The recently constructed Ghanaian Presidential Palace.
The Palace is currently in the final stages of construction, and the current President recently announced that he will move in until the new President is elected.
The current presidential residence is a castle that was a former slave trading center. The government felt this was not the proper setting for the post-colonial leadership. According to recent reports construction costs are estimated around 30 million dollars - but it is likely they will be higher upon completion.
In a meeting of the Political Science Student Association on Thursday members discussed some of the issues concerning this government action: Whether building the Palace was a good allocation of limited resources? Also, whether it is proper for the current President to move in (as he plans to do) since he would need to move out three weeks (after the elections)?
The comments among the students really ran the spectrum. The student leader made a point to encourage a non-partisan discussion which was generally respected. As an aside: the room was filled to capacity with approximately 75 to 100 students. Almost all students were men, there were at most 10 women, and two non-Ghanaians, myself included.
There were a few citations to U.S. policies. For instance, one young man said, "In New York there are people who are not fed, but the U.S. government is giving money to banks instead. In Ghana we needed a Presidential Palace, it is up to the people to find food." Although I am not an economist, nor a expert on the U.S. bailout plan, I do not think this was the intended interpretation of the U.S. Treasury's actions. However, it was interesting to learn how other people might perceive U.S. policies.
A few students felt the President is validated in moving into the residence since he went through the effort to build it. Others agreed that now it is built there is nothing that can be done to change it. They added that Ghanaians should take pride in this building as a symbol of the country's progress and development since the colonial era.
There was also a large contingent who felt the building was an excessive expenditure of money that could have been used to help alleviate poverty. There were calls for more money spent in education (particularly on textbooks, and school facilities), and health care (particularly on regional hospitals in the northern regions of Ghana).
Needless to say it was an interesting discussion, and I was glad to be a "fly on the wall."
No comments:
Post a Comment