Stephen Atubiga, a former member of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), has publicly expressed his concerns regarding the appointment of Augustus Goosie Tandoh as Presidential Advisor for the 24-hour Economy and Accelerated Export Development under President John Dramani Mahama’s administration. While acknowledging the potential benefits of Tandoh’s advisory role to the President, particularly in terms of connecting with grassroots and party cadres, Atubiga questions the suitability of assigning him this specific portfolio, drawing parallels to a previous appointment deemed inappropriate. Atubiga argues that the 24-hour economy initiative requires a multifaceted approach involving several key ministries, and placing Tandoh in this advisory position could lead to unnecessary complications and potential conflicts.
Atubiga’s core argument centers on the belief that the 24-hour economy initiative falls under the purview of several ministries, including Trade and Industry, Agriculture, Youth and Sports, Arts and Culture, and Gender and Children. He suggests that these ministries are better equipped to handle the intricacies of stimulating economic activity around the clock, and tasking Tandoh with this responsibility could create overlapping responsibilities and potential conflicts of interest. He envisions a scenario where Tandoh’s advisory role might lead to interference in the operations of these ministries, potentially hindering their efforts and undermining the overall success of the 24-hour economy vision.
The crux of Atubiga’s critique lies in his perception of a potential mismatch between Tandoh’s expertise and the demands of the assigned portfolio. He argues that the 24-hour economy initiative requires a comprehensive understanding of various sectors and their interplay, and entrusting this complex task to an advisor, regardless of their connection to the grassroots, might not be the most effective approach. He advocates for a more collaborative approach, involving the relevant ministries directly in the planning and implementation of the 24-hour economy initiative.
Atubiga’s alternative proposal involves empowering the relevant ministries to take ownership of the 24-hour economy vision. He suggests that these ministries, working in concert, should develop a comprehensive implementation plan and present it to the President for guidance and approval. This approach, he believes, would leverage the expertise and resources of these ministries, ensuring a more cohesive and effective implementation of the 24-hour economy initiative. He envisions a streamlined process where each ministry contributes its specialized knowledge and resources to the overall plan, maximizing the chances of success.
The comparison drawn by Atubiga between Tandoh’s appointment and a previous appointment deemed inappropriate highlights his concern about potential mismatches between individuals and their assigned roles. He argues that just as appointing someone without relevant experience to head a port authority is illogical, assigning Tandoh to oversee the 24-hour economy initiative might be similarly flawed. This comparison underscores his belief that specific expertise and experience are crucial for effectively managing complex initiatives like the 24-hour economy.
Ultimately, Atubiga’s reservations stem from his desire to see the 24-hour economy initiative succeed. He believes that the current approach, with Tandoh as the designated advisor, might not be the most effective way to achieve the desired outcomes. He advocates for a more collaborative approach, empowering the relevant ministries to take the lead in planning and implementation, ensuring that the initiative benefits from the collective knowledge and resources of the government. His critique is not a personal attack on Tandoh but rather a call for a more strategic and effective approach to realizing the 24-hour economy vision.
