Last Tuesday, the Hon. Minister for Finance presented a statement on the state of the national economy to Parliament. The statement had been much anticipated. Indeed it was scheduled to have been presented the Thursday before and the Minority was very much irked when it was announced that Thursday, that the Minister could not be in the House because he was indisposed.
The contents of the statement itself could be discerned from the minister’s body language. He was more subdued and sober than he was when he read the mid-year review budget of 2001 and the budget statement of this year – 2002. While in both the mid year-review of 2001, and in the budget statement of this year, the minister had been very ebullient about his achievements in restoring macro-economic stability, he was more reticent this time round. The defining statement of the presentation was when the Minister indicated that the budget was on track but facing many challenges. To the expert eye this was surely a sign that all was not well with the economy.
Of course the positive news was that inflation and interest rates are still on the decline and that agricultural production in terms of staples is much better this year as a result of a better rainfall pattern than the previous year. While this should make us happy, it is necessary to keep an eye on the more worrying signs that have shown up in the mid-year review.
The true challenges of managing a developing economy have come in the present year. Greater depreciation in the value of the cedi, higher than programmed domestic borrowing, low rate of external inflows, reduced foreign direct investment, burgeoning Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) debt as a result of decreased political will to adjust price of petroleum products, increasing arrears in statutory payments, burgeoning imports vis a vis stalled export growth and poor growth in revenue collection in real terms, reduced tonnage in cocoa exports. These are some of the challenges that we need to advert our minds to if macro-economic stability is to be sustainable.
There was a shortfall in external inflows. Considering that the budget is still almost 50% funded by external donor inflows, this shortfall affected budgetary targets. The Consultative Group meeting held in Ghana early this year achieved pledges of about $750 million and another $250 million in HIPC debt relief. Programmed inflows have been slow in coming because of the difficulty in meeting agreed benchmarks. Some of these benchmarks include full cost recovery for utility services, full cost recovery for petroleum products, sale of Ghana Commercial Bank, privatization of ECG and TOR, realization of $80 million in divestiture receipts, increase in VAT rate from 12.5% to 15%, among others. Meeting these benchmarks has not been easy. Indeed it is speculated that disagreements on Ghana’s progress in respect of these benchmarks led to a breakdown in negotiations between Ghana and the IMF during the last board meeting held in Washington this summer.
Achieving support of the IMF/World Bank for a country’s programme is critical, because most of the bilateral donors take their cue from the Bretton-Woods institutions. A stalled programme with the IMF often leads to a cessation or slow down in programmed ODA by bilateral donors. If there isn’t a quick movement to remove the obstacles blocking the external donor pipe, Ghana’s economic programme could be further thrown out of synch.
This is part of a global trend following 9/11 where there has been a sharp drop in FDI globally. However, local factors such as excessive red tape, uncertainty about government policy direction in some sectors, and reckless handling of disputes with existing investors, have also contributed in no mean way to the reduced levels of FDI. It would appear that the President’s numerous trips abroad have not
Last Tuesday, the Hon. Minister for Finance presented a statement on the state of the national economy to Parliament. The statement had been much anticipated. Indeed it was scheduled to have been presented the Thursday before and the Minority was very much irked when it was announced that Thursday, that the Minister could not be in the House because he was indisposed.
The contents of the statement itself could be discerned from the minister’s body language. He was more subdued and sober than he was when he read the mid-year review budget of 2001 and the budget statement of this year – 2002. While in both the mid year-review of 2001, and in the budget statement of this year, the minister had been very ebullient about his achievements in restoring macro-economic stability, he was more reticent this time round. The defining statement of the presentation was when the Minister indicated that the budget was on track but facing many challenges. To the expert eye this was surely a sign that all was not well with the economy.
Of course the positive news was that inflation and interest rates are still on the decline and that agricultural production in terms of staples is much better this year as a result of a better rainfall pattern than the previous year. While this should make us happy, it is necessary to keep an eye on the more worrying signs that have shown up in the mid-year review.
The true challenges of managing a developing economy have come in the present year. Greater depreciation in the value of the cedi, higher than programmed domestic borrowing, low rate of external inflows, reduced foreign direct investment, burgeoning Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) debt as a result of decreased political will to adjust price of petroleum products, increasing arrears in statutory payments, burgeoning imports vis a vis stalled export growth and poor growth in revenue collection in real terms, reduced tonnage in cocoa exports. These are some of the challenges that we need to advert our minds to if macro-economic stability is to be sustainable.
There was a shortfall in external inflows. Considering that the budget is still almost 50% funded by external donor inflows, this shortfall affected budgetary targets. The Consultative Group meeting held in Ghana early this year achieved pledges of about $750 million and another $250 million in HIPC debt relief. Programmed inflows have been slow in coming because of the difficulty in meeting agreed benchmarks. Some of these benchmarks include full cost recovery for utility services, full cost recovery for petroleum products, sale of Ghana Commercial Bank, privatization of ECG and TOR, realization of $80 million in divestiture receipts, increase in VAT rate from 12.5% to 15%, among others. Meeting these benchmarks has not been easy. Indeed it is speculated that disagreements on Ghana’s progress in respect of these benchmarks led to a breakdown in negotiations between Ghana and the IMF during the last board meeting held in Washington this summer.
Achieving support of the IMF/World Bank for a country’s programme is critical, because most of the bilateral donors take their cue from the Bretton-Woods institutions. A stalled programme with the IMF often leads to a cessation or slow down in programmed ODA by bilateral donors. If there isn’t a quick movement to remove the obstacles blocking the external donor pipe, Ghana’s economic programme could be further thrown out of synch.
This is part of a global trend following 9/11 where there has been a sharp drop in FDI globally. However, local factors such as excessive red tape, uncertainty about government policy direction in some sectors, and reckless handling of disputes with existing investors, have also contributed in no mean way to the reduced levels of FDI. It would appear that the President’s numerous trips abroad have not