By Kofi Akordor
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness”
Taking inspiration in these elevating words of Mark Twain, an American author, I did not hesitate when I was offered to visit Turkey, the only country that has part of it in Europe and another in Asia. Already, there is something in our local parlance like ‘Travel and see’. In other words, it is always good to venture out of your traditional habitat so that you experience what is happening in other places. It is likely you may learn something new and probably through interaction, impart to your hosts, something about yourself and your country.
Istanbul, which is the commercial capital of the Republic of Turkey, is a mega city by all definitions, stretching 120 kilometres in length, 50 kilometres in width and being home to over 20 million people. It has a history dating back to ancient times and it is a melting point of different religions, histories and layers of civilisation. It has many historical places of interest such as mosques, museums, palaces and basilicas to prove that.
My interest, however, as someone coming from Ghana, a country labelled developing, was in modern Istanbul, which, for four days, hosted businessmen and women and representatives of corporate institutions from all over the world. Among them were trade and business delegations from several African countries including Malawi, Kenya, Uganda, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Namibia and Mozambique.
What struck me on arrival at the Ataturk International Airport was that Turkey may not, after all, be one of the so-called developing countries. This modern, large and busy airport complex was named after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic of Turkey.
Some years ago, a group of countries in Africa, Asia and South America were placed in one country and labelled under-developed countries. Most of these countries were just emerging from colonialism or occupation and, therefore, had no stable economies or political systems. Most of these countries also belonged to the Third World, thus not part of the geopolitics of either Western Europe or the United States of America.
There were protestations from most of these countries that the term ‘under-developed’ was derogatory, hence the new term ‘developing’ which was coined for them and became the internationally accepted description for some of the poorest countries of the world.
Today, it is strange and totally misleading for some of these countries to continue to be branded as developing countries and in true fact, some are more developed and have greater prospects of developing faster than some of the so-called developed countries. It is in such group that one could find Turkey, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Brazil, India and Iran. All sub-Saharan African countries, with the exception of Republic of South Africa, are still at the bottom and the earlier they accept the fact that their once stable mates among the developing world have left them and are now being described as emerging economies, the better it may open the eyes of their leaders to the realities of the day.
The truth is, Istanbul has become a symbol of Turkey’s phenomenal transformation over the last 20 years. The city has a vast road network of asphaltic dual carriageways, flyovers, trams, metro bus lanes and underground tubes to ferry the millions of commuters to and from their destinations. Unlike in my country where traffic lights do not work, the vast city of Istanbul does not suffer that fate because the lights are powered by solar panels, something which was suggested here but was, in a nonchalant manner, brushed aside. In the midst of that jungle of concrete and steel, the planners of Istanbul and most other Turkish cities have generous space for gardens to bring man and nature together. In fact, Istanbul is a blend of human ingenuity and natural landscape to give it a special beauty.
Istanbul is located strategically where Europe, Asia and Africa meet and the Strait of Bosphorus, which links the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, divides the city into two, one on the European side and the other on the Asian side. It is, therefore, the only city that occupies two continents — Asia and Europe. This gives it an advantage as a major trading centre attracting companies and merchants from all over the world. The two sides are linked by two suspension bridges over the Bosphorus, which carry large volumes of traffic between European and Asian Istanbul.
Turkey itself has gradually become a major industrial and manufacturing country. It is the sixth largest producer of cement in the world, the ninth highest earner in tourism; it is second to China in textile production, it has a large jewellery industry and cumulatively, the 15th largest economy in the world, though the country cannot boast having one of the world’s richest gold mines.
It has a large chocolate industry but is not rated among cocoa producers on this planet. It has the second largest jewellery factory in the whole world even though it cannot boast the production of gold, diamond or any other precious minerals.
It produces vintage furniture for export when its timber resources do not come near that of Ghana. We have decided to sell our raw timber for a pittance at the expense of our ecosystem, while our governments take delight in importing furniture to furnish their offices and homes.
Ghana and other African countries will be deluding themselves in thinking that the ‘developing’ tag fits them and the emerging countries such as Turkey that are knocking hard at the doorsteps of the developed world.
Turkey imports very little vehicles because most of the major auto firms have their plants there. This has favoured their entrepreneurs to establish their own manufacturing plants. It also produces agricultural machinery, boats, electronics and light aircraft.
Turkey did not reach where it is now by chance or by accident. It took a visionary and well-focused leadership, leading the way for a committed and dedicated people who know what they want and how to get it. Sometimes it is strange that almost all the traffic lights in Accra, the national capital, do not work, and we do not feel any dent on our pride as a people. Even the one at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) intersection, which welcomes visitors, does not work for days. Can’t we adopt the solar panel system at least for our traffic lights?
Shall we call for a new political leadership which will run this country on business lines for results? Shall we tell our political leaders to stop counting their spoils of war even before they enter office? We have too much to sustain us and it is time we did away with the excuses. Ghana should not be where it is today. We must move forward, of course in the right direction.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
ISTANBUL: A CITY ON TWO CONTINENTS (JUNE 16, 2009)
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness”
Taking inspiration in these elevating words of Mark Twain, an American author, I did not hesitate when I was offered the opportunity to visit Turkey, the only country that has part of it in Europe and another in Asia.
Already, there is something in our local parlance like ‘Travel and see’. In other words, it is always good to venture out of your traditional habitat so that you experience what is happening in other places. It is likely you may learn something new and probably through interaction, impart to your hosts, something about yourself and your country.
Istanbul, which is the commercial capital of the Republic of Turkey, is a mega city by all definitions, stretching 120 kilometres in length, 50 kilometres in width and being home to over 20 million people.
It has a history dating back to ancient times and it is a melting point of different religions, histories and layers of civilisation. It has many historical places of interest such as mosques, museums, palaces and basilicas to prove that.
My interest, however, as someone coming from Ghana, a country labelled developing, was in modern Istanbul, which, for four days, hosted businessmen and women and representatives of corporate institutions from all over the world. Among them were trade and business delegations from several African countries including Malawi, Kenya, Uganda, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Namibia and Mozambique.
What struck me on arrival at the Ataturk International Airport was that Turkey may not, after all, be one of the so-called developing countries. This modern, large and busy airport complex was named after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic of Turkey.
Some years ago, a group of countries in Africa, Asia and South America were placed in one country and labelled under-developed countries. Most of these countries were just emerging from colonialism or occupation and, therefore, had no stable economies or political systems. Most of these countries also belonged to the Third World, thus not part of the geopolitics of either Western Europe or the United States of America.
There were protestations from most of these countries that the term ‘under-developed’ was derogatory, hence the new term ‘developing’ which was coined for them and became the internationally accepted description for some of the poorest countries of the world.
Today, it is strange and totally misleading for some of these countries to continue to be branded as developing countries and in true fact, some are more developed and have greater prospects of developing faster than some of the so-called developed countries. It is in such group that one could find Turkey, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Brazil, India and Iran.
All sub-Saharan African countries, with the exception of Republic of South Africa, are still at the bottom and the earlier they accept the fact that their once stable mates among the developing world have left them and are now being described as emerging economies, the better it may open the eyes of their leaders to the realities of the day.
The truth is, Istanbul has become a symbol of Turkey’s phenomenal transformation over the last 20 years. The city has a vast road network of asphaltic dual carriageways, flyovers, trams, metro bus lanes and underground tubes to ferry the millions of commuters to and from their destinations.
