News Headlines
Home » Headlines » Akufo-Addo would have performed better than Mahama – Blay

Akufo-Addo would have performed better than Mahama – Blay

Source: radioxyzonline.com

Freddie-Blay

Freddie-Blay

A former first Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Freddie Blay says Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo would have performed better as president than President John Mahama has done in the last eight months.

According to the former Member of Parliament, the mismanagement of the economy, increased corruption in the country and the poor handling of vital national issues is testament that President Mahama has already been a failure.

He, however, added that if the Supreme Court rule in favour of the NPP in the election petition case and Nana Addo is declared President on August 29, he would obviously perform better and serve the nation well.

Blay flays Arthur K on ‘all-die-be-die’ condemnation

Freddie Blay, speaking on the XYZ Breakfast show with host Moro Awudu also accused fellow party member Dr. Arthur Kennedy of wallowing in confused logic when he compared General Secretary Kwadwo Owusu Afriyie’s attacks on the Supreme Court to the all-die-be-die mantra of the party’s 2012 Flagbearer, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.

Dr. Arthur Kennedy appealed to such comparison to parry off calls by another party stalwart, Dr. Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe for Owusu Afriyie’s resignation after the latter’s criminal contempt debacle at the Supreme Court.

According to him, asking Sir John, as Owusu Afriyie is popularly known, to resign over his belligerent comments amounted to using different strokes for different folks.

He questioned the logic and moral uprightness in such a call when, according to him, the Party’s Presidential Candidate in the last general elections, has neither apologised nor been sanctioned similarly for his all-die-be-die mantra, which Dr. Kennedy deemed as an incitement to violence.

Freddie Blay, however, told XYZ Breakfast show on Tuesday that Dr. Kennedy’s arguments as warped.

“If you Arthur Kennedy are convinced that statement was wrong, so be it. That’s your opinion. I don’t think it was wrong,” he asserted.

“Why do you say that the man is violent and we should condemn him and because of that it should be linked to what Sir John said, to the extent that you are saying that we should have condemned him…I don’t see the logic. I think it’s a confused kind of argument and I will disassociate myself from it and I think I will condemn it”.