Facing mounting debt and sluggish growth, President John Mahama announced sweeping plans to slash Ghana’s ministerial ranks and streamline government operations, positioning austerity as a cornerstone of his economic revival strategy.
During his February 27 State of the Nation Address, Mahama pledged to cap his administration at 60 ministers—a sharp drop from the 101 appointed during his first term—in a bid to curb bureaucratic bloat and redirect funds toward infrastructure and business-friendly reforms.
The move signals a stark departure from recent precedents. Former President Nana Akufo-Addo’s first-term government ballooned to 126 ministers before trimming to 46 in his second term, drawing public criticism over costs. Mahama framed the cuts as both a fiscal necessity and a moral imperative: “A leaner government isn’t just about saving cedis—it’s about restoring trust. When bureaucracy stifles progress, citizens lose faith,” he told lawmakers, vowing to pair the reductions with stricter anti-corruption measures and a realignment of overlapping ministries.
Analysts suggest the reforms aim to reassure investors spooked by Ghana’s debt crisis, which saw the country default on $28 billion in loans in 2022. By halving ministerial appointments and axing nonessential presidential staff, Mahama hopes to free up millions annually for roads, energy projects, and tax enforcement—a trade-off he argues will stabilize public finances. “Every cedi spent on excess ministers is a cedi stolen from hospitals and highways,” he said.
Yet skepticism lingers. Past Ghanaian leaders have touted similar austerity drives, only to backslide. Mahama’s own first term saw mixed results, with debt levels rising despite growth. Critics also question whether slashing ministries alone can address systemic revenue leaks, including a tax evasion rate estimated at 40% of GDP. “Symbolic cuts won’t fix this,” argued Accra-based economist Nana Ama Boateng. “We need deeper reforms—like digitizing tax collection and auditing state contracts.”
The plan’s success may hinge on Mahama’s ability to navigate political landmines. Reducing ministerial posts risks alienating party allies accustomed to patronage appointments. Meanwhile, unions have warned against conflating “lean government” with public sector wage cuts, which sparked strikes under prior administrations.
For Ghanaians enduring inflation above 25% and a weakening cedi, the promise of fiscal discipline offers cautious hope. Market trader Kwame Asare, 54, voiced a common refrain: “Fewer ministers? Good. But let’s see those savings in my pocket.” As Mahama’s blueprint unfolds, its true test will be whether trimmed bureaucracy translates to tangible gains—or becomes another unmet pledge in Ghana’s turbulent economic saga.
