The 2026 Mid-Year Fiscal Policy Review presented by Finance Minister Dr Cassiel Ato Forson has given Ghanaians considerable reason to acknowledge the progress made in stabilising the economy.
Inflation has fallen substantially, economic growth has strengthened, the fiscal position has improved, the cedi has gained relative stability, and the government has demonstrated a measure of commitment to meeting its debt obligations. Ghana has also made significant payments under the Domestic Debt Exchange Programme (DDEP) and, according to the Finance Minister, has paid US$2.1 billion in principal and interest to Eurobond holders since January 2025. The government has further committed to paying the next GH¢10.8 billion DDEP coupon due in August on schedule.
These are not insignificant achievements.
Indeed, The Sikaman Times believes the government’s efforts to restore macroeconomic stability deserve recognition. The country has emerged from a period in which debt distress, high inflation, exchange-rate instability and dwindling confidence threatened the foundations of the economy.
But economic recovery is not merely about producing impressive macroeconomic indicators. It is also about ensuring that those indicators translate into improved economic conditions for households, businesses, workers and investors.
And it is here that some difficult questions arise.
Dr Ato Forson has been emphatic about the need for fiscal discipline.
In his post-budget media engagements, including his interviews on Joy News’ PM Express and Citi Breakfast Show, the Finance Minister argued that Ghana cannot return to the culture of spending beyond its means. He reminded Ghanaians that the country remains bound by fiscal commitments associated with the US$3 billion IMF programme and stressed that the fiscal targets were commitments made by Ghana under that programme.
The Minister has also argued that fiscal discipline must become a national culture, warning that the gains made through economic stabilisation could easily be lost if the country returns to reckless expenditure.
We agree.
But we are of the opinion that fiscal discipline must be applied consistently; not only when the government is dealing with inherited debt obligations or IMF benchmarks, but also when implementing the political commitments it made to voters.
This is where some of the NDC’s flagship campaign promises deserve closer examination.
The issue is not whether the government should implement its promises. It received a mandate to do so. The issue is how those promises are financed, prioritised and sequenced in an economy in which the Finance Minister himself insists that available resources are limited.
Perhaps the most obvious example is the 24-Hour Economy.
The programme was one of the NDC’s defining campaign propositions. Yet, when the Finance Minister presented the Mid-Year Fiscal Policy Review, the flagship policy received no substantive treatment in his speech.
That omission was conspicuous, particularly because the programme had been repeatedly presented to Ghanaians as a central pillar of the government’s economic transformation agenda.
The Deputy Finance Minister, Thomas Nyarko Ampem, has since explained that the 24-Hour Economy remains on course and that details are contained in the accompanying budget documents, even though Dr Forson did not highlight it in his speech.
That clarification is welcome. But it also raises a broader fiscal question.
If government is determined to maintain strict expenditure controls, how much will the full implementation of the 24-Hour Economy eventually cost the taxpayer? And at what point does the government intend to make those costs, expected returns and financing arrangements sufficiently transparent?
More importantly, does Ghana need to build entirely new physical infrastructure to achieve a 24-hour economy?
We do not think so.
The essence of a 24-hour economy is productive activity occurring across extended shifts. Government could therefore have focused first on policy incentives, tax measures, electricity reliability, transport systems, security, digital infrastructure, credit access and regulatory reforms that encourage existing factories, businesses, markets and service providers to operate multiple shifts.
Such an approach could have reduced the immediate demand for large public expenditure while allowing the private sector to carry a greater share of the investment burden.
That, in our view, would have been a more fiscally disciplined way of delivering the same policy objective.
The same question applies to the Women’s Development Bank.
Government has announced that GH¢400 million has been deposited with the Bank of Ghana as initial capital for the proposed institution, which has been incorporated as WDB Ghana Limited.
There is a legitimate policy case for improving women’s access to finance. But establishing a new financial institution should not automatically be the first answer.
Government could have explored a wholesale financing facility through existing, well-regulated banks, savings and loans companies and other licensed financial institutions, with strict eligibility criteria and government-backed credit guarantees for women-owned businesses.
Such a model could potentially have delivered credit to women entrepreneurs faster, while reducing the cost of establishing and operating another state-backed financial institution.
This is not an argument against the Women’s Development Bank. It is an argument for asking whether the most fiscally prudent route to achieving the objective is necessarily the creation of a new institution.
The government’s free sanitary pad programme similarly has an undeniably commendable social objective.
The programme seeks to address period poverty and improve school attendance among girls. Government has allocated GH¢292 million for the programme in 2026, while procurement processes for the supply of sanitary pads to schools have been underway.
But again, fiscal prudence requires that we look beyond the attractiveness of the policy objective to the sustainability of the delivery mechanism.