Unlike in my country where traffic lights do not work, the vast city of Istanbul does not suffer that fate because the lights are powered by solar panels, something which was suggested here but was, in a nonchalant manner, brushed aside.
In the midst of that jungle of concrete and steel, the planners of Istanbul and most other Turkish cities have generous space for gardens to bring man and nature together. In fact, Istanbul is a blend of human ingenuity and natural landscape to give it a special beauty.
Istanbul is located strategically where Europe, Asia and Africa meet and the Strait of Bosphorus, which links the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, divides the city into two, one on the European side and the other on the Asian side. It is, therefore, the only city that occupies two continents — Asia and Europe.
This gives it an advantage as a major trading centre attracting companies and merchants from all over the world. The two sides are linked by two suspension bridges over the Bosphorus, which carry large volumes of traffic between European and Asian Istanbul.
Turkey itself has gradually become a major industrial and manufacturing country. It is the sixth largest producer of cement in the world, the ninth highest earner in tourism; it is second to China in textile production, it has a large jewellery industry and cumulatively, the 15th largest economy in the world, though the country cannot boast having one of the world’s richest gold mines.
It has a large chocolate industry but is not rated among cocoa producers on this planet. It has the second largest jewellery factory in the whole world even though it cannot boast the production of gold, diamond or any other precious minerals.
It produces vintage furniture for export when its timber resources do not come near that of Ghana. We have decided to sell our raw timber for a pittance at the expense of our ecosystem, while our governments take delight in importing furniture to furnish their offices and homes.
Ghana and other African countries will be deluding themselves in thinking that the ‘developing’ tag fits them and the emerging countries such as Turkey that are knocking hard at the doorsteps of the developed world.
Turkey imports very little vehicles because most of the major auto firms have their plants there. This has favoured their entrepreneurs to establish their own manufacturing plants. It also produces agricultural machinery, boats, electronics and light aircraft.
Turkey did not reach where it is now by chance or by accident. It took a visionary and well-focused leadership, leading the way for a committed and dedicated people who know what they want and how to get it.
Sometimes it is strange that almost all the traffic lights in Accra, the national capital, do not work, and we do not feel any dent on our pride as a people.
Even the one at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) intersection, which welcomes visitors, does not work for days. Can’t we adopt the solar panel system at least for our traffic lights?
Shall we call for a new political leadership which will run this country on business lines for results? Shall we tell our political leaders to stop counting their spoils of war even before they enter office? We have too much to sustain us and it is time we did away with the excuses. Ghana should not be where it is today. We must move forward, of course in the right direction.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Taking inspiration in these elevating words of Mark Twain, an American author, I did not hesitate when I was offered the opportunity to visit Turkey, the only country that has part of it in Europe and another in Asia.
Already, there is something in our local parlance like ‘Travel and see’. In other words, it is always good to venture out of your traditional habitat so that you experience what is happening in other places. It is likely you may learn something new and probably through interaction, impart to your hosts, something about yourself and your country.
Istanbul, which is the commercial capital of the Republic of Turkey, is a mega city by all definitions, stretching 120 kilometres in length, 50 kilometres in width and being home to over 20 million people.
It has a history dating back to ancient times and it is a melting point of different religions, histories and layers of civilisation. It has many historical places of interest such as mosques, museums, palaces and basilicas to prove that.
My interest, however, as someone coming from Ghana, a country labelled developing, was in modern Istanbul, which, for four days, hosted businessmen and women and representatives of corporate institutions from all over the world. Among them were trade and business delegations from several African countries including Malawi, Kenya, Uganda, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Namibia and Mozambique.
What struck me on arrival at the Ataturk International Airport was that Turkey may not, after all, be one of the so-called developing countries. This modern, large and busy airport complex was named after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic of Turkey.
Some years ago, a group of countries in Africa, Asia and South America were placed in one country and labelled under-developed countries. Most of these countries were just emerging from colonialism or occupation and, therefore, had no stable economies or political systems. Most of these countries also belonged to the Third World, thus not part of the geopolitics of either Western Europe or the United States of America.
There were protestations from most of these countries that the term ‘under-developed’ was derogatory, hence the new term ‘developing’ which was coined for them and became the internationally accepted description for some of the poorest countries of the world.
Today, it is strange and totally misleading for some of these countries to continue to be branded as developing countries and in true fact, some are more developed and have greater prospects of developing faster than some of the so-called developed countries. It is in such group that one could find Turkey, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Brazil, India and Iran.
All sub-Saharan African countries, with the exception of Republic of South Africa, are still at the bottom and the earlier they accept the fact that their once stable mates among the developing world have left them and are now being described as emerging economies, the better it may open the eyes of their leaders to the realities of the day.
The truth is, Istanbul has become a symbol of Turkey’s phenomenal transformation over the last 20 years. The city has a vast road network of asphaltic dual carriageways, flyovers, trams, metro bus lanes and underground tubes to ferry the millions of commuters to and from their destinations.
Unlike in my country where traffic lights do not work, the vast city of Istanbul does not suffer that fate because the lights are powered by solar panels, something which was suggested here but was, in a nonchalant manner, brushed aside.
In the midst of that jungle of concrete and steel, the planners of Istanbul and most other Turkish cities have generous space for gardens to bring man and nature together. In fact, Istanbul is a blend of human ingenuity and natural landscape to give it a special beauty.
Istanbul is located strategically where Europe, Asia and Africa meet and the Strait of Bosphorus, which links the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, divides the city into two, one on the European side and the other on the Asian side. It is, therefore, the only city that occupies two continents — Asia and Europe.
This gives it an advantage as a major trading centre attracting companies and merchants from all over the world. The two sides are linked by two suspension bridges over the Bosphorus, which carry large volumes of traffic between European and Asian Istanbul.
Turkey itself has gradually become a major industrial and manufacturing country. It is the sixth largest producer of cement in the world, the ninth highest earner in tourism; it is second to China in textile production, it has a large jewellery industry and cumulatively, the 15th largest economy in the world, though the country cannot boast having one of the world’s richest gold mines.
It has a large chocolate industry but is not rated among cocoa producers on this planet. It has the second largest jewellery factory in the whole world even though it cannot boast the production of gold, diamond or any other precious minerals.
It produces vintage furniture for export when its timber resources do not come near that of Ghana. We have decided to sell our raw timber for a pittance at the expense of our ecosystem, while our governments take delight in importing furniture to furnish their offices and homes.
Ghana and other African countries will be deluding themselves in thinking that the ‘developing’ tag fits them and the emerging countries such as Turkey that are knocking hard at the doorsteps of the developed world.
Turkey imports very little vehicles because most of the major auto firms have their plants there. This has favoured their entrepreneurs to establish their own manufacturing plants. It also produces agricultural machinery, boats, electronics and light aircraft.
Turkey did not reach where it is now by chance or by accident. It took a visionary and well-focused leadership, leading the way for a committed and dedicated people who know what they want and how to get it.
Sometimes it is strange that almost all the traffic lights in Accra, the national capital, do not work, and we do not feel any dent on our pride as a people.
Even the one at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) intersection, which welcomes visitors, does not work for days. Can’t we adopt the solar panel system at least for our traffic lights?
Shall we call for a new political leadership which will run this country on business lines for results? Shall we tell our political leaders to stop counting their spoils of war even before they enter office? We have too much to sustain us and it is time we did away with the excuses. Ghana should not be where it is today. We must move forward, of course in the right direction.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
THE PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE BOARD'S VERDICT (JUNE 9, 2009)
WHAT began as one of those political intrigues came to an end after the Parliamentary Service Board (PSB) met and came to a conclusion: That the former Speaker of Parliament, Mr Ebenezer Begyina Sekyi Hughes, should return all items that did not belong to him to where they belong.
