0
0 In community after community across Ghana, the complaints sound the same. The roads are dusty in the dry season. They become rivers of mud in the rains. Transport fares rise. Ambulances struggle. Businesses slow down.
Residents point fingers at politicians and say development has failed them. But a deeper investigation across the country’s sixteen regions suggests a harder truth, one many citizens may not want to hear. In many places, the crisis of poor infrastructure may not be driven only by political neglect. It may also be driven by voter expectations. Because in today’s political culture, many voters reward generosity more than development.
Across towns and villages, Members of Parliament and local political leaders are quietly operating under what many would want to call “unwritten social contract.” The expectation is not only leadership. It is personal financial support. Politicians are expected to contribute to funerals. They are expected to support marriage ceremonies. They are expected to attend naming ceremonies. They are expected to pay hospital bills. They are expected to give transport money. They are expected to help individuals secure protocol jobs.
In some communities, a politician who fails to do these things risks being labelled proud, wicked, or disconnected, even if that same politician is actively lobbying for roads, schools, or water systems. The result is a political system where leaders are judged less by kilometres of asphalt and more by the number of envelopes shared.
After travelling through all sixteen regions of the country and nearly 2000 different places, one observation becomes difficult to ignore. Where communities strongly demand public projects, politicians push harder for public projects. Where communities strongly demand personal assistance, politicians focus on personal assistance. The pattern repeats itself with surprising consistency. Politics, in practice, becomes a response to what voters reward. Not what they complain about later.
Election survival is the first rule of political life. A major road project may take three to five years, require ministry approval, budget releases, contractor processes, and national coordination. But donating money at a funeral produces immediate political gratitude. Paying hospital bills secures instant loyalty from a family. Helping one youth secure a job creates a visible supporter.
For a politician facing elections every four years, the choice can become brutally simple, invest in long-term infrastructure that voters may not credit you for, or invest in short-term personal assistance that voters remember on Election Day. Too often, survival wins.
In several constituencies, it is no longer unusual for residents to approach politicians for needs that normally fall within family responsibility. Parents may seek financial help for a child’s illness even when the treatment is affordable. Individuals request business startup money. Others ask for school fees, transport fares, or daily support.
Over time, this transforms the politician from a public policy manager into a community welfare officer. Hours that could be spent chasing road approvals are instead spent attending social events or responding to hundreds of personal calls. The political office becomes a donation centre. And the development agenda shifts into the background.
At first glance, these personal donations look helpful. They solve immediate problems. But collectively, they may be costing communities something far greater. Every political hour spent distributing small cash support is an hour not spent negotiating infrastructure.
Every campaign built on personal generosity weakens the political incentive for large public investment. Every election won through gifts sends a message to the entire political class that, this is what voters value. Repeat it. And so the cycle continues. Broken roads remain. Campaign donations increase. Development speeches multiply. But structural change slows.
Privately, some political observers admit a difficult reality. A candidate who focuses only on policy, infrastructure, and long-term planning while ignoring social donations is often seen as distant from the people. Such candidates risk losing to opponents who show up constantly with financial help and public visibility.
In this environment, even honest leaders feel forced into the same system simply to remain politically alive. The structure itself rewards short-term giving over long-term building.
None of this removes responsibility from political leaders. Corruption, misuse of funds, and broken promises must still be exposed and punished. But democracy is not a one-sided contract. Leaders respond to incentives. And voters create those incentives. If citizens reward funeral donations, politicians will attend funerals. If citizens reward hospital bill payments, politicians will pay hospital bills. If citizens reward road construction above all else, road construction will become the top priority. Political behaviour follows electoral mathematics. Always.
Imagine the next campaign season unfolding differently. Imagine candidates entering communities where the first demand is not: “Honourable, what have you brought for us today?” But instead: “When exactly will this road be completed?” Imagine communities that welcome leaders at ceremonies but do not measure leadership by the size of their donations. Imagine voters who refuse envelopes but insist on infrastructure timelines. Such a shift could redefine national development within a single election cycle. Because the fastest way to change politics is not always to change politicians. Sometimes, it is to change what wins votes.
In the end, the condition of a country’s roads may reveal something deeper than government performance. It may reveal the priorities of its democracy. If voters demand gifts, they may receive gifts. If voters demand development, they are far more likely to receive development.
And until that national choice becomes clear, the mud, the dust, and the broken highways may continue to tell their own silent story. Not only about leadership. But about expectation.
