Richard Ahiagbah, the National Communications Director of Ghana’s opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), has launched a scathing critique of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) government’s performance in its first 120 days in office. Ahiagbah argues that despite the NDC’s self-proclaimed achievements under its social contract with Ghanaians, the impact on the average citizen’s life remains negligible. He dismisses the touted achievements as inconsequential in the face of the NDC’s core campaign promise: to alleviate the high cost of living. Ahiagbah contends that the removal of certain taxes, a highlighted achievement of the NDC, is a measure any government would have taken, including an NPP government had they won the 2024 elections. He specifically mentions the e-levy, COVID-19 levy, betting tax, and the unimplemented emission tax as levies that would have been scrapped under an NPP administration.
Ahiagbah’s central argument hinges on the unfulfilled promise of a 24-hour economy, a flagship campaign pledge by the NDC that aimed to significantly boost production and create jobs. He suggests that this promise was a pivotal factor in the NDC’s electoral victory. However, Ahiagbah points to the absence of budgetary allocation for the 24-hour economy initiative, indicating a lack of commitment and planning towards its implementation. This, he argues, demonstrates that the NDC is not on track to deliver on its key promises and is failing to address the pressing economic concerns of Ghanaians. He effectively questions the tangible benefits of the NDC’s actions, arguing that they fall short of addressing the core issue of improving the living conditions of Ghanaians.
The NDC, since assuming office in January 2025, has highlighted several actions as evidence of their commitment to good governance and economic improvement. These include the swift appointment and parliamentary approval of a streamlined cabinet, described by the NDC as the leanest and most efficient government structure. Furthermore, the administration underscores its efforts in fostering national dialogue on critical areas such as education and the economy. The scrapping of the controversial e-levy and betting tax are also presented as significant achievements, aimed at easing the financial burden on citizens and promoting economic activity. These measures, according to the NDC, represent initial steps towards fulfilling their social contract with the Ghanaian people.
However, Ahiagbah’s critique challenges the narrative presented by the NDC. He dismisses the cabinet appointments and national dialogues as superficial actions that do not directly translate into tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary Ghanaians. While acknowledging the removal of taxes, he argues that these are expected actions, not necessarily indicative of exceptional governance or a commitment to addressing the high cost of living. The core of Ahiagbah’s argument lies in the unfulfilled promise of the 24-hour economy, which he positions as a fundamental yardstick for measuring the NDC’s performance. By highlighting the absence of budgetary provisions for this flagship initiative, he questions the NDC’s commitment to its own promises and suggests a disconnect between their rhetoric and actions.
The exchange between Ahiagbah and the NDC represents the ongoing political discourse in Ghana, with the opposition scrutinizing the ruling party’s performance and holding them accountable for their campaign promises. Ahiagbah’s criticism focuses on the perceived gap between the NDC’s pronouncements and their concrete actions, particularly concerning the cost of living. He challenges the NDC to move beyond symbolic gestures and implement substantive policies that directly address the economic challenges facing Ghanaians. The debate revolves around the effectiveness of the NDC’s initial actions and their ability to translate campaign rhetoric into tangible improvements in the lives of citizens.
The crux of the matter lies in the differing perspectives on what constitutes meaningful action and the appropriate timeframe for evaluating a government’s performance. The NDC emphasizes the importance of laying a strong foundation through cabinet appointments, national dialogues, and the removal of unpopular taxes. They likely view these as necessary precursors to more substantial economic reforms, including the implementation of the 24-hour economy. Ahiagbah, on the other hand, argues for immediate and tangible results, emphasizing the urgency of addressing the high cost of living. This divergence in perspectives underscores the complex and dynamic nature of political discourse, where the interpretation of actions and the evaluation of performance are often subject to partisan interpretations and differing priorities.
