Ghanaians
saw four of the main contenders vying for the presidency at a national debate
last night on national television. It was the second real presidential debate
since the country’s return to constitutional rule in 1992.
Ghanaians
go the polls to elect a president and parliamentarians on December 7, 2012. The
three big issues of the 2012 election are the economy, jobs and education. But
the first of the three 2012 debates focused on the economy, social sector and
private sector development/industrialization.
Although the organizers initially
listed foreign policy, it never really was on the menu last night.
Tuesday’s
debaters were the care-take president John Mahama of the NDC, Dr Abu Forster of
the CPP, the PNC’s Hassan Ayariga and Nana Addo of the NPP.
Here
is my take on how the candidates faired in the first debate.
Abu
Sakara’s delivery was brilliant: articulate and largely level-headed. He
attacked, especially the president, without coming across as angry, overly
ambitious or even worse, presumptuous. He brought his superior intelligence to the
table. He reframed ‘problematic’ questions
intelligently without saying so before answering them. I was only shocked at
his wild take on the history of the CPP as a pro-private sector party. I guess
he was only trying to distance himself from the statism of the past.
Nana
Addo obviously was on the attack half of the time and that may have excited many,
particularly the NPP base. Did it work? May be yes, may be no. Seriously, I am
not so sure how that will play on the minds of undecided voters.
I
thought Nana’s framing of the big picture –
move GH out of export of raw commodity dependence to a light industrial
manufacturing economy that adds value to provide sustainable jobs and improve
quality of life of the average person – was great. But he seemed to have fallen
short rather badly when it came to filling in the details. The ‘details’ he offered
were either sketchy or contradictory or both. The linkage he tried drawing
between his educational policy/programme to the structural transformation of
the economy lacked depth, if you like, unconvincing.
Generally,
he’s not a fiery person but I was shocked at President Mahama’s sluggish delivery.
Was he thinking he had the presidency already in the bag? His framing of the big
picture was uninspiring at best and quite frankly dubious. Albeit, he later provided
elements that fit well into an economy that is ready to structurally take-off, transform
into a full-fledged middle nation and is willing and capable of competing on
the global stage. Sorry to say, i really Mahama is withering quite a number of potential
voters who thought he was an excellent candidate after Mills.
Thing
about this sort of debates is that substance matter and so does appearance (not
so much looks) but connection to the population/viewers/listeners. Mahama didn’t
sound convincing even with the figures. He didn’t seem like he really wants the
job, that he deserves the job. Sakara was very methodical, clinical and compelling
more than half of the time. Nana Addo’s passion meant he was sometimes very persuasive
if even overly hawkish and downright annoying.
Hassan
Ayariga provided comic relief. But why was his wife covering her face each time it was Ayariga's turn to answer a question? Ayariga clearly has inherited the domestication agenda left behind by Dan
Lartey late leader of the GCPP.
It
was a shame, the PPP’s Paa Kwesi Nduom was not allowed on the debate platform. According
to the organizers, the Ridge-based Institute of Economic Affairs, the platform is
designed for only parties contesting the elections that have at least one MP in
parliament.
Two
more presidential debates and one vice presidential debate are coming up. The first
proper presidential debate was held in 2008. The 2000 and 2004 debates did not
include some major parties.
