TARGETED VS UNIVERSAL SUBSIDY

This article First appeared in Malawi News 1st February 2014.

As campaigning for positions in the impending tripartite elections heats up, some political players have apart from just promising the electorate that they will develop their areas, opted to point at some of what they think are development milestones of their past terms.

As an individual, I have no problems with someone campaigning on the lolani ntchito za manja anga zindichitire umboni slogan. My problem starts when those people start pointing at some things which in my candid opinion are supposed to be the very anti-thesis of development. For instance, while the fertilizer subsidy may have allowed some poor families to access farm inputs, there is literary nothing that we can really point to as being a contribution of the fertilizer subsidy apart from allowing some politicians to play gods in our communities.

Malawians perpetually live from hand to mouth. Despite such massive investment in the fertilizer subsidy, Malawians still trample upon each other fighting for 10 kilogram rations at the ADMARC depots, which hardly have the maize anyway.  Food is still a major campaign issue. It should not come as a surprise though when politicians deliberately create hunger by hoarding maize and then distribute the same maize as a campaign tool to hunger stricken communities.

Questions then have to be asked.  What really went wrong with the fertilizer subsidy. Where did we really miss it. In both definition and intent, the fertilizer subsidy was supposed to be a development tool and yet, nearly ten years from when the program was initiated, the Malawian poor are more disempowered, hopeless and clueless. The Malawian poor has moved from just being poor to being mega poor. All they can do is to simply wait for another  subsidy while as the year progresses they look forward to queuing at the very same ADMARC depots that can barely supply the food despite claiming  have surpluses.

The idea of a farm inputs subsidy program is in itself not a bad idea. Being, a backbone to our country’s development, there is indeed need for the country to help in raising agricultural production by ensuring that the agricultural inputs are not only cheap but also accessible to everyone.

However, it is the mere idea of targeting the beneficiaries that I find knotty.  With the approach that the government chose to pursue, the results of the fertilizer subsidy are hardly surprising.

In my opinion, once development agencies start targeting certain sections of the society in a development initiative that is meant to benefit the entire society, the likelihood of that initiative succeeding is almost nullified. The farm inputs subsidy program therefore had its chances to succeed reduced almost to zero even just after its initial roll out, due to the fact that other key players who would have made the initiative succeed were left out of the whole set up.

This I reckon  is the common mistake that most development institutions make.  Often times, development practitioners have made the mistake of thinking that the poor people they target live as an isolated entity in the community. Due to such a poor perception, those perceived to be rich or ultra rich have been pushed out of the development process as the institutions unliterary want to develop the ultra poor. As in the case of the fertilizer subsidy, the results, have been disastrous. Perhaps this explains why despite the millions of dollars being poured into the country through both the government and the NGOs, there is very little impact on the levels of poverty in the country.

By alienating those who are rich in the community, the poor being targeted are made more vulnerable and exposed to the greed of the society’s rich. The fertilizer subsidy, in as much as it had good intent as a development tool, has fallen prey to the same common development trap that has failed so many projects before it. Consequently, most of the fertilizer and the other inputs supplied have not benefited the intended beneficiary as the rich and the ultra rich have ended up exploiting the vulnerability of the poor and the ultra poor by buying  the very same inputs that were earmarked to help the poor move out of the hunger trap. Eventually the mega rich have continued to absurdly amass wealth while the vulnerable get more vulnerable.

This is why in my view, the universal fertilizer subsidy makes sense.  For instance, everyone who wants fertilizer will have to buy it from the established market which will naturally abolish the advantage that the rich had over the poor.

The system will also ensure that only those who are ready to use the fertilizer can go and buy the same as opposed to the present scenario whereby as all the poor receive the fertilizer regardless of whether they need it or not. With the rich vendor like a vulture already waiting to snatch the fertilizer from the same farmer, the subsidized farm input program has simply been reduced to a quick cash cow with no visible impact on food production in the communities.

The universal fertilizer subsidy will naturally stifle the corruption that is now synonymous with the program. Further, the advantage that the politician has, that allows them to play gods in our communities will also vanish since no person will be required to bow at the feet of any particular politician to increase their chances of receiving the subsidized farm inputs.

