African Liberators Economic Institute (ALEI) Budget Oversight Review
Title: Assessing the Tenability of the GH¢2.7 Billion Allocation to the Office of the President: ALEI’s Analysis of Budget Realignment and Public Financial Communication
As part of ALEI’s commitment to enhancing transparency, fiscal accountability, and evidence-based policymaking in Africa, we have conducted a rigorous review of the 2025 budget controversy involving the GH¢2.7 billion allocation to the Office of Government Machinery (OGM). Our analysis specifically evaluates the explanation offered by the Minister of State in charge of Government Communication, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, within the context of public sector budgeting practices, communication strategy, and institutional credibility.
Our assessment is anchored on three core analytical pillars:
1. Budgetary and Administrative Consistency
Government Position:
Minister Felix Kwakye Ofosu explained that the GH¢2.7 billion initially allocated to OGM was not an exclusive allocation to the Presidency. Rather, it included compensation for staff who had been previously under ministries that were dissolved following President Mahama’s reduction of ministries from 30 to 23. Specifically, staff from defunct ministries such as Information and National Security were temporarily budgeted under OGM as part of the realignment process.
ALEI Analysis:
This explanation is administratively consistent with standard public finance procedures. It is a well-established practice in public administration to temporarily reassign budgetary responsibilities during structural adjustments.
The 2025 Appropriations Bill validates this claim. A significant portion of the original GH¢2.7 billion—amounting to GH¢2.3 billion—was subsequently moved under the Ministry of Interior’s National Security and Safety Management allocation, which now covers operations formerly under the National Security Secretariat and Research Department.
The revised OGM compensation allocation now stands at GH¢362 million, closely mirroring the GH¢326 million allocated in 2024. This suggests a technical reclassification rather than excessive new spending.
ALEI Conclusion:
From a technical standpoint, the explanation holds. The reallocation reflects accepted budgetary practices during administrative restructuring and does not, in itself, indicate financial impropriety.
2. Transparency and Initial Communication Breakdown
Identified Issue:
The initial presentation of the GH¢2.7 billion allocation, absent clear explanations or annotations, triggered significant public backlash and suspicions of budgetary inflation or executive bloat.
ALEI Analysis:
The absence of preemptive disclosure regarding the inclusion of compensation for staff from collapsed ministries constitutes a significant communication failure. Effective fiscal transparency requires that stakeholders—including parliamentarians and civil society—be adequately informed of such changes.
The explanation by the Minister was issued only after public scrutiny, which characterizes a reactive rather than proactive approach to accountability.
Had the government included explanatory footnotes or held stakeholder briefings during the initial budget presentation, much of the confusion and political controversy could have been avoided.
ALEI Conclusion:
While the technical justification is credible, the communication failure eroded public trust and gave room for misinterpretation. This episode underscores the critical importance of proactive fiscal disclosure.