WORLD BANK GRANT TO GHANA – BUT WHAT ABOUT RAIL?
Posted on 13 July 2009
In the first week of July, the World Bank (WB) announced that it had approved a concessionary loan of $US1.2 billion to Ghana, of which $535 million is ready for disbursement this year, after parliament has consented to the deal. Out of the $535 million, $225 million is going to finance the government’s transport sector development programme. “These,” the Accra Chronicle points out, “are the construction of the Tarkwa-Ayamfuri road in the western region, construction of Burma Camp roads and building of a bus terminal for the proposed urban transport development. “Nowhere was it mentioned that rail and water transport are also going to be beneficiaries of this facility, and this is where The Chronicle has a problem with the government. It appears to us that since Dr Kwame Nkrumah left the political scene decades ago, all successive governments have been paying lip service to rail and water transport in the country. Meanwhile, this is the cheapest means of travelling in this modern world. “Canada is more than half the size of Africa and yet it has a network of rail lines connecting all the major cities. Like in the US and European cities, all the cities in Canada have an effective rail system that ensures easy movement of commuters. “Between Helsinki and Stockholm, in Finland and Sweden respectively, they are also making effective use of a water body that is between them. They have a cruise ship that leaves Helsinki at 17:00 and arrives the following morning at Stockholm and vice versa. Another example is the Eurostar railway service between England and France which passes under the English Channel, the water body between England and France. Because this means of transport is cheap and also safe, it is well patronised. “The Chronicle concedes that Ghana is a developing country and cannot therefore compare herself to the countries that we have mentioned, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with a step. Canada, the USA and other countries did not build these infrastructures in just one or two years. It took them a long time to achieve that – so why can’t we also start planning now towards the building of infrastructure for our rail and water transport instead of the current over-concentration on roads? “As we write this article, traffic management in our big towns and cities, especially in Accra and Kumasi, is in a complete mess. The more government constructs roads in these cities, the more people import cars for use on these roads, thus constantly blocking the free flow of traffic. This alone should have sounded a caution to our leaders – that there is a need to shift our attention to rail and water transport – but that might not be what we are thinking about now as a nation. “We have on several occasions suggested in this column that we can use the middle of our dual-carriage roads in the cities to construct rail lines for urban transportation. Looking at the current design, the government can use the middle of the road to construct a rail line from Kasoa in the central region, which has become part of Accra, all the way to La Hospital. Even if we are to use trams on this line, it would help workers to get to their workplaces early, because it would not compete with cars for space. “In a similar vein, we can also encourage the use of ferries from Accra to the north by using the Volta river which passes through Ada. The world is fast changing. Therefore, if we do not come out with the right strategies, we will always be left behind in economic development. To the white man, time is precious, but to us on this side of the world, we do not see anything wrong if the worker wastes so many hours in traffic before getting to his or her place of work. “Building of roads is not a bad idea, but over concentration on that sector to the detriment of other sectors is what we are against. We hope that the policy makers would listen to us and start developing our rail sector too, which would help contribute to the growth of our economy.”
No related posts.























If developing countries want to gain the interest of investors, they must stabilize their governments and break the cycle of payouts, kick-backs, and graft that is rampant in the region.
Next, they must offer these investors details of revenue potentials that exist between metropolitan areas of the country.
Investors are simply that, investors, and they will only bring their billions of dollars with them if a profit can result. If it can be proven that a reasonable profit can be obtained, then you will gain their interest.
However, if every official in every district must receive a payment while providing no value to the investor, these people will not be coming to the region.
Government officials must change their attitude of serving only themselves to that of serving their communities and states. There must be no political class of citizen, there must be a class of person willing to offer service to the community.
This is a very nice post. You know i have never understood why African leaders do not seem to have to foresight that leaders in developed countries have. In a developed country, a policy introduced in one administration is carried forward to the next until completed but in Africa if a project is not completed in one term then that is the end of it. Not forgetting all the money invested in that project. Leaders seem only to be interested in leaving their own legacy instead of working together for the common good. And whats with this trying to hold power for life? Some African leaders are too old to rule but they still insist on keeping the presidency.(look at the Ugandan and Zimbabwean presidents). Africa is has a long way to do to achieve any form of development that will compare to the developed countries. Personally i am against this donations to poor countries as it is only promoting socialism
http://kenyantykoon.wordpress.com/