It started when the former Speaker was accused of sweeping clean his official residence of everything, including curtains, rugs, cooking utensils, furniture and electrical fittings.
The former Speaker countered that he acted according to an arrangement to clear the official residence of whatever he came to meet. As would be expected, there were protestations with political undertones which tried to impute political motives instead of the serious moral and ethical issues raised.
A parliamentary select committee under the Minority Leader, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, was tasked to do what was the logical thing – to investigate the allegations and report back to the Parliamentary Service Board. Even though parts of the report were leaked to the media earlier, it was not until Tuesday, May 25, 2009 that the PSB met to deliberate and take a decision on the report.
From what came out of the committee’s investigation and the board’s decision, the former Speaker definitely went beyond his limits. The committee came across no evidence that the former Speaker was entitled to most of the items he took away. He was, therefore, given one week from Tuesday, May 25, 2009 to return the items.
According to Mr Alban Bagbin, the Majority Leader, there was no justification for what Mr Sekyi Hughes did, because two previous Speakers – Mr Justice D.F. Annan and Mr Peter Ala Adjetey (both deceased) — did not conduct themselves in the same manner when they were leaving office. It is on record that Mr Adjetey spent his years as Speaker in his own house while Mr Justice Annan went to ‘perch’ with his wife after going on retirement.
Mr Sekyi Hughes could have avoided coming to that embarrassing end if he had been circumspect before coming to the conclusion that the items in the official residence were his for the taking. He should not have been in so much a hurry to dislodge the residence of the items. He could have sought authorisation or confirmation in black and white from the PSB before taking a decision. That could have saved everybody, including members of the Mills administration and the previous one, any unnecessary confrontations.
The position of Speaker, even though it has its political connotations, is a national one and, therefore, should not in any way be subjected to public ridicule or the person holding that position should not suffer any dishonour.
This matter could still have been handled in a more matured manner without too much public attention, but again we chose to play a political game with such a serious matter by running to the media for solace when they can offer none.
The response of Mr Sekyi Hughes to the directive of the PSB was quite strange. A day after the PSB directed the former Speaker to return all items he took away; a letter was issued by his solicitors, Zoy, Akyea & Co., addressed to the Secretary to the PSB, which said Mr Hughes was “no longer interested in the items he took away from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The letter went on; “Accordingly, for the sake of good governance, the integrity of the high office he previously occupied and in good conscience, our client states categorically that he is no longer interested in the items he took from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide.”
The former Speaker’s solicitors in their letter invited the board to “arrange for the collection of the items from his private residence in Accra, at your earliest convenience, on agreed time schedule”.
Does it mean that the former Speaker was acting on the directives of the PSB or he was surrendering what he considered to be his lawful property because the public so wish? That cannot come from a person who has shown remorse for his actions that have embarrassed many high office holders.
To avoid such incidents in future, it should be prescribed in black and white that certain categories of public office holders who are privileged to live and enjoy at the expense of the poor taxpayer do not extend their largesse beyond their tenure. Though every servant must be rewarded for his/her services, an opportunity to serve the public should not be seen as a licence to rape our national economy. Modesty and the willingness to serve are very important.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
It started when the former Speaker was accused of sweeping clean his official residence of everything, including curtains, rugs, cooking utensils, furniture and electrical fittings.
The former Speaker countered that he acted according to an arrangement to clear the official residence of whatever he came to meet. As would be expected, there were protestations with political undertones which tried to impute political motives instead of the serious moral and ethical issues raised.
A parliamentary select committee under the Minority Leader, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, was tasked to do what was the logical thing – to investigate the allegations and report back to the Parliamentary Service Board. Even though parts of the report were leaked to the media earlier, it was not until Tuesday, May 25, 2009 that the PSB met to deliberate and take a decision on the report.
From what came out of the committee’s investigation and the board’s decision, the former Speaker definitely went beyond his limits. The committee came across no evidence that the former Speaker was entitled to most of the items he took away. He was, therefore, given one week from Tuesday, May 25, 2009 to return the items.
According to Mr Alban Bagbin, the Majority Leader, there was no justification for what Mr Sekyi Hughes did, because two previous Speakers – Mr Justice D.F. Annan and Mr Peter Ala Adjetey (both deceased) — did not conduct themselves in the same manner when they were leaving office. It is on record that Mr Adjetey spent his years as Speaker in his own house while Mr Justice Annan went to ‘perch’ with his wife after going on retirement.
Mr Sekyi Hughes could have avoided coming to that embarrassing end if he had been circumspect before coming to the conclusion that the items in the official residence were his for the taking. He should not have been in so much a hurry to dislodge the residence of the items. He could have sought authorisation or confirmation in black and white from the PSB before taking a decision. That could have saved everybody, including members of the Mills administration and the previous one, any unnecessary confrontations.
The position of Speaker, even though it has its political connotations, is a national one and, therefore, should not in any way be subjected to public ridicule or the person holding that position should not suffer any dishonour.
This matter could still have been handled in a more matured manner without too much public attention, but again we chose to play a political game with such a serious matter by running to the media for solace when they can offer none.
The response of Mr Sekyi Hughes to the directive of the PSB was quite strange. A day after the PSB directed the former Speaker to return all items he took away; a letter was issued by his solicitors, Zoy, Akyea & Co., addressed to the Secretary to the PSB, which said Mr Hughes was “no longer interested in the items he took away from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The letter went on; “Accordingly, for the sake of good governance, the integrity of the high office he previously occupied and in good conscience, our client states categorically that he is no longer interested in the items he took from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide.”
The former Speaker’s solicitors in their letter invited the board to “arrange for the collection of the items from his private residence in Accra, at your earliest convenience, on agreed time schedule”.
Does it mean that the former Speaker was acting on the directives of the PSB or he was surrendering what he considered to be his lawful property because the public so wish? That cannot come from a person who has shown remorse for his actions that have embarrassed many high office holders.
To avoid such incidents in future, it should be prescribed in black and white that certain categories of public office holders who are privileged to live and enjoy at the expense of the poor taxpayer do not extend their largesse beyond their tenure. Though every servant must be rewarded for his/her services, an opportunity to serve the public should not be seen as a licence to rape our national economy. Modesty and the willingness to serve are very important.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
A nation on another wild goose chase
By Kofi Akordor
ONE of the things the Kufuor administration did to our educational system was to introduce a reform which started and ended with changes in name and duration. The former junior secondary school (JSS) became junior high school (JHS) while the senior secondary school (SSS) became senior high school (SHS)). As part of that reform, the duration of the former SSS, now SHS was extended from three to four years.
I had earlier discussed this subject in an article published in the October 16,2007 issue of this column, with the headline : Our children or guinea pigs?, and made the argument that just changing names and extending the duration of the educational system without corresponding improvement and expansion in infrastructure, improving upon the quality of teaching and making the service conditions of teachers better will not bring about the desired results.
Today, the problem has come back to confront us, as a new national debate has started as to whether the four-year SHS should be maintained or we should go back to the three-year duration, an agenda the National Democratic Congress pledged to pursue if it should win the elections.
