Politics of Monday, 7 January 2013
Policy Advisor at the Presidency, Dr Sulley Gariba has disagreed, vehemently, with persons who say Monday’s inaugural speech by President John Dramani Mahama was uninspiring, portraying the critics as confused people.
According to Dr Gariba, the ‘four-and-half’ page presentation touched on the most “critical elements that would bind this nation and define its vision”, describing the speech as “very inspiring”.
Though many saw the event as colorful, well organized and well attended, the critics argued that the President lost the opportunity to clearly sell his vision to Ghanaians and his peers from other countries.
A Political Scientist and Senior Fellow with the Institute of Democratic Governance, Kwesi Jonah, was categorical the President’s speech fell short of expectation. For instance, he said nothing was said about the government’s foreign policy.
For NPP’s Nana Fredua Agyemang Ofori Atta, the speech was uninspiring and lacked content.
He also mentioned that the speech lacked foresight, but would not blame the speech writers, saying it was a “collective body” failure spanning over years, “not being inspiring enough and not having a certain understanding of what Ghana really need”.
He said the President dwelt more on construction, turning everything into “cement politics”, and accused President John Dramani Mahama of virtually being silent on what the future holds for children.
But Sulley Gariba told Joy FM's Top Story Monday that he found it difficult associating with them.
He said a review of various inaugural speeches would prove to critics that President John Dramani Mahama did not depart from the global trend, and wondered “whether [if]this is the forum to zero in on specifics”.
Announcing that President Mahama would be delivering his inaugural address to Parliament in a few weeks time to make known his policies, Dr Gariba underscored that most critics do not seem to understand what inaugural speech is.
“I think people are getting confused between an inaugural address and a State of the nation address.”
Nevertheless, he said the President indicated his economic philosophy and where he wants to take the country.
“I wonder what speech they were listening to, they probably had a script in their mind of what the President should address, and the script didn’t come and they concluded that [way]”