I PROPOSE SETTING UP OF NLIP FOR ZAMBIA

ON 11 October we featured a theoretical policy which I called the National Leadership Identification Policy (NLIP).

As we continue to give the highlights of the 2013, I revisit the article this week.

In that article which generated a lot of interest I wrote that for quite some time, I had been pondering on how best to tackle the topic and what to include or indeed what to omit, resulting in procrastination.

I said I had dragged my feet on the topic but it had kept on haunting me such that I could not just ignore it.

 

The NLIP, is a set of strategies which should be used in identifying and keeping a pool of credible citizens ready to join the national leadership at any given level, especially in the public service.

Before that Finance minister Alexander Chikwanda was quoted in the media as saying that technocrats or civil servants employed by the government to think are disappointing President Michael Sata.

Mr Chikwanda had said the technocrats who were employed to advise the government were not playing their role.

If the implementers are that vital to the success of the policies then their identification is equally paramount.

This means that my NLIP is important if we are to have a cadre of qualified citizens ready to take up the responsibilities at various levels and in various fields of public service.

By qualified citizens I do not necessary mean people with academic qualifications only but those with holistic qualifications, bearing in mind that some are natural or born-leaders while others are made.

Even those who are not educated there is a role they can play in national development!

I am aware that currently potential public workers are identified and employed by the Public Service Commission and I am sure that this is done as need arises.

With the NLIP, however, I am looking at a scenario where the policy would guide the people responsible on how to come up with a team of qualified people whose details would be saved and whenever need arises it is just a matter of going to the pool and get one name.

Apart from that the policy should be able to guide on how to “fish out” a potential leader from any part of the country and in any field to go and take up the national leadership in the public service.

On this I am not talking about political leaders because I suppose the individual political parties have their own mechanisms of how to identify potential leaders.

As I reflected on this, my mind took me to First Republican President Kenneth Kaunda’s top civil servants and how he could have managed to identify leaders at various levels of the public service.

Glancing at some of the profiles of these former public servants reveals their wide-ranging backgrounds with some of them having been hardly educated but performed extremely well.

Before they were identified they had mere leadership potential in their own light and the identification exposed them to leadership.

Some of them could - prior to their appointments - have been good headmen, teachers, like Dr Kaunda himself, kapasos (chief retainers) or indeed good managers with massive potential for national leadership.

Like an article on the Cornerstone Business Solution website indicates, leadership is a combination of inherited and acquired characteristics.

It states that even if your genes did not make you a ‘natural’ leader you can certainly learn a lot about leadership if you are called upon to lead.

Natural leaders stand out – they are easy to identify.

Identifying those that have the latent potential to become leaders is a much harder process but it’s what every leader has to do when looking for team members to carry the national vision.

I posed a question to various senior citizens I met when preparing this discussion on how Dr Kaunda’s administration managed to identify the potential leadership especially from far-flung areas, and one
common word came out, “mechanism”.

The respondents said the administration had a deliberate mechanism through which potential leaders were identified, most of the time without the candidates knowing it or lobbying.

I am told some potential leaders were followed in their fields, right in their villages while cultivating and picked to go and become leaders like district governors, through the “mechanism”.

“Look at past performance first. Who has been able to define a vision and motivate others to go with it? Who has shown the willingness to take on a challenge and enjoyed accomplishing something noteworthy? This is what leaders do,” partly reads the article by the Cornerstone Business Solution.

Therefore, as a nation we need this mechanism to be able to haul out potential leaders from villages, communities, districts or provinces, companies, churches, markets, name it for national duties.

I am mindful that the challenge now is that there are too many qualified people as compared to those days when only a few people had academic qualification what with only about 100 graduates at Independence.

Therefore, the National Leadership Identification Policy is more imperative now than then because given the high number of “qualified people” it is easy to appoint wrong ones thereby affecting policy
implementation.

For comments/other contributions call: 0955431442, 0977246099 or email: jmuyanwa@gmail.com.

SUBSIDY REMOVAL: 2014 HOTTEST MOVE

THE removal of subsidies on fuel is debatably one of the most  controversial policy measures which the current government has come  with this year.