When new educational reforms were introduced in 1987, the argument was made that the new system will emphasise practical and employable skills to make the young graduates more useful to themselves and society even at the JSS level.The idea was to reduce the number of school drop-outs so that those who could not continue on the academic ladder could find something useful doing.
The new reforms, therefore envisaged the provision of well-equipped workshops to train pupils in skills such as masonry, carpentry, painting, plumbing, batik, tie-dye and many others. The programme, however, started on a faulty note. There were no workshops. Where there were workshops, there were no tools. Above all, there were not enough teachers for the vocational skills. Call it an old system with a new name.
The second major object of that reform was to reduce the number of years pupils spent in school from the original 17 years before one could enter a tertiary institution to 12 years. The system never considered the number of JSS graduates who will battle for admission to the SSS annually.The old system had the advantage of allowing a gradual distribution of the pupils through the Common Entrance Examination until the last batch reaches Standard Seven where they sat for the Middle School Leaving Certificate Examination (MSLCE) and continued with their education or went into apprenticeship from there.
By this time, the original number on roll might have reduced drastically to lessen any pressure on the second cycle schools.
Performance at the Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) have never been encouraging and various reasons have been assigned for that, and the least that should engage our precious time is the duration of the programme. But we took the shortest route to the solution by simply changing the names of the schools and added another year to the SSS programme, and expect that will do the magic.
Another debate has started and we should expect all sorts of arguments in favour of either the three-year system or the four-year duration. One of such arguments made by the Conference of Heads of Assisted Secondary Schools (CHASS) was that the three-year system only favours the very brilliant students. That sounds quite weird, especially from people who are themselves experienced teachers. The example they gave to buttress their point was that out of the 130,000 students who wrote the West Africa Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) last year, only 20 had eight As. So in the opinion of CHASS, the three-year SHS only benefited 20 brilliant students in 2008. If this country could only produce 20 brilliant students in a whole year, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the system, and cannot be solved with an additional one year.
The National Association of Graduate Teachers (NAGRAT) is fully committed to the three-year system. NAGRAT’s position is that more funds should be committed to the development and improvement of infrastructure. Unlike NAGRAT which is trying to identify the realities on the ground, CHASS which is better positioned to appreciate the decay in facilities in the public schools are only imagining things.
No educational system, no matter how well-intentioned and fashioned, can function properly if the essential ingredients in the system are not adequate. The truth is that basic facilities for our schools are lacking. Talk of decent classroom accommodation, learning materials, well-motivated and disciplined teachers, and most of the public schools do not come near the grade.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for pupils from the public schools to enter any of the prestigious second cycle schools. Naturally, students from the public schools will find it difficult to enter the tertiary institutions. Given their poor and sordid circumstance, if you give students in these schools even 10 years, they will still not be able to make the grade. That is why those parents who can afford it are sending their children to private schools, while some engage private teachers to give additional tuition to their children.
What will an additional year to do a pupil who is in a deprived school, without the full complement of teachers, and only has a tree as roof over his head.
The 12-member committee that has been constituted to revisit the matter will only add to our financial burden without bringing out anything new that will solve the problem. The budget for the so-called national forum can benefit a deprived school in a more positive way. Professor Jophus Anamuah-Mensah, the Chairman of the committee which drafted the 2001 report on the country’s educational reforms, was right when he declared that any fresh debate on the subject would be needless since his committee had already done a thorough job on the subject, and came to the conclusion that the three-year SHS should remain.
As a nation, we like committing resources to ventures that do not bring any worthy returns. Why should a high profile committee spend days, weeks and who knows, months, just to deliberate on whether the duration of a school system should be three or four years? Will that bring the classrooms our children so much need? Will that bring the much-needed textbooks? Will it transform our teachers into a core of dedicated and disciplined workers who will be committed to their profession?
Most of the people who are demanding extra years for the SHS may not be conversant with the conditions of schools in the country. A child in an empty classroom will not make any gains no matter the number of years he spends in that classroom. That same child will turn into a genius in an improved environment. That is what must engage our attention. The future of our children cannot continue to be toyed with at the whims and caprices of governments. The number of years will not count so far as the facilities are not in place.
ONE of the things the Kufuor administration did to our educational system was to introduce a reform which started and ended with changes in name and duration. The former junior secondary school (JSS) became junior high school (JHS) while the senior secondary school (SSS) became senior high school (SHS)). As part of that reform, the duration of the former SSS, now SHS was extended from three to four years.
I had earlier discussed this subject in an article published in the October 16,2007 issue of this column, with the headline : Our children or guinea pigs?, and made the argument that just changing names and extending the duration of the educational system without corresponding improvement and expansion in infrastructure, improving upon the quality of teaching and making the service conditions of teachers better will not bring about the desired results.
Today, the problem has come back to confront us, as a new national debate has started as to whether the four-year SHS should be maintained or we should go back to the three-year duration, an agenda the National Democratic Congress pledged to pursue if it should win the elections.
When new educational reforms were introduced in 1987, the argument was made that the new system will emphasise practical and employable skills to make the young graduates more useful to themselves and society even at the JSS level.The idea was to reduce the number of school drop-outs so that those who could not continue on the academic ladder could find something useful doing.
The new reforms, therefore envisaged the provision of well-equipped workshops to train pupils in skills such as masonry, carpentry, painting, plumbing, batik, tie-dye and many others. The programme, however, started on a faulty note. There were no workshops. Where there were workshops, there were no tools. Above all, there were not enough teachers for the vocational skills. Call it an old system with a new name.
The second major object of that reform was to reduce the number of years pupils spent in school from the original 17 years before one could enter a tertiary institution to 12 years. The system never considered the number of JSS graduates who will battle for admission to the SSS annually.The old system had the advantage of allowing a gradual distribution of the pupils through the Common Entrance Examination until the last batch reaches Standard Seven where they sat for the Middle School Leaving Certificate Examination (MSLCE) and continued with their education or went into apprenticeship from there.
By this time, the original number on roll might have reduced drastically to lessen any pressure on the second cycle schools.
Performance at the Basic Education Certificate Examination (BECE) have never been encouraging and various reasons have been assigned for that, and the least that should engage our precious time is the duration of the programme. But we took the shortest route to the solution by simply changing the names of the schools and added another year to the SSS programme, and expect that will do the magic.
Another debate has started and we should expect all sorts of arguments in favour of either the three-year system or the four-year duration. One of such arguments made by the Conference of Heads of Assisted Secondary Schools (CHASS) was that the three-year system only favours the very brilliant students. That sounds quite weird, especially from people who are themselves experienced teachers. The example they gave to buttress their point was that out of the 130,000 students who wrote the West Africa Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) last year, only 20 had eight As. So in the opinion of CHASS, the three-year SHS only benefited 20 brilliant students in 2008. If this country could only produce 20 brilliant students in a whole year, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the system, and cannot be solved with an additional one year.
The National Association of Graduate Teachers (NAGRAT) is fully committed to the three-year system. NAGRAT’s position is that more funds should be committed to the development and improvement of infrastructure. Unlike NAGRAT which is trying to identify the realities on the ground, CHASS which is better positioned to appreciate the decay in facilities in the public schools are only imagining things.
No educational system, no matter how well-intentioned and fashioned, can function properly if the essential ingredients in the system are not adequate. The truth is that basic facilities for our schools are lacking. Talk of decent classroom accommodation, learning materials, well-motivated and disciplined teachers, and most of the public schools do not come near the grade.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for pupils from the public schools to enter any of the prestigious second cycle schools. Naturally, students from the public schools will find it difficult to enter the tertiary institutions. Given their poor and sordid circumstance, if you give students in these schools even 10 years, they will still not be able to make the grade. That is why those parents who can afford it are sending their children to private schools, while some engage private teachers to give additional tuition to their children.
