33 DAYS TO THE POLLS: FORMER RADIO 1 FM NEWS EDITOR MODOU THOMAS QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT SPENDING, LIVING STANDARDS AND POLITICAL PATRONAGE

Raleigh-based broadcaster and Muyayam Radio founder challenges Gambians to examine nine years of government performance, questioning ministers’ generous allowances, the rising cost of living and the alleged use of NPP resources to benefit a university student.

By Our Editors

With fewer than 33 days remaining before The Gambia’s presidential election, veteran journalist and former Radio 1 FM News Editor Modou Thomas has delivered a sharply critical assessment of President Adama Barrow’s administration, challenging Gambians to consider whether their lives have materially improved after nearly nine years of the present government.

Speaking in a broadcast recorded on 2 November 2026 from Raleigh, North Carolina, United States, Thomas, founder and editor of the diaspora-based digital broadcasting platform Muyayam Radio/TV, questioned the government’s economic record, the privileges enjoyed by senior public officials and what he characterised as troubling political patronage.

His message was directed particularly at ordinary Gambians confronting the daily difficulties of feeding their families, educating their children, paying for transport and meeting the escalating costs of essential commodities.

Rather than concentrating on political personalities and campaign promises, Thomas invited listeners to examine their own circumstances.

Speaking in Wolof, he asked a series of questions that formed the central argument of his broadcast.

“Over the past nine years, up to this very day, has your peace of mind improved? Has your standard of living improved, or has it deteriorated? Have the difficulties you face in everyday life increased, or have they become easier to manage?”

He extended those questions to the welfare of children, the health of families and the general condition of the country.

For Thomas, the assessment of a government’s performance should begin not with political speeches or official ceremonies, but with the conditions prevailing in Gambian households.

THE PRICE OF RICE, PETROL AND EVERYDAY SURVIVAL

Thomas devoted the opening section of his commentary to the economic difficulties facing ordinary citizens.

He repeatedly referred to the price of rice, petrol, education and the condition of roads, presenting these as practical measures by which citizens could judge the government’s performance.

“What is happening to the price of rice? What about petrol? What about education? What about the roads?” he asked.

These questions, he argued, require serious consideration from citizens whose daily experiences provide a direct measure of changing economic conditions.

He encouraged business owners, workers, parents and ordinary households to examine whether their circumstances had improved.

“When you open your shop, when you go about your daily activities, think carefully about your circumstances. Ask yourselves these questions. The answers are simple. You can see them clearly for yourselves.”

His argument was that economic performance cannot be adequately measured through political declarations alone.

The purchasing power of household incomes, the affordability of essential commodities and the ability of parents to educate their children are equally important indicators of public welfare.

UNIVERSITY STUDENT AND ALLEGED NPP VEHICLE: THOMAS QUESTIONS POLITICAL PATRONAGE

One of the mpointed passages in the broadcast concerned a young man whom Thomas identified as Yusupha Yusuf Tunkara, reportedly a student at the University of The Gambia.

Thomas referred to a vehicle allegedly associated with the governing National People’s Party (NPP), raising questions about the relationship between political organisations, students and access to material assistance.

In the translated passage, Thomas referred to the student’s education and financial circumstances before drawing attention to the vehicle.

“You are studying, and yet an NPP vehicle is being used to transport you around.”

The remarks appeared to form part of his broader criticism of political patronage and the distribution of resources to individuals associated with political organisations.

The precise circumstances surrounding the vehicle, its ownership and the student’s relationship with the NPP were not established in the available recording transcript.

Nor did the transcript establish that public funds had been used to purchase, maintain or operate the vehicle.

Nevertheless, Thomas’s comments raise an issue deserving of careful scrutiny: whether political parties and public officials maintain a clear distinction between legitimate political assistance, party resources and government property.

The Daily Observer has not independently verified the allegations concerning Yusuf Tunkara or the vehicle.

MINISTERS’ ALLOWANCES COME UNDER SCRUTINY

Thomas reserved some of his strongest criticism for the financial benefits he alleged were enjoyed by government ministers.

In a detailed examination of salaries and allowances, he claimed that members of the Cabinet received several payments in addition to their basic monthly remuneration.

Editor Thomas named names calling out ministers such as Ebrima Sillah, Ismaila Ceesay and Ahmad Bah, identifying them in a discussion about ministers and government departments. In other words, he exposed their hypocrisies and lies

He alleged that ministers received a household-related payment of approximately D25,000 each month.

“Every month, a minister takes home a substantial amount of money. They receive 25,000 dalasis for their household and family expenses. Twenty-five thousand dalasis. And that is only one benefit.”

Thomas then turned to fuel coupons, official vehicles and security arrangements.

According to his account, government ministers receive fuel allocations for their official transportation and are provided with two vehicles, including a utility vehicle.

He further claimed that ministers enjoyed continuous security protection from personnel drawn from the police, gendarmerie or military.

Such benefits, he argued, should be examined alongside the conditions facing ordinary Gambians.

The issue was not simply whether ministers were entitled to official transportation or security, but whether the overall scale of government expenditure could be justified to citizens experiencing financial hardship.

