Francis Asante, a finance lecturer based in the United States and a prominent member of the Movement For Change, a strategic forum supporting Alan Kyeremanteng, has launched a scathing critique of the Gold for Oil policy spearheaded by Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia. Asante argues that the policy, far from achieving its stated objectives, has demonstrably failed on multiple fronts, exacerbating existing economic challenges rather than alleviating them. He points to a series of unmet promises and inaccurate predictions made by Dr. Bawumia as evidence of the policy’s shortcomings.
Central to Asante’s criticism is the discrepancy between the projected financial gains from the Gold for Oil initiative and the actual outcomes. He highlights Dr. Bawumia’s initial forecast of a $4.8 billion annual profit for the Bank of Ghana through the policy’s implementation. This projection, according to Asante, stood in stark contrast to the reality of reported losses incurred by the central bank. This significant deviation, he posits, underscores a fundamental flaw in the policy’s design or execution, raising questions about its underlying economic viability.
Beyond the financial implications, Asante also takes aim at the policy’s impact on fuel prices. Dr. Bawumia, he recalls, had assured the public that the Gold for Oil policy would lead to a noticeable reduction in fuel costs for consumers. However, Asante argues that this promise remained unfulfilled, with fuel prices continuing to climb throughout the administration’s tenure. This failure to deliver on the anticipated price relief, he contends, further undermines the policy’s credibility and casts doubt on its efficacy in addressing the pressing issue of rising fuel costs.
Another key element of Asante’s critique centers on the projected impact of the policy on the Ghanaian Cedi. He recalls Dr. Bawumia’s assertion that the Gold for Oil strategy would significantly bolster the Cedi’s value against the US dollar. This prediction, according to Asante, has proven to be inaccurate, with the Cedi continuing to struggle against the dollar. He attributes this failure to the Vice President’s overreliance on the concept of economic elasticity, suggesting that this approach has been misapplied and has not yielded the desired positive effects on the currency’s performance. Asante argues that this miscalculation further reinforces the policy’s overall inadequacy in achieving its stated goals.
Asante further expands on the economic implications of the policy, arguing that the Gold for Oil initiative has not only failed to deliver on its promises but has also potentially contributed to the worsening economic situation. The lack of positive impact on fuel prices, coupled with the continued decline of the Cedi, has placed further strain on the Ghanaian economy. This, he argues, demonstrates a fundamental disconnect between the theoretical underpinnings of the policy and its practical application. The failure to anticipate and mitigate these negative consequences highlights what Asante considers to be a critical oversight in the policy’s formulation and implementation.
In his concluding remarks, Asante reiterates his central argument, emphasizing the policy’s overarching failure to bolster the Ghanaian Cedi against the US dollar. He suggests that the policy’s shortcomings are indicative of a broader issue, namely, a disconnect between economic policy and practical realities. He calls for a more rigorous and evidence-based approach to policy development, emphasizing the importance of realistic projections and a thorough understanding of the complex interplay of economic factors. Asante argues that only through such a comprehensive approach can effective and sustainable economic solutions be devised. He concludes by urging a reassessment of the Gold for Oil policy and a renewed focus on strategies that are demonstrably capable of strengthening the Ghanaian economy and improving the lives of its citizens.