Rather than relying predominantly on large-scale government procurement and distribution, government could have considered reducing taxes and other costs associated with sanitary products, supporting local manufacturers, providing targeted vouchers to vulnerable girls and using schools and community health structures to identify beneficiaries.
That could have helped create a more sustainable ecosystem in which the private sector produces affordable sanitary products while government focuses its limited resources on those who genuinely cannot afford them.
The objective would remain intact, but the fiscal burden could potentially be reduced.
The Mid-Year Review announced a US$300 million World Bank-supported education programme involving 210 major infrastructure interventions, including new secondary schools, rehabilitation of existing schools and upgrades to school categories.
We welcome investment in education. We also welcome the objective of eliminating the double-track system and expanding STEM and technical education.
But Ghana’s history of abandoned and incomplete projects should compel every government to be much more selective.
The Sikaman Times is of the considered view that completion should, wherever economically and technically feasible, precede expansion.
If there are existing schools, hospitals, roads, markets, water systems and other public projects that can be completed with relatively modest additional expenditure, it makes little fiscal sense to leave them unfinished while committing scarce resources to entirely new projects.
Ghana’s macroeconomic numbers are improving, but many businesses and individuals continue to complain that the improvement is not sufficiently reflected in their daily economic experience.
A cursory analysis of comments on the Finance Minister’s Facebook page following his post of a chart highlighting the decline in inflation revealed widespread dissatisfaction, with many respondents questioning why the sharp fall in inflation from 23.8% in December 2024 to 5.3% in June 2026 had not translated into a noticeable improvement in their economic circumstances.
The government can point to falling inflation and improved fiscal indicators. That is valid.
But a contractor who has completed a government project and remains unpaid does not experience the economy through the inflation rate alone.
Neither does a cocoa farmer waiting for legitimate payments, or a depositor whose savings are trapped in a licensed specialised deposit-taking institution facing liquidity problems.
The government must therefore ask whether some of the resources being committed to fulfilling campaign pledges could have produced a greater immediate economic multiplier if directed towards legitimate outstanding obligations.
Paying verified road contractors, settling legitimate obligations to cocoa farmers, addressing the claims of depositors who placed their money with recognised and duly licensed specialised deposit-taking institutions, and supporting viable but illiquid financial institutions including through restructuring or consolidation where necessary could inject money directly into the economy.
These are not necessarily politically glamorous expenditures. But they can be economically transformative.
A contractor who receives a legitimate payment can pay workers, suppliers, banks and taxes. A cocoa farmer who receives money can buy inputs, pay school fees and support local businesses. A depositor who recovers legitimate savings can restore household consumption or reinvest in a business.
This portal believes the government faces a difficult but manageable balancing act.
It cannot abandon the campaign promises on which it sought and received a mandate. But neither should every campaign promise become an automatic claim on the public purse regardless of Ghana’s fiscal circumstances.
The solution is prioritisation.
The government should rank its promises according to economic impact, social necessity, fiscal cost and speed of returns.
Policies that can be achieved through regulation, incentives, partnerships or the use of existing institutions should not necessarily require the creation of new government-funded structures.
Where infrastructure is required, existing facilities should be assessed before new ones are constructed.
Where government must spend, expenditure should first target projects and obligations with the greatest multiplier effect.
And where public money has to be committed, Ghanaians deserve clear information about the total cost, expected benefits, financing source, implementation timetable and measurable outcomes.
That is what fiscal discipline should mean. It should not simply mean spending less. It should mean spending better.
Dr Forson deserves credit for his efforts towards stabilising Ghana’s economy and for the government’s commitment to meeting its debt obligations. The improvement in macroeconomic indicators and the effort to rebuild Ghana’s credibility with investors should not be diminished by partisan politics.
But neither should macroeconomic success become an excuse for failing to interrogate the allocation of scarce public resources.
The Finance Minister is right that Ghana cannot afford to return to the reckless spending that contributed to the country’s economic crisis.
But the same principle must apply to ‘politically attractive’ programmes, including those introduced by the current administration.
The Sikaman Times is therefore of the considered view that the true test of Ato Forson’s fiscal discipline is not simply whether Ghana meets an IMF benchmark or records another favourable macroeconomic indicator. It is whether the government can maintain those gains while making difficult choices about which promises to fund, which to phase, which to redesign and which to achieve through the private sector rather than the public purse.
The ultimate measure of success will be an economy in which inflation is low, debt is sustainable, public finances are credible, businesses have liquidity and ordinary Ghanaians can actually feel the recovery.
Stability is important. But stability that does not translate into opportunity and improved living standards will eventually be judged incomplete.
DISCLAIMER: The views, comments, and contributions made by readers or contributors on this website do not necessarily represent the position or views of The Sikaman Times. The Sikaman Times will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements made by readers or contributors on this website.
