Professor of Economics at the University of Ghana, Patrick Asuming, says discussions around the Ghana Gold Board should move away from defensiveness and focus on a full, transparent accounting of both the benefits and costs of the programme.
Speaking on the KeyPoints on TV3, Prof. Assuming was clear that neither he nor other economists have condemned the Gold Board.
Instead, he said the debate is about understanding the true economic value of the initiative and ensuring the country has all the information needed to assess it properly.
“From the onset, there has been no condemnation of the Gold Board,” he stated.
“That needs to be made very clear.”
Prof. Assuming explained that economists assess policies using broader frameworks that go beyond surface-level figures.
This, he said, can sometimes be mistaken for hostility or opposition.
“Economists have ways of counting that tend to be more extensive than other people’s,” he noted.
“So when commentary is made, it shouldn’t automatically be interpreted as an attack.”
According to him, public scrutiny of state institutions should be expected and welcomed, especially when national resources are involved.
“This is for the country of Ghana,” he said.
“When institutions of state are doing things and people comment, it’s not necessarily an attack.”
Prof. Assuming observed what he described as a shift in tone from earlier public statements by the Gold Board, noting that recent explanations appear less confrontational and more open to acknowledging losses.
“The earlier statement came across as defiant,” he said.
“But now the position seems to be that yes, there are losses and the benefits outweigh the costs. That is a point of view.”
However, he stressed that such claims by Ghana Gold Board must be backed by comprehensive accounting.
By Christabel Success Treve