Given all the problems that the targeted farm input subsidy program presented  which the universal subsidy promises to eliminate, wouldn’t toying with the universal subsidy make a whole lot of sense?.

THE CURSE OF MALAWI’S MANY POLITICAL PARTIES.

Article first appeared in January 2014, in The Sunday Times

There is no denying that political parties play a very important part in any democratic system. For example political parties offer the voters with options on who to vote for, depending on what principles the parties stand for.

In a normal democratic system, political parties are supposed to develop policies and programs which they are supposed to offer the public to choose from. The policies and programs are supposed to reflect the demands of the general public. The fact that in a society we cannot all have similar demands, provides room for conflicting demands hence necessitating the need for alternative policy positions. This is where political parties become handy in a democracy.

The role of the political party in a democracy can thus not be overlooked.

However, in as much as the political party is important, too many political parties can be harmful to a democracy like ours. In a country where we have so many parties, most of those who do not even have a single policy statement to stand by,  the only role that our many political parties can play is to confuse the electorate and lead to a less favoured candidate to win.

In fact, some of the political parties only exist to divide their opponents vote. This in my opinion is the main reason why we have many political parties mushrooming as we get closer to the elections. It is my opinion that  as a country we need to move fast to protect our interests  by coming up with an enabling legislation to control how we come up with political parties and which parties should be allowed to participate in an election.

In as much as people have a constitutional right to form or join a political grouping of their choice,  it would be important to set a minimum standard as to which parties must be allowed to contest an election. For instance, it would make a lot of sense if MEC would set up a minimum standard on the period that a political party is supposed to exist before it can be allowed to participate in an election. In my view, such a period should not be less than 4 years since the last general election.

Such a standard, would allow MEC to  have a well defined number of players in the next election. This would allow for better planning and reduce resource wastage.

Allowing only the proven and established parties to contest in an election would allow Malawians to vote for credible leaders whose policy positions have been evaluated by the voters over a period of time and not only in a few months.  The current set up where a person can just wake up and form a political party less than five months to an election and be allowed to contest is in my view the greatest blight to Malawi’s democracy.

Voters are given a raw deal, Suddenly MEC has to plan to reach out to more parties than they should have. Suddenly a political party that was supposed to be in the fore front or even expected to win the elections is hit by massive defections to the new and smaller party – Usually defections planned by the rival party to weaken its opposition. And, if that cannot be tactical rigging, what else would be.

Our electoral law needs to be strengthened to allow MEC being a key player in the elections, to flush out opportunism in the electoral process by rejecting those parties which, based on an established criteria have been deemed as having no policy footing. All parties that just mushroom on the eve of the elections must be rejected as distracters and be advised to contest the next election.

Equally, the electoral law must mandate the registrar of political parties to refuse to register any political parties whose policies are framed within an ideology of an existing party.  New political parties  in my view must offer the electorate with alternative policy positions hence there is no need to register a party whose policies do not offer any alternative to the policies that are already in existence.

The many political parties existing in Malawi albeit without ideologies are not an expression of freedom. Neither are they a blessing to Malawian, these parties are a curse that need to be flushed out of the electoral calendar until such a time they tell us what they really stand for.

WHO IS YOUR RUNNING MATE?

Article first appeared in Malawi News

As the 2014 tripartite elections draw closer, calls for the Presidential candidate from various parties to reveal who their running mates are, are getting more louder. As one concerned citizens and one of the voters in next year’s elections, I would like to add my voice to such calls.  It is a fact, that any election is a competition and that different tactics may have to be employed to keep your opponent guessing about your next move. To the political parties and their torch bearers in Malawi, hiding the name of the running mate could be such a tactic.

