The lament of Professor Agyeman Badu Akosa, former Director-General of the Ghana Health Service, highlights a deeply rooted systemic issue within Ghana’s governance: the propensity of public officials to seek medical treatment abroad at the expense of the Ghanaian taxpayer. This practice, he argues, represents a significant drain on national resources that could be better allocated to bolstering the domestic healthcare system. Professor Akosa questions the rationale behind this outward flow of funds, particularly given the exorbitant costs often associated with foreign medical care. He advocates for a paradigm shift, suggesting that these substantial financial outlays be redirected towards domestic healthcare infrastructure development, including the acquisition of essential diagnostic equipment like MRI machines in every region. This investment, he contends, would not only improve healthcare access for all Ghanaians but also demonstrate a commitment to building a robust and self-sufficient healthcare system within the country.
Professor Akosa’s critique extends beyond the financial implications of this practice. He challenges the underlying assumption that quality healthcare is only accessible beyond Ghana’s borders. He highlights the inherent contradiction of public officials seeking foreign medical care while simultaneously responsible for overseeing and improving the nation’s healthcare system. This begs the question of confidence, or lack thereof, in the very system they are tasked with managing. He posits that Ghana possesses competent medical professionals capable of providing high-quality care, citing the example of presidential care. If the President were treated within Ghana, he argues, the same level of expertise would be available. This reinforces his argument that investing in and trusting the local healthcare system is not only fiscally responsible but also a testament to the capabilities of Ghanaian medical professionals.
The core of Professor Akosa’s argument centers on the concept of national self-reliance and the responsibility of public officials to demonstrate faith in the systems they govern. His call for a ban on foreign medical treatment for public officials is not merely a cost-saving measure; it is a symbolic gesture aimed at fostering trust in Ghana’s healthcare system and promoting its development. By prioritizing domestic healthcare, he believes, public officials will be incentivized to improve the system for all citizens, not just themselves. This, in turn, would create a virtuous cycle of investment, improvement, and increased confidence in the quality of Ghanaian healthcare.
Professor Akosa’s concerns extend beyond healthcare to encompass education. He advocates for a similar policy regarding the education of public officials’ children. He proposes that children of public officials should be educated within Ghana’s education system. This, he argues, would ensure that policymakers have a vested interest in the quality of Ghanaian education. Educating their children abroad, he suggests, creates a disconnect between policymakers and the realities of the Ghanaian education system, thereby hindering meaningful reform. He questions the credibility of officials advocating for educational policies while simultaneously choosing foreign education systems for their own children. This, he argues, reveals a lack of faith in the very system they are tasked with improving.
The underlying theme connecting Professor Akosa’s arguments on healthcare and education is accountability and commitment to national development. He champions the idea that public officials should be invested in the systems they govern, both personally and financially. This commitment, he believes, is essential for driving positive change and building a stronger, more self-reliant Ghana. By prioritizing domestic healthcare and education, public officials would not only demonstrate faith in Ghanaian institutions but also contribute to their improvement. This, in turn, would benefit all citizens and foster a sense of national pride and ownership.
Professor Akosa’s call for a ban on foreign medical treatment and education for public officials represents a challenge to the status quo. It is a call for greater transparency, accountability, and a renewed focus on building robust and accessible public services within Ghana. His critique underscores the need for a fundamental shift in mindset among public officials, one that prioritizes national development and demonstrates a genuine commitment to improving the lives of all Ghanaians. This shift, he argues, is crucial for fostering trust in public institutions and creating a more equitable and prosperous future for the nation.
