"It's the economy, stupid" was coined to initially drum it home to then-candidate Clinton that the key issue to focus on in the campaign was the domestic economy. Of course, in due course, that message had a second and devastating effect on the incumbent as he was portrayed to have taken his eyes off the domestic ball and had become more concerned about whether Saddam Hussein had lemon or honey in his tea, so to speak. History will record that William Jefferson Clinton defeated George Herbert Walker Bush in the 1992 election on the back of a public clamour for a leader in tune with their needs. Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton was seen as such a person.

Thinking about the current NPP administration, it is very clear that they don't have a clue as to how to tackle the many issues bedevilling the economy. There are many things that frustrate me, and other Ghanaians, about how the nation is being managed but nothing frustrates me more than not getting the simple things right. There is a clear lack of vision in regards to managing our scarce financial resources, to put it mildly. A simple look at our political and economic system reveals huge wastage which if eliminated could provide us greater capacity to do a few more things. Given our unfortunate situation of managing unlimited needs with limited resources, you would have thought that a government 'overflowing' with economists and graduates from other financial disciplines would have made tackling our penchant for wasteful practices a top priority. Alas, we have no such luck.

In a 2004 article, Funding Our Development: Time to Turn to the Diaspora, I proposed an annual voluntary contribution by those of us resident abroad that could be utilised for specified projects in Ghana. I received a huge amount of feedback. A common theme that ran through most of the responses was the need for the government to first eliminate waste in the system to increase its capacity to fund projects before looking for assistance from citizens abroad. The more I thought about the idea, the more I agreed with the sentiment. I have come to realise that whiles external funding was still needed, it was absolutely essential to eliminate waste. So, I have endeavoured to use just two examples to illustrate just how wasteful this government is.

Official government travel

Nowhere is the staggering level of financial waste more evident than in official government travel overseas. It is all too common to read of government officials travelling to attend little known conferences and events, even in countries where we have diplomatic presence. During his first term, the President was often accused of being addicted to travel. Coming from the opposition parties, I thought it was simply a case of "two legs good, four legs bad". Subsequent events have convinced me there's someone at the Castle whose job it is to scour newspapers, Internet sites etc to sniff events that someone in the government could attend!

This raises one important question: if the President and his Ministers choose to attend all events, why is it necessary to pay people to be Ambassadors and to represent us overseas? We spend millions of dollars each year to send Ambassadors and their families overseas, rent or lease buildings to house them and pay their salaries and allowances. And what do the people of Ghana get in return? We get visa merchants - glorified cashiers, so to speak! The only time you hear of or read about our Ambassadors is when they are invited to some local party or festival. I am yet to read about an Ambassador participating in a high profile conference or reading a speech on behalf of the government..

Often, these government officials travel at least six-deep; meaning you get Ministers, Special Assistants, media people and some hangers-on on such trips. I know the NDC and other opposition parties have had a lot to say about per-diems paid to government officials but the issue is far greater than that. Counting airfares, per diems and incidentals, such travels leave us several thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, out of pocket. And it is not just the monetary cost, it is also the opportunity cost. Money spent on such trips are lost to the economy and would not be available to hire nurses, doctors, teachers, or garbage collectors. It would not be available to purchase vital equipment to save or enhance our lives. Instead, the money is wasted because of politically and economically reckless judgements and wanton disregard for the plight of suffering citizens.

Rubbing shoulders with other world leaders may make the country look good but it would not compensate for the lack of basic needs. It would not eliminate nasty smells and overflowing garbage in Accra. It certainly will not stop the interruptions in electricity supply nor provide ready access to clean water for the citizens. A cancelled trip, for example, may only save us $US15,000 but that could buy generators or medicines for our hospitals.

Bloated bureaucracy

One of the major disappointments is the continuing practise of creating an endless stream of bureaucratic chiefs. This government has been showering ministerial positions like confetti at an end of year office party. It was not too long ago that the NPP was lambasting the NDC government for overloading the economy with a large array of Ministers. Whereas the government now sees merit in a bloated ministry, the citizens of Ghana simply do not agree we need so many cooks. In a subsequent article I would argue that Ghana would be better served by having no more than 12 cabinet-level ministers to handle all the portfolios. For now though the focus is on the financial burden we have been saddled with as a result of the rather top-heavy approach to public administration.

To understand the burden to the economy of the rather large ministry, consider the issue of free petrol to Ministers. I'm reliably informed that each Minister is allocated 2 cars for their duties. If we assume that each car runs on 50 litres of petrol per week, it means we are paying for up to 100 litres of free petrol each week for the Ministers. At 30,000 cedis a gallon (or 6,521 cedis a litre), this means in an average week the people of Ghana pay almost 58 million cedis to cater for free petrol for Ministers. In a year that amounts to 2.98 billion cedis ($US 331,594) and this is just for the Ministers.

I have not included in this little exercise the President, Vice-President, Special Assistants, MPs and the countless aides and spokespersons. That means, whatever the cost arrived at above, you could very easily triple the amount. Remember also that with the President and his Vice, every trip involves a convoy of no less than ten cars, all of which draw free petrol at the public's expense. These people also choose to ride in petrol guzzling SUVs and cars with bigger engine capacities. As petrol is usually bought on credit, you have to factor in the interest payments as well. According to a report the government subsidised petroleum products to the tune of 1.7 trillion cedis ($US 189 million) in 2004 and paid 749 billion cedis ($US 83 million) as interests on TOR debt (Ghanaweb, 12 April 2005). How much was spent on free petrol for current and previous Ministers was not indicated.

This issue is not about Ministers needing the wherewithals to do their work; it is about how big a burden we place on the economy. I have no problem with the notion that Ministers must be given some benefits but there is a big problem with the size of the Ministry and the types of benefits. In addition to free petrol, these people are granted free accommodation, among other things. It is no secret that many Ministers live in government accommodation whiles earning rental income from their own properties. And it is fully sanctioned. That is the sort of waste I'm talking about!

Election Cum Referendum in 2008

Unfortunately in Ghana, it seems our leaders believe the task of reducing waste falls on the shoulders of ordinary workers alone and has nothing to do with them. One of the arguments they use against a drastic increase of the minimum wage is that salary increases must be linked to increased productivity. That is correct on all accounts. What has not been considered however is that productivity can also be increased by eliminating waste. And the task of eliminating waste should start with the government, which should in turn impose strict financial discipline on the beaurocracy.

Clearly, the key lesson of the 1992 US Presidential election was that no matter how respected and loved an incumbent (or government) is, the electorate would almost always look to the bottom line when it comes to making a decision on stewardship. This is definitely a lesson the President and his government should heed because the good people of Ghana are fast running out of patience; they are looking for innovative solutions to problems. He can start by taking steps to eliminate most of the financial waste and devote the saved resources to addressing urgent needs.

The 2008 election, apart from choosing the next president, would also be a referendum on the current incumbent's stewardship. Rawlings is yet to come to terms with the rude shock he was given in 2000. A similar fate could befall the current incumbent and the NPP, unless they heed the cries of well meaning Ghanaians for real fundamental changes to how they do things.