What will an additional year to do a pupil who is in a deprived school, without the full complement of teachers, and only has a tree as roof over his head.
The 12-member committee that has been constituted to revisit the matter will only add to our financial burden without bringing out anything new that will solve the problem. The budget for the so-called national forum can benefit a deprived school in a more positive way. Professor Jophus Anamuah-Mensah, the Chairman of the committee which drafted the 2001 report on the country’s educational reforms, was right when he declared that any fresh debate on the subject would be needless since his committee had already done a thorough job on the subject, and came to the conclusion that the three-year SHS should remain.
As a nation, we like committing resources to ventures that do not bring any worthy returns. Why should a high profile committee spend days, weeks and who knows, months, just to deliberate on whether the duration of a school system should be three or four years? Will that bring the classrooms our children so much need? Will that bring the much-needed textbooks? Will it transform our teachers into a core of dedicated and disciplined workers who will be committed to their profession?
Most of the people who are demanding extra years for the SHS may not be conversant with the conditions of schools in the country. A child in an empty classroom will not make any gains no matter the number of years he spends in that classroom. That same child will turn into a genius in an improved environment. That is what must engage our attention. The future of our children cannot continue to be toyed with at the whims and caprices of governments. The number of years will not count so far as the facilities are not in place.
The Parliamentary service board's verdict
By Kofi Akordor
WHAT began as one of those political intrigues came to an end after the Parliamentary Service Board (PSB) met and came to a conclusion. That it was wrong for the former Speaker of Parliament, Mr Ebenezer Begyina Sekyi Hughes, to return all items that did not belong to him to where they belong. It started when the former Speaker was accused of sweeping clean his official residence of everything, including curtains, rugs, cooking utensils, furniture and electrical fittings.
The former Speaker countered that he acted according to an arrangement to clear the official residence of whatever he came to meet. As would be expected, there were protestations with political undertones which tried to impute political motives instead of the serious moral and ethical issues raised.
A parliamentary select committee under the Minority Leader, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, was tasked to do what was the logical thing – to investigate the allegations and report back to the Parliamentary Service Board. Even though parts of the report were leaked to the media earlier, it was not until Tuesday, May 25, 2009 that the PSB met to deliberate and take a decision on the report.
From what came out of the committee’s investigation and the board’s decision, the former Speaker definitely went beyond his limits. The committee came across no evidence that the former Speaker was entitled to most of the items he took away. He was, therefore, given one week from Tuesday, May 25, 2009 to return the items.
According to Mr Alban Bagbin, the Majority Leader, there was no justification for what Mr Sekyi Hughes did, because two previous Speakers – Mr Justice D.F. Annan and Mr Peter Ala Adjetey (both deceased) did not conduct themselves in the same manner when they were leaving office.It is on record that Mr Adjetey spent his years as Speaker in his own house while Mr Justice Annan went to ‘perch’ with his wife after going on retirement.
Mr Sekyi Hughes could have avoided coming to that embarrassing end if he had been circumspect before coming to the conclusion that the items in the official residence were his for the taking. He should not have been in so much a hurry to dislodge the residence of the items. He could have sought authorisation or confirmation in black and white from the PSB before taking a decision. That could have saved everybody, including members of the Mills administration and the previous one, any unnecessary confrontations.
The position of Speaker, even though it has its political connotations, is a national one and, therefore, should not in any way be subjected to public ridicule or the person holding that position should not suffer any dishonour.
This matter could still have been handled in a more matured manner without too much public attention, but again we chose to play a political game with such a serious matter by running to the media for solace when they can offer none.
The response of Mr Sekyi Hughes to the directive of the PSB was quite strange. A day after the PSB directed the former Speaker to return all items he took away; a letter was issued by his solicitors, Zoy, Akyea & Co. addressed to the Secretary to the PSB which said Mr Hughes was “no longer interested in the items he took away from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The letter went on; “Accordingly, for the sake of good governance, the integrity of the high office he previously occupied and in good conscience, our client states categorically that he is no longer interested in the items he took from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The former Speaker’s solicitors in their letter invited the board to “arrange for the collection of the items from his private residence in Accra, at your earliest convenience, on agreed time schedule”.
Does it mean that the former Speaker was acting on the directives of the PSB or he was surrendering what he considered to be his lawful property because the public so wish? That cannot come from a person who has shown remorse for his actions that have embarrassed many high office holders.
To avoid such incidents in future, it should be prescribed in black and white that certain categories of public office holders who are privileged to live and enjoy at the expense of the poor taxpayer do not extend their largesse beyond their tenure. Though every servant must be reward for his/her services, an opportunity to serve the public should not be seen as a licence to rape our national economy. Modesty and the willingness to serve are very important.
WHAT began as one of those political intrigues came to an end after the Parliamentary Service Board (PSB) met and came to a conclusion. That it was wrong for the former Speaker of Parliament, Mr Ebenezer Begyina Sekyi Hughes, to return all items that did not belong to him to where they belong. It started when the former Speaker was accused of sweeping clean his official residence of everything, including curtains, rugs, cooking utensils, furniture and electrical fittings.
The former Speaker countered that he acted according to an arrangement to clear the official residence of whatever he came to meet. As would be expected, there were protestations with political undertones which tried to impute political motives instead of the serious moral and ethical issues raised.
A parliamentary select committee under the Minority Leader, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, was tasked to do what was the logical thing – to investigate the allegations and report back to the Parliamentary Service Board. Even though parts of the report were leaked to the media earlier, it was not until Tuesday, May 25, 2009 that the PSB met to deliberate and take a decision on the report.
From what came out of the committee’s investigation and the board’s decision, the former Speaker definitely went beyond his limits. The committee came across no evidence that the former Speaker was entitled to most of the items he took away. He was, therefore, given one week from Tuesday, May 25, 2009 to return the items.
According to Mr Alban Bagbin, the Majority Leader, there was no justification for what Mr Sekyi Hughes did, because two previous Speakers – Mr Justice D.F. Annan and Mr Peter Ala Adjetey (both deceased) did not conduct themselves in the same manner when they were leaving office.It is on record that Mr Adjetey spent his years as Speaker in his own house while Mr Justice Annan went to ‘perch’ with his wife after going on retirement.
Mr Sekyi Hughes could have avoided coming to that embarrassing end if he had been circumspect before coming to the conclusion that the items in the official residence were his for the taking. He should not have been in so much a hurry to dislodge the residence of the items. He could have sought authorisation or confirmation in black and white from the PSB before taking a decision. That could have saved everybody, including members of the Mills administration and the previous one, any unnecessary confrontations.
The position of Speaker, even though it has its political connotations, is a national one and, therefore, should not in any way be subjected to public ridicule or the person holding that position should not suffer any dishonour.
This matter could still have been handled in a more matured manner without too much public attention, but again we chose to play a political game with such a serious matter by running to the media for solace when they can offer none.
The response of Mr Sekyi Hughes to the directive of the PSB was quite strange. A day after the PSB directed the former Speaker to return all items he took away; a letter was issued by his solicitors, Zoy, Akyea & Co. addressed to the Secretary to the PSB which said Mr Hughes was “no longer interested in the items he took away from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The letter went on; “Accordingly, for the sake of good governance, the integrity of the high office he previously occupied and in good conscience, our client states categorically that he is no longer interested in the items he took from the Speaker’s official residence, bona fide”.