It is a single move which has remained hot to date, more than six  months down the lane.

 The measure which was accompanied with the reduction in the Farmers  Input Support Programme (FISP) will remain so for a long time to come  because of its impact on lives of people.

Like I stated in this forum on May 8 2013, the move could have been  better handled than it was.

To start with any subsidy on the price of a commodity reflects what  the government wants to achieve at that particular time and,  therefore, it has several opportunity costs.

I indicated then and still indicate that due to the scarcity of funds,  the government will always have to make choices on what to spend the  limited resources on and what to forego.

Wisely or not the subsidy on fuel prices was introduced to mitigate  the effects of the high prices of the commodity in the country.

It followed the realisation of the cardinal role the commodity plays  as the lubricant of the entire economy and therefore the argument  whether it was the right thing to do or not will remain relative and a  matter of policy objective.

In my view the increase in the prices of fuel is among a few changes  which affect the national economy and all citizens including those in  the countryside who may not be able to board any form of motor vehicle  at all.

They are affected through the ripple effects which are quite drastic  and effective.

The same goes with the adjustment in the prices of mealie meal which  ironically affects even the self-catering rural dwellers through the  immediate effects.

The subsidy on fuel is distinctive in that it can be on consumption  and on production at the same time depending on what the subsidised  fuel is used for.

Therefore, whether to continue with the subsidy is neither wrong nor  right, but depends on what the Government wants to achieve at a given  time.

In short, the government was neither wrong nor right in removing it.

I stated that from the detailed justification which came through then  Mines, Energy and Water Development minister Yamfwa Mukanga when  announcing the measure and the subsequent one by President Michael  Sata it was clear that the government meant well.


What the government did not do is to prepare the minds of the people.

The responsible ministry should have psyched the people by offering  prior information on how the government had been performing on the  subsidy and some of the challenges.

That did not come from the ministry or ministries responsible until  President Sata told the nation on May 2 that in 2012 alone, the  treasury redirected resources amounting to K754 million from
implementation of other government programmes to the fuel subsidy.

According to State House for the 2013 budget, the Government already  paid K571.5 million in fuel subsidies.

It was estimated that more than K1.1 billion would have been paid in  2013 as subsidies if no adjustment were made to the price build up  and/or the pump price.

Our government had an opportunity to ensure the data resonated well  with the status quo, during the unveiling of the 2014 National Budget  in October this year.

One expected Finance minister Alexander Chikwanda to inform the nation  that so much money was saved following the removal of subsidies on  fuel and the reduction on FISP.

He should have gone a step further - like he did last year on the  Eurobond funds – by telling the nation the areas in which the saved  money would be spent on.

That could have gone miles in helping to bring the issue to rest once  and for all.

On the other hand, however, the removal of subsidy on maize and  fertiliser - justifiably or not - helped to revive the argument on the  need to diversify consumption from nshima to other foodstuffs.

Like I asked then, were Zambians created to survive on only nshima  made from maize meal as staple food? What of other crops like rice,  sweet potatoes, cassava, Irish potatoes, macaroni, finger millet and  sorghum?

The overdependence on maize and its products has amplified the  position of the cereal crop to a political produce.

Yes, the continued dependence on nshima made from maize is not helping  us at both household and national level.

I would say the development provides all of us with an opportunity to  rethink on our feeding choices and come up with alternatives to maize.

I feel even at the peak of the subsidy on its cultivation, maize has  been grown by the local small scale farmers at higher cost given the  low productivity.

Reducing or eradicating the overdependence syndrome on maize would  require the total change of the mindset by the citizenry, including  the farming community.

For that to occur, the Government should play an active role in  marketing and popularising the consumption of other foodstuffs,  including nshima made from other crops.

For comments/other contribution call: 0955 431442, 0977 246099,
0964742506 or e-mail: jmuyanwa@gmail.com or
Ends…

2013 REVIEW STARTS

AS we move towards the end of 2013, we will, in the next number of weeks, look at some of the highlights of the year in terms of new policies.


