Albert David KAMARA: Sierra Leone Telegraph: 15 September 2026:
President Julius Maada Bio says hi Government needs US$61 million to conduct the 2026 Population and Housing Census. For a country with about 9 million people, this number is shockingly high. It means the census will cost about US$7 per person counted, one of the highest per‑person census costs in West Africa.
When you compare Sierra Leone to other African countries, the difference is disturbing: Ghana with a population around 31 million, spent about US$2.7 per person counted. Kenya with a population around 47 million spent about US$3.8 per person counted.
Sierra Leone, a low‑income country with GDP per capita under US$900, is now flirting with one of the highest per‑capita census costs in the region. This is not statistical planning, this is fiscal acrobatics.
Sierra Leone’s GDP per capita is around US$846 (2025), and agrowing young population. Median age is under 20 years, meaning millions of young people trapped in unemployment or underemployment. High food insecurity and fragile public services, with citizens battling rising prices, weak health systems, and failing schools.
In such a context, a US$61 million census becomes a moral question as much as a technical one: Why is a country that cannot feed, employ, or medically protect its citizens suddenly able to justify a gold‑plated census?. Why is “urgent action” reserved for closing a census financing gap, not for closing the gap between hunger and food, joblessness and work, sickness and care?
The rhetoric of “national development” is being used as a moral shield for a spending plan that looks inflated, misaligned, and disturbingly insulated from the daily suffering of ordinary Sierra Leoneans.
This would be less alarming if Sierra Leone had a clean record on census integrity. It does not. The 2015 census was widely criticised by then SLPP opposition, other parties and civil society for alleged political manipulation of figures.
The 2021 mid‑term census attracted condemnation and scepticism from ECOWAS, the EU, international observers, and domestic civil society, and the public, who raised serious concerns about methodology, inclusiveness, and credibility of the exercise.
In other words, Sierra Leone’s recent censuses have not been neutral in statistical exercises, they have been political battlegrounds, with numbers weaponised to redraw constituencies, re‑engineer representation, and tilt resource allocation.
Against that backdrop, a US$61 million census announced by President Bio, is not just expensive, it is dangerous if it is not built on iron‑clad transparency and independent oversight. You are not just funding data, you may be funding political engineering.
The Government’s narrative is seductively simple, as President Julius Maada Bio emphasized on three issues, (1) “Reliable data is essential for planning”,.(2) “We must urgently close the financing gap.” And (3) “Development partners must accelerate disbursement.”
But the hard logic says this is excessive per‑capita cost. Sierra Leone is paying more per citizen than larger, richer neighbours for the same basic exercise. The biggest gap is pushed onto development partners, allowing the Government to claim commitment while outsourcing responsibility, and blame.
Only about US24 million pledge is reportedly disbursed, despite a known census date. That signals budgetary misalignment and raises questions about internal prioritisation and cash‑flow management. With previous censuses condemned or questioned, asking citizens and donors to bankroll another mega‑exercise without genuine reforms is institutionally reckless.
This is where the intention begins to look less like “data for development” and more like excessive and wasteful spending dressed up as national planning. Deceptive and manipulative framing, using “development” language to mask political and fiscal motives. And undemocratic practice, where citizens are expected to accept opaque budgeting for a process that directly affects representation and resource distribution.
This is a disturbing distortion, because the moral urgency of hunger, unemployment, and collapsing services is being subordinated to the urgency of a politically convenient census. This is not just bad economics; it is bad democratic hygiene.
To read more about this and other stories, click here
https://thesaloneindependentchronicle.com/
Be the first to comment