad, warehouse and sell them quickly and go back for more.

Business turnover is higher for such entrepreneurs. A captive market where government policy makes domestic production unattractive, and where domestic production does not offer the types of returns that imported goods offer, is at the mercy of usurious profiteering from import-and-sell businesses. This is the reason why commonly used products like toothpaste, rice, chocolates, jeans, etc are imported from the US and other foreign nations and sold at substantially higher prices in Ghana.

The Consequences of Right-wing Unregulated Economic Liberalization

The national government has a responsibility to regulate the environment for economic activity and to use this regulatory tool to encourage domestic production of the basic products that our people use. Such a policy has many benefits for the masses, chief among them being employment opportunities for the ordinary Ghanaian. The benefits of an economic regime that encourages domestic production accrues directly to everyone in the nation and not a few importers, wholesalers and retailers. The only downside to such a regulatory control will be the curtailment of unregulated profit-making for importers, buyers and sellers. If you were in any doubt about my characterization of the UP/PP/NPP as a camp of elitists who favor personal wealth accumulation and extreme individualism with little thought to social and economic policies that have the potential to raise the whole nation’s standard of living, you only have to see the swelling of the masses of dejected and jobless Ghanaians and the hopelessness that gawks at you when you look in the eyes of the average Ghanaian in 2006.

Yes, protagonists of this free for all and personal wealth-maximizing regime will point to 100 or even 1000 Ghanaians with outward trappings of good living and wealth to substantiate their claim that under NPP’s regime of unrestrained freedom of economic activity, Ghana is making progress. But this grossly misses the basic point about economic and social policies; the kind that have made the US, UK and other Western nations, places we admire. These countries are not attractive to us because they have encouraged absolute and maximum rent-seeking activity among their entrepreneurs. It is their policies encourage the provision of social services and infrastructural facilities that make these countries attractive to us. Their policies encourage private economic activity but they also appropriate a portion of the proceeds of such activities to provide the services, and facilities that create a certain ambience. It is this ambience that makes New York, London or Hamburg places we admire. A government with a social democratic ideology is interested in the generation of jobs for its people; they pay taxes from those jobs. It encourages the local manufacturing of products; for those production units pay taxes and employ citizens. It appropriates funds and taxes from these units not for its own sake, but for the sole sake of providing social services and infrastructure. A social democratic government understands that the progress of a nation does not only lie in the few numbers of its citizens that have the opportunity to accumulate large amounts of wealth. Rather, it understands that policies that ultimately raise the living standards of everyone are those that must be pursued if a nation wants to develop.

Is Social Democracy Stupid?

The elitist mentality of the NPP government sees nothing wrong with a handful of extremely wealthy persons who drive hummers and Chevy Suburbans through knee deep pot holes and choking filth to multi-million dollar homes that are insulated from their surroundings by high concrete and electrified barbed wire fences and uniformed security guards. JAK and his elitist NPP camp firmly believe in “each man for himself and God for us all”. These people, especially President Kufuor, find every excuse to travel to the West because they enjoy the ambience of the social and infrastructural environments that these societies offer, yet they fail to recognize that the kind of economic elitism, the unregulated liberalization of economic activity and their nonchalant attitude to poverty and polarization among our citizens are not the kinds of policies that produce the types of development they admire in Western societies.

Social and Economic Penury Under NPP: How Not to Build A Social Democracy

Finally, let me make a few observations to buttress the conclusion that, the type of social and economic ideology that NPP pursues for our country cannot result in any meaningful development for Ghana. Yes, these policies will accumulate wealth for a few businessmen who have connections to negotiate the import and sell business environment. Those with connections, but who seek even higher returns on their investments in such an environment of free-for-all business, will sooner or later turn to criminal activity to achieve such wealth. It should surprise no one that some Ghanaians have resorted to importing cocaine by the tonnage for onward export to lucrative destinations. This is a logical consequence of an economic environment that encourages unregulated and unrestrained wealth-seeking behavior. When NDC was in power from 1993 to 2000, the cost of a barrel of crude oil was an average of less than $30, and a gallon of petrol in Ghana was 6000 cedis. In 2006, a barrel of crude oil is around $75 dollars, and the price of a gallon of petrol has consequently doubled in the US for example. But in Ghana, a gallon of petrol rose from 6000 cedis to more than 40,000 cedis, much of it accounted for by layers of government taxation. If we take cognizance of the direct correlation between fuel price increases and the high cost of living for our citizens, one must conclude that NPP is a government that cares nothing about the welfare of our citizens. This travesty is put into sharper focus, when you realize that a gallon of petrol now costs more than the daily wage of an experienced certified trained school teacher.

A government with social democratic leanings and one that is sensitive to the welfare of the general population will not pursue the types of policies I have outlined above. NDC, even though it often attracts charges of authoritarian leadership, has proven to be more socially democratic, more sensitive to the welfare of the man in the street, and more socially aware that a country does not develop through economic elitism and unrestrained economic liberalization. Under NPP Ghana has a rule of the jungle, where only the fittest survive by any means.