However, in my opinion, by hiding their running mates, parties put themselves and the nation at a huge disadvantage. For instance, the running mate automatically becomes the vice president in an event that the parties presidential candidate has won. Just like it happened in April 2011, should a president  die or become incapacitated whilst in office the Malawi constitution guarantees that the vice president automatically assumes the presidency. It is because of such a provision that Malawians deserve to know who their potential vice presidents will be. By  not revealing the names of their presidential running mates now, the political parties in Malawi are giving us a raw deal and hoodwinking us into voting for a candidate we may not have wanted simply because we did not have time to scrutinize their credentials.

And yet, the fact that Vice presidents have a 50-50 chance of becoming presidents themselves, must compel us to critically examine those people who have the potential of occupying such offices lest we vote into office Mafias and vagabonds.  The Malawian political parties thus are in my view doing the nation a great disservice and are clearly demonstrating how desperate they are with winning the next elections than giving Malawians credible and transparent leadership. 

One sometimes wonders, what is it that lies in a running mate that he or she must be treated like a joker in some game. It is a pity that political parties believe that by hiding their running mates they are giving themselves a greater chance of going into an election with a stable party. Well and, Granted. Experience however, tells us that such stability is only short lived. If history is to go by, the relationship between the Vice president and the President in Malawi has been a troubled one.

The first Vice President in our democratic dispensation Dr. Justin Malewezi, had to resign from UDF when the fight for leadership with Dr. Muluzi, the political engineer became so intense.  The squabbling was there for all to see and Muluzi could even proudly shout it at his rallies in his famous wapakaliyala sayimba belu” slogan.

Then came Bingu Wa Mutharika, the much touted economic engineer. He too had a very patchy ride with his Vice President Dr. Cassim Chilumpha.  The allegations that Bingu made that Chilumpha was attempting to assassinate him, still hang on the head of Chilumpha up to now.

Well, only Chilumpha, and God knows whether it is really true that he attempted to kill his boss. Chilumpha, may have been imposed on Bingu by Muluzi hence their fall out. Nonetheless, in his second term, Bingu, had a chance to pick his own Vice president who, as is the practice he only revealed during the time they were submitting nomination papers. I am sure no one needs to be reminded of the results.

All the events above, just come in to underscore that no party can achieve stability by hiding their running mates. In fact, by hiding the running mates, the parties are being unpatriotic to Malawians as they place the interests of Malawians at risk. Assuming it is true that Chilumpha had indeed tried to kill Bingu, what sort of instability would have ensured from the same?

What about the destabilizing effect that the sour relationship that Bingu had with his Vice had.  The political squabbling in DPP then, led to the Office of the Vice Present being sidelined and some theories still indicate that some of the governance issues that led donors to withhold their aid then could have been directly linked to the fall out. As if that was not enough, the cat and mouse relationship between the two almost plunged the nation into chaos when Bingu died.

Granted these events, is it imperative that the Malawian must be able to know who their running mates are and do a thorough  analysis on who the potential vice presidents are. Malawians would be able to know whether these people are power hungry, self centred or the get rich quick type of people and be able to make informed choices when voting.

On the other hand, by choosing the running mate faster, the potential president has ample time to study the strengths and the short comings of his potential vice president hence giving the country a better chance of a stable leadership that what we have currently been experiencing.

The stakes in a running mates position, have always been high, but events  during the rule of and after the death of Bingu must teach us all a lesson on how invaluable the running mates are and hence they should not go without being analyzed. Political parties therefore owe the nation a great service of revealing who their running mates are sooner than later for us to ably do our thorough analysis on those people.

Equally, the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) must put in place measures to force the parties to nominate their running mates during their conventions otherwise, Malawians are being given a raw deal.

LESSONS FROM CASH-GATE-

* This article also appeared in The Sunday Times.

There is no doubt that the shooting of  Mphwiyo has generated a lot of interest, fear and anxiety amongst Malawians. If truth be told, what happened and is still happening in this case is something that most of us only thought was only made for the cinema or some Hardly chase thriller. Usually when we hear of shootings, it is about robbery or some trigger happy police officer was strictly following the shoot to kill order but not the Paul Mphwiyo type of shooting.

It thus comes as no surprise that a lot of Malawians and donors are following the issues with keen interest. It is totally understandable that the news continues to dominate Newspaper front pages even after weeks since it happened.  As the news unfolds, there has been numerous theories and counter theories on what exactly led to the shooting.

