Ghana Must Put National Development Above Party Manifestoes; This is Why !!!

National development must be taken seriously in a lower-middle-income country like Ghana. Development cannot be episodic, partisan, or tied to electoral cycles. It must be continuous, deliberate, and nationally owned.

Since 1992, Ghana has practiced democratic governance with notable success. The Fourth Republic has witnessed more than five peaceful political transitions, a record that places Ghana among Africa’s most stable democracies. Yet despite this democratic success, Ghana continues to struggle with development continuity. The primary reason is clear: political party manifestoes, not national development plans, have become the dominant drivers of governance and public investment.

Democracy Without Development Continuity

Ghana’s political transitions typically occur every eight years. With each transition comes a change in priorities, policy direction, and project focus. As a result, the country records an alarming number of abandoned or stalled projects across multiple sectors.

Examples are visible nationwide: the Saglemi Housing Project, the Komenda Sugar Factory, E-block day senior high schools, various road projects, Agenda 111 hospitals, and several industrial and manufacturing initiatives. Many of these projects were initiated by one government and left incomplete—or completely abandoned—by the next.

This pattern undermines the very logic of governance. Public resources are sunk into projects that never deliver value, while citizens bear the cost through lost opportunities, deteriorating infrastructure, and rising public debt.

Abandoned Projects as a Political Strategy

Ironically, project abandonment often benefits the political class. Incoming governments prefer to pursue projects promised in their own campaign manifestoes rather than complete existing ones. Completion of inherited projects is politically unattractive, as credit may be attributed to the previous administration.

Among actors within Ghana’s two major political parties, a common justification for abandoning ongoing projects is that such projects are perceived as belonging to the opposition. At the same time, when these projects are eventually completed, they are often rebranded or politically appropriated.

This approach reduces national development to political theatre. National cohesion, value for money, and long-term impact become secondary to partisan advantage.

The Missed Opportunity of the NDPC

Ghana already possesses the institution meant to resolve this problem: the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC).

Established under the 1992 Constitution and operational since January 7, 1993, the NDPC was designed to serve as the anchor of Ghana’s development planning. In theory, it should provide continuity, coherence, and strategic direction beyond electoral cycles.

In practice, however, the NDPC has exercised limited influence over national development outcomes.

Changes in political leadership repeatedly alter the direction and priorities of the Commission. At one point, the NDPC is tasked with producing a 40-year development plan; at another, it shifts to a 10-year framework. None of these plans survives beyond the lifespan of the government that initiated it. Since no government in the Fourth Republic has exceeded eight years in office, long-term plans rarely reach maturity.

More importantly, NDPC frameworks often emerge as extensions of ruling party manifestoes rather than as independent expressions of national development needs. This alignment makes continuity nearly impossible once power changes hands.

Rethinking Development: A Bipartisan National Plan

If Ghana is serious about development—and about catching up with countries such as Vietnam and Singapore, which gained independence after Ghana but are significantly more developed—then a fundamental shift is required.
Ghana must end the practice of allowing political party manifestoes to determine national development direction.

Instead, the country should adopt a 40–50 year bipartisan National Development Plan.

This plan should:

• be developed with input from all political parties,
• consolidate the ideas that typically feed into party manifestoes,
• serve as the single authoritative framework for national development regardless of which party is in power.

Once adopted, this plan must be backed by a strict legal framework that prevents governments from deviating from it arbitrarily.

Making Development Understandable and Accountable

For this approach to succeed, the national development plan must be:

• sector-wide, covering every area of the Ghanaian economy,
• tailored to Ghana’s socio-cultural realities,
• written in clear, accessible language.

When citizens understand development priorities, they can demand accountability. One reason policy failure persists in Ghana—and across Africa—is that policies are often opaque, technical, and poorly communicated. Public education and clarity are essential to citizen ownership.

Conclusion

Ghana’s development challenge is no longer about ideas or institutions. It is about political will and structural discipline.

Ending the dominance of party manifestoes over national development and replacing it with a bipartisan, legally binding National Development Plan is not radical—it is necessary.

If Ghana truly intends to develop, it must treat development as a national project, not a partisan one.