We will look at the implementation of these policies and how that will possibly affect the economic sector in 2014 and beyond.

 

Without going into details, I have in mind the rebasing of the Kwacha whose upshots affect all Zambian nationals and residents.

 

 

 

Effective January 1, 2013, Zambia has had a new currency.


Then there is the introduction of the Cheque Truncation System (CTS) for all commercial banks whose implementation, however, seems to have not achieved the desired goals.

 

 

 

There are various policy changes which have been effected through Statutory Instruments (SIs) like number 55 of 2013 as well as the now infamous SI 89 on the export of unprocessed minerals.

 

 

 

We will further relook at some of the notable economic achievements in the year and the challenges like the widened budgetary deficit.

 

 

 

The deficit which was initially planned at 4.3 per cent will rise up to 8.5 per cent by December 31 2013.

 

The review will lead us to the 2014 National Budget where I will draw the readers’ attention to some of the measures espoused in the document.

But that will be after looking at some of the efforts the Bank of Zambia has made to address various monetary challenges in the country, including the high lending interest rates.

 

 

 

 

We will further refocus at the newly-launched Mines and Mineral Development Policy and ascertain its relevancy to the sector.

 

 

 

By the time we look at all these issues, we may well be in time to welcome the beginning of 2014 at which instant Policy Analysis may go on recess while we try to look at its relevancy to you, the readers.

 

 

 

Before going full throttle into the 2013 review, however, I want to attend to unfinished business by featuring an abridged mail from a reader on the toll gate fees.

 

 

 

Bwalya Mutale, a CIMA student writes:

 

 

 

“Dear Muyanwa (Mr)

I hope and trust that my mail finds you well.

I write to make a comment on the on-going toll gate debate in Zambia. First and foremost it is agreeable that this toll gate fees are another increase on the tax burden on the ordinary Zambians.

 

The question that begs for an immediate answer is, is the tollgate tax the only and best method to better roads?

 

I leave it to the Zambians to answer but what is my point?

 

My point is that a quick glance at the Zambian budget shows that a staggering 60 per cent or so of the total budget goes to consumption!

 

If I was the minister of finance, my objective should then be to find creative ways to reduce this trend first before going about in burdening the poor Zambians with more tax.

You see no one can ever develop if they eat more than they invest.

Back to the tollgate tax, no one can deny that through this tax government will raise substantial amounts of revenue which could lead to better roads. But you see our governments have a pedigree of long fingers.

 

Tell me, if tomorrow the doctors took to the streets demanding better salaries that our government will not be tempted to deep their fingers in these same funds!

So you see the problem is financial discipline.

Zambia currently ranks amongst the top in the high cost of living category in the region.

 

Of course this is subject to further debate by experts. So if the tollgate tax is implemented that should push the cost of living higher and so will inflation. This then means the recent salary increments will be wiped out by inflationary pressures.

 

This again will contradict the government’s goal of creating a middle class.

“In my concluding the tollgate fees should just be for bigger automobiles especially those trucks exporting copper which is not even properly taxed while the ordinary cargo should be exempted,” ends Mr Mutale.

Further, in response to my question if there is anything positive about the fees, Mr Mutale writes:

“My desire which I believe is shared by many is to see a better Zambia for all.

 

I do in some way agree that certain strategic roads should be tolled especially those going to the mining regions such as Copperbelt and North-western Provinces.

 

However, to be effective these fees should not go to the central treasury but should be left to develop the respective provinces. In other words the revenue should be ring-fenced as provincial or some other criteria but not centralised.

 

This will mean decentralising the road fund into regions so that the money does not come to Lusaka. This will also be in line with government’s policy of decentralisation.

 

For comments/other contributions call: 0955431442, 0977246099 or e-mail: jmuyanwa@gmail.com.

POLICY ANALYSIS: TOLL GATE DEBATE RAGES ON

POLICY ANALYSIS: TOLL GATE DEBATE RAGES ON: LAST week on Policy Analysis we looked at tollgate fees in an article  which was written by a Zambian student, Edwin Hatembo Jr, who is  s...