The former Speaker’s solicitors in their letter invited the board to “arrange for the collection of the items from his private residence in Accra, at your earliest convenience, on agreed time schedule”.
Does it mean that the former Speaker was acting on the directives of the PSB or he was surrendering what he considered to be his lawful property because the public so wish? That cannot come from a person who has shown remorse for his actions that have embarrassed many high office holders.
To avoid such incidents in future, it should be prescribed in black and white that certain categories of public office holders who are privileged to live and enjoy at the expense of the poor taxpayer do not extend their largesse beyond their tenure. Though every servant must be reward for his/her services, an opportunity to serve the public should not be seen as a licence to rape our national economy. Modesty and the willingness to serve are very important.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
SACRIFICE, WITCH-HUNT AND ACCOUNTABILITY (MAY 26, 2009)
After days of embarrassing revelations of questionable expenditure by members of the British House of Commons, the Speaker, Michael Martin, has tendered in his resignation.
Mr Martin came under severe criticism for being an obstacle to reforms of the expenses system. His resignation came after a group of MPs set in motion an agenda to oust him through a no-confidence motion, a situation that could have made him the first Speaker in 300 years to suffer such a fate.
Members of the British public were shocked to hear how their representatives in the House of Commons went into extravagant and sometimes frivolous expenditures on anything, from buildings to lawn mowers, which imposed on the taxpayer unnecessary financial burden.
Public response was quite straightforward — outrage — at what they considered to be irresponsible behaviour on the part of men and women who pledged to serve their interests when they were campaigning for office.
Over there, people did not run into the embracing arms of political parties or the media for support and sympathy. In fact, it was the media which raised the alarm and the parties were the first to denounce those acts of indiscretion.
The leader of the Conservative Party, Mr David Cameron, for instance, did not hesitate to demand that those members of his party who were found to have indulged in those acts to make refunds or face sanctions.
Since the changeover from the Kufuor to the Mills administration, we have had and continue to have several cases of public officers being asked to render one form of account or another for their past stewardship.
There were several cases of some officials of the previous government going home with vehicles which officially did not belong to them. Some have been accused of paying ridiculously low prices for their official vehicles, some of which do not even qualify to be sold. There were also cases of previous occupants of government bungalows having looted the places or abandoned them in a manner that could not be described as the best.
It is true that in their attempt to retrieve state vehicles or regain custody of official bungalows, some agents of the new administration made some false moves which should not be overlooked.
But by and large, the issues revolve around individuals and not political parties or the previous government as a body. It is, therefore, important that Ghanaians begin to see things the same way as the British public so that individual public officials do not cover their own excesses by evoking the sympathy of the previous administration or any political party.
Suddenly, certain words are being bandied about in a manner that does not contribute to the public good. It is now fashionable for some public officers to be screaming hoarse for ill-treatment after, in their own estimation, making so much sacrifice to serve the nation.
Public service in any form entails some amount of sacrifice, but at what cost to the state? Shall we ask whether it is fair for a minister of state who, with all the niceties and privileges attached to his position, evoke this sacrificial theory simply because he had been asked to return a vehicle belonging to the state? Or is it a sign of ingratitude to question the propriety of a government official who, after buying a state property very cheaply, resells it for huge profit?
Shall we say that argument also holds for a former head of state who will decide to go home with a fleet of customised state vehicles because he had been given the opportunity to serve the nation in that prestigious capacity? Is that why people do not see anything wrong with a high office holder such as the Speaker of Parliament stripping bare his official bungalow because he had served the nation in that capacity?
We may ask further, why are the so-called sacrifices made to warrant such rewards from the state when others making even bigger sacrifices are ignored? Is it because they forfeited their salaries and other entitlements while in office?
Is it because the positions were imposed on them because they were the only persons capable of acting in that capacity? In short, one may want to know what were the sufferings, pains and other deprivations they had to endure for serving in their respective positions.
Can we think of the sacrifices of other public servants that continue to sustain the progress and development of this nation? Think about the sacrifices of teachers who mould raw brains into sophisticated human resources with very little remuneration.
What about the men and officers of the Police Service who work around the clock to provide us with security, sometimes at the risk of their own lives. What of hospital workers whose complaints of poor service conditions have become a permanent feature on the labour front?
Should they also commandeer all hospital equipment and vehicles when proceeding on retirement? So why should those who obviously made gains while in their privileged positions hold the nation to ransom because they have to account for their stewardship?
Closely related to this is the complaint of witch-hunting. It is as if all our political and public office holders are angels so any attempt to check malfeasance amounts to witch-hunting. Politics has become a lucrative enterprise and only a few can claim becoming worse off after assuming political office.
Take the number of friends and relatives who accompany nominees to the vetting sessions. Look at the agitation, manoeuvres and intense lobbying associated with the quest for ministerial and other appointments. So why should some sound as if they were led to the altar like the meek lamb and sacrificed so that the rest of us shall be saved?
Our democracy cannot grow if our public office holders are not held accountable for their actions. Victimisation cannot be ruled out in some cases, we agree, but it is better to treat cases on their individual merits than putting everything into one basket and labelling it political vindictiveness or witch-hunting.
Since the vehicle-snatching episode gained media attention, the names of some prominent personalities in the previous administration have not surfaced anywhere. That tells a story. It means individuals should be answerable for their actions.
It also means that some people have conducted themselves very well and left public office with their dignity intact. Those who failed to meet those standards should not try to court public sympathy with claims of harassment or witch-hunting.
Everywhere, from Britain to Australia, the citizenry are becoming more and more critical of the conduct of their political leaders, especially where the use of public funds is concerned. We cannot claim indifference to this new wind of public awareness, more so, when our economy cannot absorb frivolous spending and extravagance in high places.
As for sacrifice, no one claims to be doing it better than the millions of Ghanaians whose take-home pay cannot afford them even a single decent meal a day and whose children cannot afford the luxury of a good classroom for their studies. Those who have had more than enough should tone down their noises, otherwise it will become obvious that their claim to serve was to exploit those who voted them into office.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Mr Martin came under severe criticism for being an obstacle to reforms of the expenses system. His resignation came after a group of MPs set in motion an agenda to oust him through a no-confidence motion, a situation that could have made him the first Speaker in 300 years to suffer such a fate.
Members of the British public were shocked to hear how their representatives in the House of Commons went into extravagant and sometimes frivolous expenditures on anything, from buildings to lawn mowers, which imposed on the taxpayer unnecessary financial burden.
Public response was quite straightforward — outrage — at what they considered to be irresponsible behaviour on the part of men and women who pledged to serve their interests when they were campaigning for office.
Over there, people did not run into the embracing arms of political parties or the media for support and sympathy. In fact, it was the media which raised the alarm and the parties were the first to denounce those acts of indiscretion.
The leader of the Conservative Party, Mr David Cameron, for instance, did not hesitate to demand that those members of his party who were found to have indulged in those acts to make refunds or face sanctions.
Since the changeover from the Kufuor to the Mills administration, we have had and continue to have several cases of public officers being asked to render one form of account or another for their past stewardship.
There were several cases of some officials of the previous government going home with vehicles which officially did not belong to them. Some have been accused of paying ridiculously low prices for their official vehicles, some of which do not even qualify to be sold. There were also cases of previous occupants of government bungalows having looted the places or abandoned them in a manner that could not be described as the best.