 One thing though has been consistent: someone, within the government system was involved in some fishy business. And this was not a once off thing, but something that has been happening over a period of time. It is with this in mind that news about  ACB and the fiscal police starting investigations on the civil service struck me.

While Some people have lauded the  institutions for  the investigations, it is my view that these institutions do not deserve any credit for this. Rather, serious questions ought to be asked as regards their efficiency.  Ladies and gentlemen, here are institutions whose primary responsibility is preventing corruption and other financial crimes yet all they do is to wait for the crime to happen and start chasing shadows. Worse still in most cases such cases are lost because by the time they come in the culprit may already have destroyed the key evidence.

Just for information sake, this is not the first time huge amounts have been siphoned off the tax payers purse. Few years ago,  some  people were arrested for being found with over 400 Million Kwacha in their bank accounts. Although arrests were made, the nation is yet to hear the conclusion to that particular case.

 Yet the mere fact that this happened should  to have alerted the ACB, the fiscal police, the auditor general’s office and indeed the accountant general in whose department the said crime was committed, to tighten up the loose ends, open serious and credible investigations on the civil service and not wait for a the Mphwiyo case to start whining.

Surely the mandate of ACB and fiscal police must go beyond prosecuting but also includes preventing corruption and other financial crimes. In any case apart from the deterrence, what else do we benefit for jailing someone who in any case has already stolen our money and drank on all of it? Does it not sound like a forestry officer who stands on the road confiscating charcoal bags in the name of checking deforestation when the tree he was supposed to protect has already been cut. In which case, confiscating the charcoal would in any case not bring the tree back to life.

Frankly, I find most of the institutions that we have set up to check abuse very reactive and thus failing to live up to their mandate. I am sure that had the ACB, the fiscal police, the National audit office taken keen interest in the earlier case I have alluded to above, the Mphwiyo case might not have happened.

Launching numerous investigations now, to me sounds like some waste of more money on top of that which was already stolen. My point being that the fiscal police and the ACB could have done much better by simply being proactive and not wait for some complaint or some shooting to start probing the civil service. Institutions like them need to have the mandate to probe corruption or financial irregularities even where nothing is being suspected. Waiting for the donors or the government to push them to carry out investigations is opening up themselves to undue interference from those directing them to do the same.

In the same spirit, the government needs to strengthen institutions  like ACB, the National Audit Office and FIU. The FIU for example since it has a privilege to access our account information from the banks, need to be given the mandate to investigate and recommend for prosecution suspected cases of financial crimes. It would also of immense benefit to Malawians if these institutions would act in the same way as auditors do. Auditors do not audit an organization just because there is something wrong suspected but they would also audit just to check on levels of compliance to standards within a system.

It may sound expensive and a waste of money yet in my opinion this is the only way through which financial crimes and corruption can be checked. Probing the civil service just because there is a case at hand  is not good enough. When will the ACB and the fiscal police look into the accounts of most of these civil society organizations, when will they check the NGOs. Will they also wait for some high profile financial mismanagement issue to be exposed. Institutions mandated to check abuse must learn to be proactive if we are to make any headway in the fight against corruption and abuse of public funds.

It may be argued that it would be wrong, to check companies or institutions just for the sake of it. Well, in my view, it is also wrong not to  take interest in the operations of various public companies and institutions until when corruption has taken place. Thus, while it is good to launch the numerous probes into the civil service now, a more proactive approach to issues would help us a lot. A stitch in time saves nine so they say!

ON MALAWI’S UNDER-DEVELOPMENT. Part 2.

In July next year, Malawi commemorates 50 years of independence. There has been so many views from different sectors of our society on what has been achieved and what has not. The consensus though has been that what we have achieved is far too little compared to that what we ought have to achieved.

I totally agree with such views.  As we continue moving forward, the need  to reverse the situation and move out of the poverty trap has never been more imperative than it is now. In this article, I would like to contribute to this debate by offering my views on why we are still lagging behind and what could be done to change the present situation.

