PRIORITIES
NOBODY doubts the good intentions of some Government public policy initiatives. They are indeed a radical departure from traditional administrative order.
They however pose two challenges.
The first concerns public perception. Zambians were expecting instant changes, a drop in prices, cheaper fertilizer and a general improvement in the standard of living. These have not come about, understandably so.
There is no doubt that serious privation wrought by COVID-19 influenced electoral outcomes last year. Zambians were smarting from economic downturn, unemployment and general social depression. Zambians wanted a change and quick fix to a multitude of problems. The crisis of expectation is not endemic to Zambia. Malawians are demanding leadership change because changes have not come fast enough. The ordinary citizen expected instant tangible benefits and not the promise of longterm economic stabilization.
Secondly, new policies have been implemented, sometimes for political expediency, but often without appropriate comprehensive research that should normally inform policy. For example the increase in the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) has been welcome as a positive step towards devolution, albeit without any supporting frame work thereby resulting in slow uptake.
In principle the increase, which effectively put more money at the lower levels is a definite plus, but in reality it raises many practical questions. For a start not all constituency are the same, in size, demography and needs.
The initial CDF fund was meant to address small exigencies, but now CDF is a capital fund meant to address all manner of needs from repairing roads, building classrooms, grants for business and bursaries for deserving students. This spread presents a nightmare for accountability and management by any traditional Government institutions.
The same can be said of the transition from FISP to CFSP. The rationale is lost in application as it relates to national productivity which relies on the small peasant farmer to generate the bumper harvests that the country has witnessed in successive years. A combination of beneficiary exclusion and new delivery conditionalities are bound to impact negatively this year.
The procurement nightmare is yet another example of bad planning. Granted that deficiencies were manifest in the system, the answer was not the radical change that will now affect productivity.
More seriously however, concessions granted to the Mining sector still begs for an answer, given that no clear quid pro quo has been advanced. There is no promise of value addition save for increased production which will bequeath generations to come gaping trenches where minerals will have been excavated. Taken in isolation and as a target 3miiilion tons of copper production is attractive, but this target belies the net loss of national resource. We must be assured of equitable sharing of proceeds from the resource.