When President John Dramani Mahama assumed office in January 2025, one of his earliest reforms was the streamlining of government ministries from about thirty to twenty-three. The restructuring was intended to eliminate waste, improve efficiency, and align the machinery of state with urgent national priorities such as economic recovery, energy transition, and digital transformation.
While this bold step was applauded, circumstances over the past months have revealed clear cracks that now make a ministerial reshuffle both realistic and necessary. The first and most compelling reason is the unfortunate passing of two ministers within the year. Their sudden deaths have created leadership gaps in critical portfolios. While deputies and acting ministers have tried to hold the fort, the reality is that no ministry can thrive on part-time attention. Strategic decisions often stall when authority is temporary, and it weakens public confidence in the administration’s ability to respond swiftly. Ghana cannot afford prolonged uncertainty in ministries that directly affect citizens’ daily lives. Second, the reduction of ministries, though efficient on paper, has forced some ministers into double-tasking.
A clear example is where certain portfolios, once run independently, are now merged under one leader. For instance, the Ministry of Works, Housing & Water Resources now handles what used to be separate mandates of housing, sanitation, and water. Similarly, other ministers are stretched across expanded responsibilities that cover vast policy areas. While these leaders may be competent, the scope of their duties risks overstretching them, resulting in slow progress and bottlenecks.
No matter how hardworking, a single minister cannot give equal focus to all these pressing demands at the same time. Third, there are signs of underperformance in some sectors. Citizens are increasingly vocal about erratic power supply despite the establishment of the Ministry of Energy & Green Transition. Complaints about unemployment continue to grow even with ministries dedicated to Labour, Youth Empowerment, and Trade & Agribusiness. Likewise, corruption scandals around ghost payrolls have dented confidence in the government’s promise of reform. A reshuffle would not only remove non-performing ministers but also send a powerful message that accountability and results are non-negotiable.
A reshuffle also creates the opportunity to inject fresh energy into the cabinet. Ghana has a wide pool of technocrats, young professionals, and experienced hands who can bring new ideas into government. Bringing in such people could improve delivery in critical sectors like digitalisation, health, and infrastructure. It would also allow Mahama to balance regional representation and gender inclusiveness more effectively — important considerations in building trust across the nation.
Of course, reshuffles are not without risk; they may interrupt ongoing projects or unsettle bureaucracies. But at this stage, the greater danger lies in maintaining the status quo. Citizens are impatient for results, and leadership must adapt to shifting realities. Mahama has already shown willingness to make tough calls, such as reassigning the National Service Authority’s head earlier this year. Extending that decisiveness to the ministerial level would demonstrate seriousness and responsiveness.
In conclusion, a reshuffle is no longer a matter of politics but of necessity. With two ministerial seats vacant, several ministers overstretched, and others underperforming, Ghana requires a refreshed team that can deliver with urgency. A well-targeted reshuffle would revive confidence, sharpen focus on national priorities, and prove that the Mahama administration is committed to matching promises with real action.
@Berry