TOLL GATE DEBATE RAGES ON

LAST week on Policy Analysis we looked at tollgate fees in an article  which was written by a Zambian student, Edwin Hatembo Jr, who is  studying in South Africa.

 Following the article, I received an avalanche of feedbacks from  readers within the country mainly condemning me for what they termed  biased reporting.

 Most of the contributors seemed to have been too emotional to even  observe that the article was not written by me but by a guest writer.  They offloaded all their tirades on a wrong target.
One of such reactions reads:
“James
Your article today understates two reasons why toll roads are  monopolistic within the boundaries of Zambia. 1. There are no  alternative roads north, south, east, or west. 2. All charges will be passed onto consumers. This is tax by the backdoor.

The experience in other countries suggest revenue raised is not spent  on roads when run by the state as funds are diverted to other uses and  roads.

Let's not be naïve. Toll charges at internal points will be bad for  Zambians.  Toll charges at borders have a tenuous link to road  maintenance and more about taxation revenue.

Tolls like subsidies will cost ordinary Zambians. Your analysis is  weak lacking real numbers and international comparisons.

You cannot conclude that qualitative benefits 'far outweigh' without  numbers. We know for example that 60 per cent of tax revenue is spent  on consumption.

The lack of alternative roads weighs against the imposition of tolls. Twenty-six tolls will push up inflation.

“This is biased reporting. Again,” ends the concerned resident who  sent the message through his
Blackberry® SmartPhone on MTN Zambia.

If I was the author of the original article, I would have given this  reader an “A” for churning out a good critic whose only flaws were  prejudice and wrong target.

As they say: “do not kill the messenger for the bad message.” In this  case I was the messenger since the article by Mr Hatembo Jr was  carried on my column.
For two or more other articles, I would be found culpable of some  ethical or other offence if I attempted to reproduce them but all I  can say is that people should argue with the facts or issues not with  the authors.



“I READ with keen interest the article headlined ‘Why Zambia needs  toll gates’ by James Muyanwa in the Times of Zambia of Wednesday  October 30, 2013.

Toll gate in Nigeria

Another reader contributing through a letter to the editor writes:

 Indeed toll gates may be one sustainable way of road infrastructure  improvements.  However, I find it strange that James seems to have taken a political  stand in the way he went on justifying the necessity of toll gates.

 By this, I mean his inclination to political overtones rather than  coming out with a balanced intellectual exposition.

 For all purposes and intent, James ignored the reality that  over-taxation and double taxation seem to be the only available  options for revenue generation each time the Government treasury runs
out of money.

 He allegedly failed to bring out the reasons or justification that the  Government gave to the people of Zambia for introducing the fuel levy  are the same that James is now advancing on the need for toll gate  fees.

 Has the road infrastructure throughout the country been developed to  expectations as advanced by the Government 22 years ago?

The answer is simple road infrastructure development remained  far-fetched as if fuel levy was abandoned many years ago.

 It seems James does not see this to be double taxation in view of the fuel levy.

 He has not told the public what concrete mechanisms and measures have  now been introduced to ensure that every ngwee that is collected from  the toll gate will directly get into the road fund.
Bornwell Siakanomba  Policy development consultant

“LUSAKA” ended the consultant.

 However, like other readers, Mr Siakanomba is aiming at a wrong target  and if he had taken time to relook at the article in question he could  found out that on that day I merely provided a forum for Mr Hatembo Jr  to air his views to which, as a Zambian, he is entitled.

 As a columnist, I am aware, though, that there are always two sides to  any policy, the merits and demerits but if a reader chooses to  champion one side, like Mr Siankanomba and other readers did, they are  entitled to do that.

 My duty, however, as a journalists is to balance the views of the two  opposing parties and I have done just that by using the views of Mr  Siankanomba and others to counter Mr Hatembo Jr’s.

 What is important is that the target and the real issue should not be  lost; otherwise we will be fishing in the dark.

 For comments/other contributions call: 0955431442, 0977246099 or
email: jmuyanwa@gmail.com.