 I would like to make it clear here that I believe that Malawi is a country which has enormous potential to develop. This potential is both on the human as well as the capital resources front. In my view, what has held us back all this long is our tendency to think in  a socialist mode when the world is moving in a capitalist direction.  By this I mean, the greatest problem affecting Malawi today is its own citizens who expect to get decent services from the government without paying anything.

Think of it this way, In Malawi, 85% of the population are in the rural areas. This leaves just 15% in the urban areas. Looking at the tax structure of the Malawi government, it is clear that that most of the taxes in the country are paid by the fewer people in the urban areas. It is not surprising thus that the tax regime on the Malawian worker is detrimental and does not support the growth of the one being taxed. Taxes in themselves are not a bad thing, but when a few people are forced to carry a heavy load on behalf of many people, then it becomes a serious problem. When a nation in which  only  few pay taxes has a very huge appetite for free things, then we are in an abyss.

In other words, in as much as the government may try to raise the taxable figures for those in formal employment, the country would still not be able to generate enough resources to adequately support all of us. That is why in a country as poor as ours, it is illogical to have almost all services being offered for free. One wonders, is it really justifiable for the government to offer a completely  free primary education? Is it really plausible for us to have a completely free health care system? Why should Malawians expect to watch free TV and expect a High Definition (HD) pictures  when they are not willing to pay for a TV license. It is  a fact that most of the money that government uses is in the areas of Agriculture, education and health. Given that these services are all offered mostly for free, it is not surprising that the services are often poor  if that is not an understatement.

In my opinion, the country needs to reflect seriously on what services it can offer for free and those which require to be paid for. We must first detach politics from development and realize that  it is insanity for us to expect to get all the services from the government free of charge. Such a sick mentality is what is crippling the services of institutions like the University of Malawi ( whose students would like to get payouts in form of allowances that exceed the fees they pay and expect the institution to operate normally) Admarc and most water boards.  As citizens living in this country, we must always take it upon ourselves to think of better ways in which we can help our services to be operating in the way that we desire.

By asking the populace to be paying a little something when they get hospital services or education, the government, would not be asking too much from its citizens as that would allow the citizen to be able to demand quality services from those who are supposed to provide them. Unless we move from being a nation which expect everything to be free and play our part in the nations development, we must expect that nothing, will change in the next 50 years.

Lessons that are never Learnt

Dear Freddo!

Thank you for reminding us of the lessons that are never learnt. I liked the entry.  Allow me to comment on the governments idea to send young men to South Korea for work as one piece of evidence that we never learn. After the Theba hassles, and we hear some people still have not received their money, the government is at it again exporting labor-now to the far east. It appears the only product that this country is able to export is cheap labor!

Is idea of sending our youths to do ganyu in South Korea not another Theba. Why is the government not  taking  time to consult widely on the idea. What is there to justify the speed being taken on the initiative. The government, if we are to take the words of Moses Kunkuyu, thinks it has hit a jackpot as the initiative provides answers to the problem of joblessness.

True!, Theba, is a creative way of creating employment, but , who benefits? Is it not the host country. If we may go back into history, how did Malawi benefit by exporting labor to South Africa? I know our youth will rush to grab the opportunity without even considering the terms of the employment. After all it is work in a foreign country. Fred, I have in mind few examples of our young men who went outside the country to play professional football. They ended up signing contracts that were drafted in a language they did not understand. Of course they later on terminated the contracts but they already had lost a lot. I was of the view, that government needed to invest in training the youth on such aspects before letting our youth in the land of the unknown. That is if they still think exporting labor is a good idea. I know with the arrogance that this government seems to have, nothing, or no one would convince them to abandon the idea.

Why is the government taking exporting labor as a success. Is this not pulling the country down. Does the country not need the same youth to help boost our export base. Why can the government not concentrate on initiaves such as OVOP and set up as many rural factories as possible to help these young men find a meaningful way of earning a living within the country. By exporting our work force, are we not sacrificing our country’s development at the altar of cheap political milage?

