In a meeting that many ordinary Ethiopians find strikingly out of touch with the nation’s dire realities, the Council of Ministers convened its 46th regular session today. Even as frontline health workers persist in their protest for better working conditions and compensation, the government brazenly pressed onward with sweeping fiscal and policy decisions—measures that critics say mask systemic neglect and further enrich those at the helm of power.
The official statement from the Prosperity Party and the Office of the Prime Minister detailed several key decisions. Among these was the introduction of a mid-year macroeconomic and fiscal framework covering 2018–2022. Ostensibly designed to expand the government’s revenue base and maintain macroeconomic stability, opposition voices argue that the framework is little more than a tax-and-debt strategy that disproportionately displaces the country’s economic burdens onto ordinary citizens. While the government touts unanimous backing inside the ruling party, critics question whether any real consultation took place at all.
A central highlight of today’s session was the discussion of two major international loan agreements. The first agreement secured a $49,550,000 facility from the Arab Bank for African Economic Development to bolster a youth employment initiative linked to agricultural and industrial parks. The second involved a 45,100,000 SDR loan from the World Development Association, earmarked for improving health services for women and girls. In a country where the health system is already gasping under the weight of a protracted strike by its very own health workers, these financial commitments are being met with skepticism. Opposition figures contend that such loans, with their extended payment terms and attached fees, are a questionable antidote to deep-seated health sector woes—a ploy to distract from the regime’s failure to address the immediate demands and sacrifices of its medical professionals.
Another measure up for debate was a new regulation orchestrated by the Ministry of Labor and Skills. This rule, which imposes a service fee on the revenues generated by Ethiopian institutions from overseas services, is being promoted as a path to boost internal income. Critics, however, see it as an onerous revenue grab that risks further alienating workers who already face immense hardships in both domestic and global markets.
The session also featured discussions on two draft legislative instruments: one for Ethiopian Foreign Work Compensation, intended to secure the rights and dignity of Ethiopians employed abroad, and another for a proclamation on plant protection and quarantine, aimed at modernizing Ethiopia’s agricultural import/export controls. While these proposals were unanimously passed in the House of Representatives, detractors argue that they constitute little more than cosmetic reforms—hardly the transformative policies needed when the nation’s own health system teeters on the brink.
By moving forward with these decisions despite the glaring reality of an ongoing health workers strike, the government appears to be prioritizing political theater over substantive solutions. Observers note that while international lenders are lined up to open new avenues for loans, domestic voices crying for better working conditions and genuine healthcare improvements are being ignored. This perceived disconnect has only fanned the fires of public dissent, positioning the current regime as one more interested in statistics and loan agreements than in the welfare of its citizens.
The unfolding controversy raises a host of questions: Will these sweeping economic measures ease the broader structural challenges in Ethiopia or simply serve as another layer of distraction? And how much longer will the government allow critical sectors—especially healthcare—to languish under policies that seem designed more for political maneuvering than real reform?
In the coming weeks, as the repercussions of today’s decisions begin to ripple through the economy, widespread protests and growing discontent may well force a fundamental reexamination of priorities in a nation at a crossroads. The stark contradiction between high-level monetary maneuvers and the on-ground cries for basic dignity in the health sector is a bellwether for the escalating struggle between an out-of-touch regime and a people demanding accountability and tangible change.
