Government-Approved Borehole Drive: MCEs Spending Up to GH¢100,000 Per Unit

A fresh wave of borehole construction is quietly spreading across Ghanaian communities, bankrolled by the state and executed through the country's network of Municipal and District Chief Executives. The programme, which has largely operated below the public radar, was brought to light on Monday when a sitting Member of Parliament confirmed its existence and defended its cost structure before a live radio audience.

Vincent Ekow Assafuah, MP for Old Tafo and a former Deputy Minister for Local Government and Rural Development, disclosed on Oyerepa FM that MCEs in the Ashanti Region and other parts of Ghana have been sinking boreholes at an average cost of GH¢100,000 per unit -- all with formal government authorisation.

What the MP Said

Assafuah was unequivocal in his claims, drawing on his ministerial experience to lend credibility to the figures he cited.

"I can confidently disclose that the Asokwa MCE and other MCEs in the Ashanti Region has been drilling boreholes costing an average of GH¢100,000," the Old Tafo MP stated. "Don't forget I have been a Deputy Minister for Local Government and Rural Development before and I know there has been approval for the MCEs to be drilling these bore holes."

The MP was adamant that the initiative was neither arbitrary nor unauthorised. He insisted the necessary bureaucratic clearances had been obtained and that the programme was a coordinated effort to tackle the chronic water access deficit that continues to affect many Ghanaian communities -- particularly in peri-urban and rural areas.

The Asokwa MCE Pushes Back on Figures

The Asokwa Municipal Chief Executive, who was present in the Oyerepa FM studio during the same broadcast, took issue with the GH¢100,000 average figure attributed to his municipality.

According to the MCE, borehole projects in Asokwa municipality have been costing between GH¢80,000 and GH¢90,000 on average -- a range that, while still substantial, falls short of the figure the MP publicised.

The on-air dispute over pricing highlights one of the consistent complications in Ghana's public infrastructure rollout: cost variability across districts. Geological conditions, accessibility of project sites, equipment mobilisation costs, and the prevailing market rates for contractors can all push final figures up or down significantly depending on location.

Water Access Remains a National Priority

The revelation arrives at a moment when Ghana's water sector challenges continue to attract attention from policymakers, development partners, and civil society alike. According to data from the Ghana Water Company Limited and the Community Water and Sanitation Agency, millions of Ghanaians -- particularly those in district capitals and rural communities -- still lack reliable access to clean, treated water.

Boreholes have historically served as a practical stopgap, offering communities a direct and relatively fast source of groundwater. Where borehole water quality is good and maintenance structures are in place, they represent a meaningful improvement over reliance on unprotected wells or seasonal surface water sources.

The involvement of MCEs and DCEs in commissioning such projects is not new. Local government officials have long had a mandate to address infrastructure gaps within their jurisdictions, and water access falls squarely within that brief. What is notable about Assafuah's disclosure is the scale and the apparent nationwide scope of the current exercise.

Questions of Procurement and Oversight

While the MP positioned the programme as properly authorised, the public disclosure raises legitimate questions about procurement processes, oversight mechanisms, and value for money -- questions that Ghanaians and watchdog institutions are right to ask.

• Were the borehole contracts awarded through competitive tendering, or were they sole-sourced?
• Is the GH¢80,000 to GH¢100,000 per borehole cost in line with independent market benchmarks?
• What monitoring is in place to ensure boreholes are functional, properly cased, and fitted with appropriate handpumps or mechanised systems?
• How many boreholes are being sunk in total, and what communities are benefiting?
• Are maintenance funds and local water management committees being established alongside each installation?

These are not hostile questions -- they are the basic due diligence that separates genuine community development from projects that look good on paper but fail in the field. Ghana has seen enough borehole schemes over the decades where infrastructure was installed without adequate plans for sustaining it. Broken handpumps and abandoned boreholes dot the landscape in many districts, a monument to good intentions poorly followed through.

The Cost Argument in Context

A unit cost of GH¢80,000 to GH¢100,000 for a single borehole may strike some as high, but infrastructure professionals working in the sector note that costs in this range are not out of the ordinary in Ghana's current economic environment.

Factors that drive up borehole costs include:

1. Depth of drilling required -- some communities sit atop granite formations that demand significantly more drilling time and equipment wear
2. Transportation of equipment and materials to remote or poorly road-networked communities
3. The current price of steel casing, gravel packs, and cement grout used in lining and sealing boreholes
4. Pump procurement and installation -- including solar-powered pump sets, which carry higher upfront costs but lower long-term operating costs
5. Water quality testing and analysis prior to commissioning

Still, the difference between GH¢80,000 and GH¢100,000 per borehole -- even if both figures are individually justifiable -- is GH¢20,000 per unit. At scale, across dozens or hundreds of communities, that variance adds up to tens of millions of cedis. Getting the figures right, and ensuring they are independently verifiable, matters.

The Broader Picture for Ghana's Infrastructure

The borehole programme, as described by Assafuah, is part of a wider pattern of decentralised infrastructure delivery that successive Ghanaian governments have relied upon to extend services to communities that fall outside the reach of the national water grid.

Ghana's ambitious goal of achieving universal access to safe drinking water remains work in progress. The government's National Water Policy sets out targets for expanding coverage, and the District Assemblies Common Fund has historically been a vehicle for financing exactly the kind of local water infrastructure that MCEs are now deploying.

What Monday's radio disclosure adds to the public record is a rare, frank acknowledgment from an MP with direct ministerial experience that this activity is happening, that it is approved, and that it is costing significant public money. Whether the programme is being tracked, evaluated, and reported in a manner that allows citizens to judge its effectiveness remains, for now, an open question.

Civil society organisations, investigative journalists, and parliamentary oversight committees would be doing Ghana a service by following up -- not to undermine a programme that could genuinely improve lives, but to ensure that the public funds being deployed deliver real, lasting results on the ground.