We dread a situation where the President will not heed the calls for the reversal of certain actions which in our estimation will not inure to the interest of the country.
We have already observed some and wonder intransigence as a feature will play part in the new administration.
This character is repugnant and definitely not inuring to the national interest.
All of us as citizens of this country must come down from the fence and join in the conversation against these trends.
The decision of the President to appoint a Governor of the country’s apex bank could have passed without eyebrows being raised, but for the quality of the persons picked as we pointed out in an earlier discourse.
Ever since the appointment was announced, there have been subtle murmurs of disapproval among Ghanaians, especially players on the bank turf.
The spotlight of the public on the man who caught the President’s attention to head the apex bank is driven by unambiguous factors steeped in competence and integrity.
Nobody can dispute the significance of these attributes in the management of the banking sector in all economic ambiences.
The banking crisis which engulfed the country, an unparalleled fact of history, appears to have taught us nothing, nor our political leaders.
Observers of the sector will recall how the apex bank had to intervene in the matter of banks gradually heading for failed status.
Nothing has been gained in the form of productive lessons for policy makers so we do not head for the same precipice we were saved from plunging into.
There was a period in our not too distant history when the banking sector of the economy was on the precipice ready to take a fatal plunge.
Someone definitely slept on his watch and pushed us to that state. Confidence in the ability of joint stock entities to keep our monies listed dangerously. It was an intangible situation not visible to the uninitiated. Little wonder the situation was hardly comprehended by the ordinary Ghanaian because after all comets were not seen.
We were close to scenes where many sensing danger were going to make a run for their monies in the banks. Explaining the consequences of the aftermath of such a situation is largely known and, therefore, not warranting such an effort.
But for the intervention of the likes of government at the time, the story would have been different from this script.
It does sound preposterous that someone who was tasked with the task of supervising banks could not live up to the expectations of his employers yet now elevated, his terms of reference being beyond the previous ones in the same institution he failed to deliver positive results.
The President knows something we don’t, hence his decision, which has upset many.
We hear the newly installed opposition formation intends to formally inform the International Monetary Fund (IMF) about the anomaly.
Perhaps they should give the President a chance to brood further on the issue.
An action such as the one which prompted this commentary even before the President gets the nod of the not-yet-to-be empanelled Council of State smacks of recklessness. This is a feature whose existence in governance should be frowned upon and fought tooth and nail.