One of the biggest obstacles to Ghana’s long-term progress is not always corruption, nor a lack of ideas nor even inadequate resources.
It is something far more subtle, yet far more damaging: the absence of policy continuity. For more than three decades under the Fourth Republic, Ghana has developed a troubling habit: every new government arrives with its own projects and priorities while many existing initiatives from previous administrations are abandoned, renamed or left incomplete. The result is a national development journey that repeatedly resets itself every eight years.
Also Read
This “start–stop” pattern has inflicted enormous costs on the country. Roads remain unfinished for decades. Hospitals, factories and schools lie idle for want of political attention. Major national programmes stall between elections and carefully drafted policies are shelved simply because a different party initiated them. Investors grow cautious, public confidence drops and institutions lose the momentum required to deliver sustainable development.
As Ghana begins a serious national conversation about reforming its governance system, especially through a proposed Hybrid Parliamentary Model, the question of policy continuity must be moved from the margins to the centre of our debate. Without strong continuity mechanisms, no political system can guarantee long-term national progress.
Policy continuity at its core means that Ghana’s development direction must not change abruptly depending on who wins an election. It means that national priorities such as education reform, industrialisation, water security, road infrastructure, health delivery and economic diversification must remain consistent across administrations. Governments may refine, improve or adjust these strategies but they should never discard them just to score partisan points.
Countries that have achieved rapid progress, including Singapore, South Korea, Botswana, Malaysia and Rwanda did not do so by changing course every election cycle. They succeeded by respecting long-term national plans, insulating development priorities from politics and allowing institutions to build on the work of their predecessors.
Ghana must adopt the same discipline, but within a fully democratic and accountable framework. The proposed Hybrid Parliamentary System provides mechanisms that make this possible.
Central to this is a constitutionally protected National Development Planning Authority (NDPA). Unlike the current NDPC, this strengthened authority would develop 25-year and 50-year national development plans that survive changes in government. These long-range frameworks would guide Ghana’s economic, social and infrastructural transformation regardless of which party is in office. No administration would be able to arbitrarily abandon essential national projects without strong justification and parliamentary oversight.
A second key mechanism is the introduction of a bicameral legislature, where the upper house, the National Cohesion and Regions Council ensure that long-term plans are respected and that national policies reflect the needs of all regions, not just the priorities of a ruling party. This chamber, including regional representatives and traditional leaders will act as a stabilising force, preventing sudden policy reversals and strengthening national unity.
Furthermore, the Hybrid Parliamentary System will introduce shared executive leadership. A Prime Minister, drawn from the majority in Parliament, leads government business and is held accountable daily, while a ceremonial President acts as a constitutional guardian. This shared structure discourages the kind of unilateral executive decisions that often derail continuity.
Under a more proportional electoral system, Ghana would also see more coalition or consensus-based governments. Coalitions naturally encourage cooperation, moderation and longer-term thinking, since no single party can bulldoze its agenda through Parliament. This collaborative environment is ideal for policy continuity.
Above all, Ghana needs a cultural shift where national development is valued more than party slogans. A country cannot build new schools, new highways, new industries and new health systems if each government inherits only a political battlefield rather than a national blueprint.
Without strong continuity mechanisms, Ghana risks remaining trapped in a loop where every election resets our development clock. But with well-designed continuity structures which will be protected by law, supported by institutions and embraced by political leaders, Ghana can finally move from short-term politics to long-term national progress.
As the nation engages in this important dialogue, Ghanaians, especially the youth, who will inherit the consequences must insist that continuity becomes a permanent feature of our governance architecture. A nation that keeps restarting will never reach its destination. A nation that plans boldly for the future and follows through regardless of political winds, will.
Ghana now stands at such a crossroads. The choice before us is whether we want our future to be shaped by political cycles or by a shared national vision that endures beyond them.
The conversation must begin and it must continue until Ghana secures the policy continuity it has long been denied.