Is it not a fact accepted everywhere that the youth are the heart of any meaningful and sustainable development. Is it also not true that this country needs the youth if we are to realize the dream of transforming this country from a predominantly importing country to an exporter. Does this government share this vision? Does it have a vision anyway? How on earth do you grow an economy when you are exporting your labor?

Is the PP government simply trying to counter Atupele’s claim that he will create 500,000 jobs once voted in. The way the government is acting on this, has every hall mark of panic. And such rushed affairs, often end up in tears. We all know that this government, and the governments before it have always failed to create jobs for Malawians, but exporting labour is not one of the ways for creating employment. Kwa eni Kulibe Mkuwe, Kumadyetsa nthanga dzungu nulifuna. The government must take heed of this adage, and try to develop the country’s youth within the country.

Even if the exported youth were to be sending dollars to Malawi, how much difference would those few dollars make to our forex situation.

May the government, take its time and consult widely before going ahead implementing this iniative.

REVISITING THE 2010, LOCAL COURTS BILL

Around this period in 2010, a new law that sought to criminalize fouling of the air was dominating public debates. Whether one was on face book, in the minibus or even at a  pub, talk was about whether the law wanted to ban farting in public or it had other intentions.

According to the then justice minister, Dr George Chaponda says the  bill would have criminalized flatulence to promote "public decency".

"Just go to the toilet when you feel like farting," he was quoted by the  BBC as having told local radio.

Of course Chaponda’s interpretation was directly contradicted by another senior government official, the Solicitor General Anthony Kamanga, who said that the reference to "fouling the air" meant pollution.

"How any reasonable or sensible person can construe the provision to criminalising farting in public is beyond me," he said, adding that the prohibition contained in the new law has been in place since 1929.

The Local Courts Bill, which contained the controversial decree read: "Any person who vitiates the atmosphere in any place so as to make it noxious to the public to the health of persons in general dwelling or carrying on business in the neighbourhood or passing along a public way shall be guilty of a misdemeanour."

The local courts bill did not make it into the laws of Malawi due to the stiff opposition from Malawians. However, events in most cities and towns, in my opinion suggest that taken from Anthony Kamanga’s point of view, the law could really have been very useful in guaranteeing public health.

Just recently, residents from a neighborhood in Likuni, were angry with one business person who they accused of fouling their air through their piggery business. The stench from the pig Kraals, was unbearable for the neighbours. However, this is just a small scale economic activity, there are other bigger companies who are also fouling our air.

Take for example, the many companies who are involved in production in our country. Think of how they manage their waste. For those who have recently travelled the M1 road, between Kanengo and Lumbadzi, you would not miss the stench that is coming from one company involved in the production of livestock feeds.

If that is not enough,  take the Salima road, from Kanengo (Salima turn Off), before you reach Mchezi, another company is producing fertilizers while other companies dump their tobacco waste close by. The stench that comes from these companies waste, is as well indescribable.

Well let us look at it this way: The company, that is along the Lumbadzi road, stands between Lilongwe city and Kamuzu International airport. It as such stands within the gates of the city. It is a pity, that for visitors coming into Malawi through KIA and Lilongwe, are greeted by such foul smell.

It is equally disheartening that the tourist  travelling to the lake through Kanengo must go through the stench produced from the fertilizer and the tobacco waste.

Surely, these companies do have a right to pursue their different economic activities.  It is a fact that the companies are employing a lot of Malawians and giving them a source of livelihood. Yet, in as much as these activities are important, the companies do not have a right to harm the public by fouling the air.

One then wonders whether, the local courts bill, was bad in its entirety. One also wonders, whether the city councils have any other function apart from collecting the city rates and the markets. Surely one would expect the councils to be pro-active and put in place regulations that protect the public from health hazards posed by the industrial activity. One would expect the councils to protect the image of the city by ensuring that waste is disposed properly and that the air within the city is clean.

Doesn’t the deterioration of public sanity in Lilongwe and other cities confirm to us that we might have missed an opportunity by rejecting the entire local courts bill on the basis of a few bad elements within the proposed law?  Surely, those who foul the air, must be heard accountable.