D4,000 FOR TELEPHONES, D45,000 FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND D15,000 FOR DOMESTIC EXPENSES

Thomas proceeded to list additional allowances which he claimed were available to ministers.

He referred to a telephone allowance of approximately D4,000 and a responsibility allowance amounting to D45,000.

He also claimed that ministers received a domestic allowance of D15,000, which he associated with household arrangements and expenses.

Another payment he identified was a rental allowance, which he placed at approximately D45,000.

The broadcaster’s account of the alleged benefits was extensive.

“They also receive a telephone allowance. An allowance specifically intended to cover their telephone expenses. That amounts to approximately 4,000 dalasis.”

Turning to another payment, he said:

“They receive another benefit called a responsibility allowance. That allowance amounts to 45,000 Gambian dalasis.”

He continued by identifying domestic and rental allowances, claiming that both were separate from the ministers’ ordinary salaries.

These figures represent Thomas’s claims as rendered in the available Wolof transcription. The Daily Observer has not independently confirmed them against an official Cabinet remuneration schedule, budget document or government payroll.

The claims nevertheless raise legitimate questions about transparency in public expenditure.

Where senior public officials receive multiple allowances, the public has an interest in understanding their legal basis, financial value and conditions of payment.

D65,000 BASIC SALARY, BEFORE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

Thomas claimed that the basic monthly salary of a government minister stood at approximately D65,000.

“Their basic salary is 65,000 Gambian dalasis. Sixty-five thousand dalasis. That is only their basic salary.”

He stressed that this amount, according to his account, excluded the various allowances he had already mentioned.

He also criticised additional payments connected with official travel, including per diem allowances paid when ministers travelled away from their regular duty stations.

“And whenever they travel, they are also paid per diem allowances. Even when they travel on official assignments, they receive additional payments.”

The broadcaster’s central complaint concerned what he portrayed as a substantial gap between the financial privileges of senior officials and the circumstances of ordinary citizens.

His figures, if accurate and applicable to the same individual and payment period, would raise questions about the total remuneration attached to Cabinet office.

However, the amounts cannot responsibly be treated as verified salaries or used to calculate definitive ministerial earnings without establishing whether they are monthly payments, conditional benefits, reimbursements or allocations for official duties.

A GOVERNMENT’S RECORD MUST BE MEASURED AGAINST THE LIVES OF ITS PEOPLE

Throughout the intelligible portions of his broadcast, Thomas returned to a recurring theme: the importance of measuring political leadership against everyday economic conditions.

His questions about rice, petrol, education, roads and household welfare were not merely rhetorical flourishes. They formed the basis of his criticism of the administration’s performance.

He appeared to suggest that voters should assess whether the political changes of the past nine years had produced corresponding improvements in their personal circumstances.

His discussion of ministerial allowances also raised the broader issue of public spending priorities.

The provision of salaries, transport, security and allowances to government officials is not inherently improper. Such expenditure may be authorised by law and justified by official responsibilities.

The questions are whether the payments are transparent, proportionate, properly authorised and consistent with the responsible management of public resources.

Thomas’s broadcast challenged listeners to consider those questions within the wider context of economic hardship.

A DIASPORA VOICE ENTERS THE ELECTION DEBATE

Broadcasting from Raleigh, Thomas joins a long tradition of Gambian journalists in the diaspora using independent media platforms to participate in national debates.

As a former Radio 1 FM News Editor and the founder and editor of Muyayam Radio/TV, his commentary combines the perspective of a journalist with that of a Gambian observing political developments from abroad.

His decision to deliver the broadcast in Wolof was also significant.

Explaining his choice of language, Thomas said he wanted more people to understand his message.

The subjects he addressed were familiar to households across the country: food prices, transportation, educational costs, public services and the distribution of government resources.

His criticism of the administration culminated in an appeal for citizens to scrutinise the record of those seeking to govern them.

THE DECEMBER 5 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

The presidential election is scheduled for 5 December 2026, according to the Independent Electoral Commission.

Thomas’s broadcast, recorded on 2 November, came 33 days before polling day, as political parties and presidential hopefuls prepared for the formal nomination process.

The election will provide voters with an opportunity to evaluate competing political programmes, the incumbent administration’s record and proposals for the country’s future.

Thomas’s remarks constitute one contribution to that national discussion.

His criticism of government expenditure and living standards raises questions that can be tested through official financial records, economic data and public debate.

The claims concerning individual allowances and the alleged NPP-linked vehicle remain unverified and should be distinguished from established facts.

What is unmistakable from the broadcast, however, is Thomas’s insistence that the experiences of ordinary citizens deserve a central place in the election debate.

His message was directed towards the household rather than the political podium, towards the market rather than the campaign rally, and towards the daily burdens borne by Gambians rather than the privileges attached to public office.

As the country approaches another presidential election, those questions form part of the wider discussion about governance, accountability and the economic direction of The Gambia.

The Daily Observer Gambia will continue examining claims about public expenditure, political patronage and living standards as part of its election coverage.

The post 33 DAYS TO THE POLLS: FORMER RADIO 1 FM NEWS EDITOR MODOU THOMAS QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT SPENDING, LIVING STANDARDS AND POLITICAL PATRONAGE appeared first on Daily Observer Gambia .