There were those who were generally referred to as armed chair politicians. These are people who are not ministers of state, parliamentarians or political party activists.
In short, they are not in mainstream politics but are adept in political discussions. They do not have privilege of access to radio or television studios to engage in free discussions; neither do they have the penchant for writing in the newspapers.
However, at the least opportunity offered by a gathering, whether at a funeral, a wedding or a gathering of two or more to celebrate alcohol consumption, the armed chair politician will indulge himself in political arguments, condemning or praising public office holders or offering solutions to all national problems.
Whichever way you look at it, the armed-chair politicians played and continue to play important roles in our political milieu, especially in the days when the voices of dissent were hushed because of the harsh conditions prevailing on the political landscape.
They were the voice of the voiceless and initiators of public debates on topical national issues. They also fuelled the rumour mill and fed the public on what was happening within the corridors of the political establishment.
Today, the role of the armed-chair politicians has not diminished in any way, except that a new breed of commentators on social and political issues, who are more biased towards the latter, have taken over prominence as a result of the liberalisation of the airwaves, thanks to the 1992 Constitution that has guaranteed freedom of speech and expression to citizens.
These are people who move from one radio station to another and still manage to fix themselves at one or two television stations throughout the day, pushing the agenda against or for a political party or any other institution directly or indirectly.
The role of these commentators, which has assumed a professional character, cannot be ignored. Governments that take these commentators for granted do so at their own peril. In a liberal political environment such as the one we are enjoying in this country, there is room for some people to do the talking while others listen.
The social commentators who spent all day talking can be pardoned. After all, they are making a living and they have those who are ready to listen to them. If only their discussions will be well-informed, objective, and impartial (devoid of partisanship) and centre on pressing national issues, we will say the nation is the winner. It is such open discussions that nurture a healthy democracy.
The worry of the majority of Ghanaians is about another group of people who have made talking a bigger part of their work. We are referring to our politicians, especially those who have found themselves in government and who spend a greater part of their time talking.
During the campaign period, politicians promise the electorate everything. But the story becomes different after they enter political office and that is when the fruitless talking starts.
Newly-appointed ministers have to embark on familiarisation tour of areas under their jurisdiction for week to ‘acquaint themselves’ of the problems being faced by institutions under their ministries.
All these time more talking goes on, reminding the people of the promises they made on the campaign platform, without forgetting to tell them about the damage done to the economy by the government they came to replace.
The inspection tour and talking cut across from district executives, parliamentarians, and ministers of state to the Presidency. It is all promises, pledges, assurances and expressions of commitment to do one thing or another. It may be too big an assignment for me. But the social scientists may try it and I will not be surprised if they come out with a conclusion that our government officials spend greater part of their tenure talking than focusing on matters of state. That is why we need to sit up.
By all means, government officials must use every opportunity to explain policies to the people and to solicit their support and confidence, but it appears we are building this nation through talking with very little action.
If government officials and their bureaucrats and technocrats are not on the road talking and doing inspections, then they are holding a series of meetings that bring very little at the end of the day.
A daily schedule of a minister looks like this: Opens a conference in the morning, presides over a meeting and possibly attends an evening programme in one of the numerous modern hotels in the capital. Other days are used to tour the regions and districts to have first-hand experience of problems there. That leaves very little time for serious thinking, planning and execution.
Our Presidents do not fare better either. Apart from other things, they must create space for chief mourners who are constantly calling on them to announce the death of a great son or a great daughter.
By the time the last delegation departs, they are too tired, so they retire and wait for the following day to start it all over. Some may say it is our culture to spend all our productive hours worrying about or celebrating the dead.
We have built enough roads with our mouths to make the autobahns of Germany look like farm roads. We have used our mouths to construct enough schools to take all our children off the streets and put them comfortably in classrooms instead of leaving them under the tree shades which has become their shelter against hostile weather conditions.
The latest Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) results showed that just a little over 50 per cent of those who sat for the examination qualified to progress to the senior high schools (SHS). Is that why there is so much noise about bringing qualitative change in our educational system?
What the results mean is that about half the population of this year’s candidates are already on their way to join the pool of the marginalised and deprived whose means of survival can be anything but decent.
We have done everything with our mouth from the construction of hospitals, and provision of potable water to anything that could have transformed this country into a paradise by now. What we have failed to do is to sit down and think, plan and act.
The recent rains exposed how poor our roads are. It also exposed the corruption and mismanagement that had permeated our construction industry and town planning.
For a country of its size and natural resources, Ghana could have done better, if our leaders had not indulged in more talking than acting.
There is too much poverty, deprivation and misery around to allow for loose talk. The indiscipline on the roads is not something that could be fought with daily lectures without concrete decisions to enforce discipline.
Our traffic lights do not work and no-one seems to be in charge. Drivers of passenger vehicles have turned the shoulders of city roads into expressways and we seem to be impotent to act.
We continue to make boastful noises that agriculture is the mainstay of the economy. Meanwhile, we have made food imports a lucrative business, while our fertile lands lie uncultivated.
A government delegation just returned from a three-nation tour of UK, the US and Colombia to understudy operation of the Bus Road Transport (BRT) system in those countries. Those countries succeeded in operating that system not just because they had the money, but they also had the determination to do what they knew was good for them.
We hope it does not become another ‘looking without doing’. There is a lot to do to overhaul our transport system. Apart from upgrading our roads, especially bringing Accra city roads to international standard, we need to exploit the use of other means of city transport, including trams on some of the busy and heavily congested routes.
At the peak of the busy period, we seem to be trapped in our own capital city by heavy traffic. It should not be a matter of no funds, that is an old story; it is a matter thinking and acting.
If mere talking were to do the trick, the fishermen at James Town in Accra would have been the proud owners of a modern fishing harbour promised them by the previous government.
If mere promises or talking were to do the construction, Ghanaians would have by now been travelling from Accra to Paga on a fast train as was promised them some years ago.
We have failed in these two projects not because of lack of funds, but because we are not able to determine our priorities, coupled with the lack of the conviction to pursue our targets with determination.
In the absence of any clear-cut national development agenda vigorously pursued under a committed and visionary leadership, we think talking will do the trick. Talking may soothe our pains and give us some hope in the interim but ultimately leave us empty at the end of it all. Those who want to talk can be left to do so, but we want more action from our leaders than talking.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment