Government deceived public by changing methodology for deficit calculation – Terkper

Former Finance Minister Seth Terkper has said the current government is creating the wrong impression that it is managing the deficit well after changing the calculation methodology.

Mr Terkper said on The Key Points programme on TV3 Saturday, September 26 that he raised issues against the decision to change the methodology when government took the decision because in his view, it was going to mislead Ghanaians to think that the government is doing well.

He noted that the government has underperformed when it comes to management of the economy.

Mr Terkper told host of the programme that “when the current government changed the methodology for calculating deficit, we raised the issues”.

“We have always said that in our fiscal framework all inclusive approach is needed. All inclusive yes, you can have an exceptional expenditure but you show that as part of the deficit .

“The change of the mythology, now we are applying the exceptional expenditure that is the footnote, the banking sector cost, the energy sector cost. Sometimes no provision was made at all for it in the budget.

“So when you change the methodology and you say that your deficit is 4.7 per cent and the IMF has revised the all-inclusive to 7.3 per cent and when you add the items in the footnote, you reach 7.3 per cent, then you confuse the analysis

“Because you give the impression that you are doing so well when in actual fact you are not and that is where we are today.”

Reacting to his comments on the same show, a Deputy Minister of Finance, Kweku Kwarteng, said policies of this government have yielded better results than the previous government.

“In this analysis, we should be focused on the policies and the policy outcomes. Sometimes it gets a bit too partisan when it becomes, Are you better or am I better.

“We should be looking at the policies and then policy outcomes and I am sure the evidence will be clear as to which policy, even if it is under different governments, which policies have delivered us the outcomes we want and why we should continue with those policies.”