By Clement Akoloh<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ACCRA, May 3, 2026<\/strong> \u2014 The Bank of Ghana\u2019s 2025 financial results have ignited a sharp three-way debate among policymakers, with government, opposition, and central bank officials offering starkly different interpretations of the reported GHS 15.6 billion loss.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental question: Was the loss the unavoidable cost of stabilising Ghana\u2019s economy, or evidence of policy missteps with broader economic consequences?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n BoG: \u201cA Necessary Cost of Stability\u201d<\/em>*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Presenting the Bank\u2019s 2025 Annual Report on May 1, Governor Dr Johnson Asiama defended the results as the price of restoring macroeconomic stability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Bank attributes the loss primarily to two factors:<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the Bank, these interventions have yielded measurable gains:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Bank also pointed to falling lending rates, from over 30% in 2024 to about 17.7%<\/strong>, with projections toward 15%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On concerns about its balance sheet, the BoG stressed that its negative equity position of GHS 96.3 billion<\/strong> stems largely from the 2022 Domestic Debt Exchange Programme (DDEP), not current operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCentral banks can operate effectively with negative equity. Their authority derives from law, not their balance sheet,\u201d officials maintained.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The opposition New Patriotic Party (Minority Caucus), led on the issue by Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, has rejected the BoG\u2019s framing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At a May 3 press conference, the group argued that the true financial impact<\/em> is significantly higher:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe real operating loss is closer to GHS 34.9 billion. When gold-related transactions are included, total losses could approach GHS 44 billion.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The Minority\u2019s critique rests on three key claims:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Avoidable Policy Costs<\/strong> 2. Wealth Transfer to Banks<\/strong> \u201cThis represents a transfer of public resources to banks at the expense of investment in jobs and social services,\u201d the Minority argued.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n 3. Losses in Gold Transactions<\/strong> Beyond the numbers, the Minority tied the issue to broader economic conditions, citing unemployment concerns and constraints in credit access for businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Majority Caucus, along with officials such as Sammy Gyamfi, has strongly defended the Bank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They argue that the reported losses are largely accounting effects<\/strong>, particularly from currency revaluation, rather than indications of economic mismanagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWhat is being described as a loss is largely the cost of stabilisation,\u201d Majority voices have maintained.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n On the claim of wealth transfer, they counter that improved macroeconomic conditions are already filtering through the system:<\/p>\n\n\n\n They also emphasised that the BoG\u2019s accounts were externally audited and fully disclosed<\/strong>, urging caution against political interference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCentral bank independence is critical. We must avoid politicising its operations.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n In response to concerns about the gold programme, the government has indicated that future interventions will involve cost-sharing arrangements<\/strong> between the BoG and other state entities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The debate ultimately reflects deeper disagreements over policy choices and economic trade-offs:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Minority has already escalated the issue with engagements with the International Monetary Fund as part of Ghana\u2019s ongoing programme reviews.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meanwhile, the government maintains that macroeconomic indicators validate its approach and that stability gains will increasingly translate into improved livelihoods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For many Ghanaians, the debate goes beyond accounting frameworks. The central question remains whether recent macroeconomic gains\u2014lower inflation, a stronger currency, and improved reserves\u2014are translating into tangible improvements in living conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the policy arguments intensify, the real test may lie not in balance sheets, but in the everyday economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Source: parliamentnews360.com<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Bank of Ghana\u2019s 2025 financial results have ignited a sharp three-way debate among policymakers, with government, opposition, and central bank officials offering starkly different interpretations of the reported GHS 15.6 billion loss.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2658,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[51],"tags":[982,1590,1589,1193,1584,193],"class_list":{"0":"post-2657","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-general-news","8":"tag-bank-of-ghana","9":"tag-central-bank","10":"tag-ddep","11":"tag-dr-johnson-asiamah","12":"tag-hon-kojo-oppong-nkrumah","13":"tag-parliament-of-ghana"},"yoast_head":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\n\n\t\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\nMinority: \u201cA Hidden GHS 44 Billion Loss and Wealth Transfer\u201d<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
They argue that the GHS 16.7 billion OMO expenditure resulted from a reversal of earlier liquidity management tools, such as the Dynamic Cash Reserve Ratio, which had allowed banks\u2019 liquidity to be controlled at little or no cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The group alleges that about GHS 14.6 billion in interest payments<\/strong> to commercial banks effectively boosted bank profitability while private sector credit contracted by 13.9% in 2025<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
They also contend that while the BoG recorded losses on gold purchases, the state-linked gold trading entity reported profits, resulting in what they describe as a net fiscal loss<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nMajority: \u201cDon\u2019t Politicise the Central Bank\u201d<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\nThe Core Dispute<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nWhat Lies Ahead<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nThe Bottom Line<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n