It is true that in their attempt to retrieve state vehicles or regain custody of official bungalows, some agents of the new administration made some false moves which should not be overlooked.
But by and large, the issues revolve around individuals and not political parties or the previous government as a body. It is, therefore, important that Ghanaians begin to see things the same way as the British public so that individual public officials do not cover their own excesses by evoking the sympathy of the previous administration or any political party.
Suddenly, certain words are being bandied about in a manner that does not contribute to the public good. It is now fashionable for some public officers to be screaming hoarse for ill-treatment after, in their own estimation, making so much sacrifice to serve the nation.
Public service in any form entails some amount of sacrifice, but at what cost to the state? Shall we ask whether it is fair for a minister of state who, with all the niceties and privileges attached to his position, evoke this sacrificial theory simply because he had been asked to return a vehicle belonging to the state? Or is it a sign of ingratitude to question the propriety of a government official who, after buying a state property very cheaply, resells it for huge profit?
Shall we say that argument also holds for a former head of state who will decide to go home with a fleet of customised state vehicles because he had been given the opportunity to serve the nation in that prestigious capacity? Is that why people do not see anything wrong with a high office holder such as the Speaker of Parliament stripping bare his official bungalow because he had served the nation in that capacity?
We may ask further, why are the so-called sacrifices made to warrant such rewards from the state when others making even bigger sacrifices are ignored? Is it because they forfeited their salaries and other entitlements while in office?
Is it because the positions were imposed on them because they were the only persons capable of acting in that capacity? In short, one may want to know what were the sufferings, pains and other deprivations they had to endure for serving in their respective positions.
Can we think of the sacrifices of other public servants that continue to sustain the progress and development of this nation? Think about the sacrifices of teachers who mould raw brains into sophisticated human resources with very little remuneration.
What about the men and officers of the Police Service who work around the clock to provide us with security, sometimes at the risk of their own lives. What of hospital workers whose complaints of poor service conditions have become a permanent feature on the labour front?
Should they also commandeer all hospital equipment and vehicles when proceeding on retirement? So why should those who obviously made gains while in their privileged positions hold the nation to ransom because they have to account for their stewardship?
Closely related to this is the complaint of witch-hunting. It is as if all our political and public office holders are angels so any attempt to check malfeasance amounts to witch-hunting. Politics has become a lucrative enterprise and only a few can claim becoming worse off after assuming political office.
Take the number of friends and relatives who accompany nominees to the vetting sessions. Look at the agitation, manoeuvres and intense lobbying associated with the quest for ministerial and other appointments. So why should some sound as if they were led to the altar like the meek lamb and sacrificed so that the rest of us shall be saved?
Our democracy cannot grow if our public office holders are not held accountable for their actions. Victimisation cannot be ruled out in some cases, we agree, but it is better to treat cases on their individual merits than putting everything into one basket and labelling it political vindictiveness or witch-hunting.
Since the vehicle-snatching episode gained media attention, the names of some prominent personalities in the previous administration have not surfaced anywhere. That tells a story. It means individuals should be answerable for their actions.
It also means that some people have conducted themselves very well and left public office with their dignity intact. Those who failed to meet those standards should not try to court public sympathy with claims of harassment or witch-hunting.
Everywhere, from Britain to Australia, the citizenry are becoming more and more critical of the conduct of their political leaders, especially where the use of public funds is concerned. We cannot claim indifference to this new wind of public awareness, more so, when our economy cannot absorb frivolous spending and extravagance in high places.
As for sacrifice, no one claims to be doing it better than the millions of Ghanaians whose take-home pay cannot afford them even a single decent meal a day and whose children cannot afford the luxury of a good classroom for their studies. Those who have had more than enough should tone down their noises, otherwise it will become obvious that their claim to serve was to exploit those who voted them into office.
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
TEMA IS DECAYING SLOWLY (MAY 19, 2009)
TEMA is the crystallisation of one of the dreams of Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the nation’s First President, to transform a small fishing village into one of the busiest industrial and port cities on the continent.
To set in motion this ambitious project, the state acquired large tracts of land mostly from the chiefs and people of Nungua Traditional Area, which were to be developed into industrial, commercial and residential estates.
The new Tema Township was, therefore, demarcated into well-planned residential communities with their unique features and facilities such as schools, markets, police stations, recreational and shopping facilities, essentially with the objective of making the city neat, beautiful and accessible.
With the completion of Tema Harbour in 1962 and the Volta Dam at Akosombo becoming operational in 1963, Tema started to take shape, giving hope to a newly-independent African nation that was determined to make its mark on the international scene.
Major industrial establishments, including the Volta Aluminum Company (VALCO), which came as a package with the construction of the dam, started to spring up.
To facilitate movement between the emerging industrial and port city of Tema and the national capital of Accra, our first President thought of an expressway which became the Accra-Tema Motorway, a project that was vehemently resisted by some politicians at the time, because they thought it was more of grandiose than a necessity in nature.
Tema, with its well-developed roads, industrial, commercial and residential estates, became the pride of the nation. It became the destination of young school leavers who sought a living at the sprawling main harbour, the adjoining fishing harbour and the numerous factories the city could boast of.
Those were the days Tema was vibrating with activity throughout the day and night, with big buses of the various companies ferrying their workers to and from work on their shifts.
You could see the buses belonging to VALCO, Tema Shipyard and Drydock Corporation, Ghana Textiles and Printing (GTP), Ghana Textiles Manufacturing Company (GTMC), Tema Steel Works, Sanyo Electronics, Akasanoma Electronics, Tema Food Complex Company (TFCC) and of course the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority and many others on the streets of Tema moving in all directions for 24 hours.
These were vibrant companies that provided thousands of Ghanaian workers and their dependents with livelihood. Ghana was really heading towards industrialisation. Forty-seven years after coming into existence, Tema should have matured by now and blossomed into a major industrial centre comparable to similar cities in other parts of the world. But that was not to be. Decay set in and Tema started to lose its glory.
The textile industry collapsed, thanks to an overzealous implementation of a trade liberalisation policy and with that, the collapse of GTP, GTMC and the rest.
A cruel divestiture policy witnessed the state losing interest in many of its major enterprises including the Ghana Steel Works, the Tema Food Complex Corporation, the Tema Shipyard and Drydock Corporation and the Tema Cold Stores Company.
Some of these companies have collapsed entirely, while others are struggling for survival in private hands.
You do not need to enter Tema before coming face-to-face with its decay and past glory. When coming from the direction of Nungua, using the beach road, one could sense the gloom of Tema. The road does not give any indication that one was entering the nation’s biggest industrial and seaport city. I doubt if the situation will be the same in other major port cities like Manchester, Liverpool, Rotterdam or Hamburg, to name a few.
No matter how poor we claim to be as a country that beach road leading to the harbour should have been developed into a dual-carriageway, well-asphalted, to give meaning to our boast that we are the gate-way to the West Africa sub-region.
Driving on that stretch of road in the night can be a nightmare and there had been reports of armed robberies and car snatches on several occasions. Incidentally, along this road is the multi-million dollar Cocobod warehouse complex, which is to serve as a transit point for cocoa brought from the hinterland before shipment to foreign lands.
The Accra-Tema Motorway, which was not only criticised but condemned in the past, has remained the main artery linking the port city to Accra and any mishap on that route, such as accident, means Accra is cut off from its junior sister.
