COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
DEAR Cabinet Ministers especially Dr. Situmbeko Musokotwane for Finance and National Planning.
Nobody doubts the importance of the LusakaNdola Highway, therefore suggesting that those opposing the Macro Ocean Investment Consortium are intellectually deficient or ignorant is not a very inspiring epithet.
If anything, those suggesting that no money will be repatriated from Zambia as a result of the project could be classified as such because the concessionaires will repatriate their profit.
The condescending attitude adopted by the Minister in discussing this matter is a diversion from issues of substance that have been raised, to which no satisfactory explanation has been offered.
Many Zambians are asking why three distinct functions in the project are being conflated, namely road construction, maintenance and tolling. These are distinct and separate.
It goes without saying that inbuilt within the construction contract is quality assurance which could even be subcontracted to a reputable company. Such assurance would automatically provide for road maintenance.
These are three distinct functions that can be undertaken separately.
It is a fact that NAPSA alone can finance the $600 million odd project. For good measure, the Workers Compensation Fund Control Board has been roped into the project.
The two have financial muscle to construct the road, which task AVIC and indeed our own VELOS had bid to undertake. Their statutes allow them to invest in viable projects. From all projections the highway is a very viable project, if well managed of course.
If anything, NAPSA has funded roads before, some of which are not as lucrative as the LusakaNdola Highway. All projections indicate that traffic on this national backbone will more than triple in the next 20 years, thereby generating more revenue which would accrue to the pension fund, rather than externalisation by the consortium.
Tolling on the other hand has nothing to do with road construction. Although previous regimes had contemplated tolling to support road maintenance it was not until 2011 that the first toll gates were established.
Judging from the deterioration suffered by the roads over time, it is clear proceeds were not utilised for the purpose.
All indications are that proceeds were redeposited in the Government’s general revenue account, not necessarily for road maintenance. This is a mistake readily remedied, by administrative action.
It is against this background that speculation is rife that the contract is intended to benefit external interests. Some people have even suggested that the contract will be a source of guaranteed income for the ruling party and some individuals within the current structures.
Government has a duty to explain to the Zambians why the NAPSA/WCFCB consortium cannot fund the road and thereafter employ competent institutions to manage the roads to ensure a return on investment while ensuring continued maintenance.
Why should the Chinese consortium be involved in sharing toll proceeds?
We have seen this tolling model before. It was tried in the infamous Intelligent Mobility scheme where the concessionaires were to participate in revenue sharing for 17 years or so. This was defeated as being extortionist.
What is the difference with this new one?