Tema looks like an orphaned city even though two state institutions — the Tema Development Corporation (TDC) and the Tema Municipal Authority (TMA) — are competing for the revenues it can bring into their coffers.
The TDC sells Tema lands, while the TMA collects the market tolls and property rates and others. Some officials of the two state institutions are far better off than Tema itself. While the two institutions know where to make their monies, none could worry about its state of roads and other infrastructure.
For its strategic national importance and for its small size, Tema roads are some of the worst in the country and constitute a big blot on our values as a nation. How come that a city that brings so much to the country in terms of revenue, a city where most of our exports and imports are channeled through be so neglected. Those who do not know may visit Tema one of these days, especially after a heavy downpour.
It is an undeniable fact that TDC lands had benefited some of its officials more than the city and the original landowners of Nungua Traditional Area. That was why the Nungua people started to agitate for the return of their lands when they realised that those at TDC were only interested in selling the lands for personal profit instead of the projects they were originally acquired for.
Dr Nkrumah, according to reports, felt nostalgic about Tema, while in exile in Conakry, in the Republic of Guinea after his overthrow, because he could see a dream fading away. Tema had never reached its full bloom before the gloom set in.
Tema has become a fragmented city with most of its settlements or communities having nothing in common with one another. There are no road networks connecting these settlements. Take communities 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. They are supposed to be part of Tema.
However, residents of these communities have to force their way onto the motorway through unapproved routes or use the circuitous beach road before reaching Tema city centre. A road over the Sakumo Lagoon to link main Tema and the Sakumono area and another linking Community 11 to the Klagon and the Sakumono areas have remained on the drawing board.
Could it be that Tema’s problems are partly because there is no clear definition of the roles of the TDC and TMA? Then one must go, and TDC, having finished selling the lands has exhausted its stay. Be as it may, the Tema story cannot be isolated from the decay that has engulfed this nation of ours. It is our wish that the change will reflect in the fortunes of our once proud port city of Tema, which is lying right on the Greenwich Meridian. Remember the once famous Meridian Hotel?
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
To set in motion this ambitious project, the state acquired large tracts of land mostly from the chiefs and people of Nungua Traditional Area, which were to be developed into industrial, commercial and residential estates.
The new Tema Township was, therefore, demarcated into well-planned residential communities with their unique features and facilities such as schools, markets, police stations, recreational and shopping facilities, essentially with the objective of making the city neat, beautiful and accessible.
With the completion of Tema Harbour in 1962 and the Volta Dam at Akosombo becoming operational in 1963, Tema started to take shape, giving hope to a newly-independent African nation that was determined to make its mark on the international scene.
Major industrial establishments, including the Volta Aluminum Company (VALCO), which came as a package with the construction of the dam, started to spring up.
To facilitate movement between the emerging industrial and port city of Tema and the national capital of Accra, our first President thought of an expressway which became the Accra-Tema Motorway, a project that was vehemently resisted by some politicians at the time, because they thought it was more of grandiose than a necessity in nature.
Tema, with its well-developed roads, industrial, commercial and residential estates, became the pride of the nation. It became the destination of young school leavers who sought a living at the sprawling main harbour, the adjoining fishing harbour and the numerous factories the city could boast of.
Those were the days Tema was vibrating with activity throughout the day and night, with big buses of the various companies ferrying their workers to and from work on their shifts.
You could see the buses belonging to VALCO, Tema Shipyard and Drydock Corporation, Ghana Textiles and Printing (GTP), Ghana Textiles Manufacturing Company (GTMC), Tema Steel Works, Sanyo Electronics, Akasanoma Electronics, Tema Food Complex Company (TFCC) and of course the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority and many others on the streets of Tema moving in all directions for 24 hours.
These were vibrant companies that provided thousands of Ghanaian workers and their dependents with livelihood. Ghana was really heading towards industrialisation. Forty-seven years after coming into existence, Tema should have matured by now and blossomed into a major industrial centre comparable to similar cities in other parts of the world. But that was not to be. Decay set in and Tema started to lose its glory.
The textile industry collapsed, thanks to an overzealous implementation of a trade liberalisation policy and with that, the collapse of GTP, GTMC and the rest.
A cruel divestiture policy witnessed the state losing interest in many of its major enterprises including the Ghana Steel Works, the Tema Food Complex Corporation, the Tema Shipyard and Drydock Corporation and the Tema Cold Stores Company.
Some of these companies have collapsed entirely, while others are struggling for survival in private hands.
You do not need to enter Tema before coming face-to-face with its decay and past glory. When coming from the direction of Nungua, using the beach road, one could sense the gloom of Tema. The road does not give any indication that one was entering the nation’s biggest industrial and seaport city. I doubt if the situation will be the same in other major port cities like Manchester, Liverpool, Rotterdam or Hamburg, to name a few.
No matter how poor we claim to be as a country that beach road leading to the harbour should have been developed into a dual-carriageway, well-asphalted, to give meaning to our boast that we are the gate-way to the West Africa sub-region.
Driving on that stretch of road in the night can be a nightmare and there had been reports of armed robberies and car snatches on several occasions. Incidentally, along this road is the multi-million dollar Cocobod warehouse complex, which is to serve as a transit point for cocoa brought from the hinterland before shipment to foreign lands.
The Accra-Tema Motorway, which was not only criticised but condemned in the past, has remained the main artery linking the port city to Accra and any mishap on that route, such as accident, means Accra is cut off from its junior sister.
Tema looks like an orphaned city even though two state institutions — the Tema Development Corporation (TDC) and the Tema Municipal Authority (TMA) — are competing for the revenues it can bring into their coffers.
The TDC sells Tema lands, while the TMA collects the market tolls and property rates and others. Some officials of the two state institutions are far better off than Tema itself. While the two institutions know where to make their monies, none could worry about its state of roads and other infrastructure.
For its strategic national importance and for its small size, Tema roads are some of the worst in the country and constitute a big blot on our values as a nation. How come that a city that brings so much to the country in terms of revenue, a city where most of our exports and imports are channeled through be so neglected. Those who do not know may visit Tema one of these days, especially after a heavy downpour.
It is an undeniable fact that TDC lands had benefited some of its officials more than the city and the original landowners of Nungua Traditional Area. That was why the Nungua people started to agitate for the return of their lands when they realised that those at TDC were only interested in selling the lands for personal profit instead of the projects they were originally acquired for.
Dr Nkrumah, according to reports, felt nostalgic about Tema, while in exile in Conakry, in the Republic of Guinea after his overthrow, because he could see a dream fading away. Tema had never reached its full bloom before the gloom set in.
Tema has become a fragmented city with most of its settlements or communities having nothing in common with one another. There are no road networks connecting these settlements. Take communities 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. They are supposed to be part of Tema.
However, residents of these communities have to force their way onto the motorway through unapproved routes or use the circuitous beach road before reaching Tema city centre. A road over the Sakumo Lagoon to link main Tema and the Sakumono area and another linking Community 11 to the Klagon and the Sakumono areas have remained on the drawing board.
Could it be that Tema’s problems are partly because there is no clear definition of the roles of the TDC and TMA? Then one must go, and TDC, having finished selling the lands has exhausted its stay. Be as it may, the Tema story cannot be isolated from the decay that has engulfed this nation of ours. It is our wish that the change will reflect in the fortunes of our once proud port city of Tema, which is lying right on the Greenwich Meridian. Remember the once famous Meridian Hotel?
fokofi@yahoo.co.uk
kofiakordor.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)