To aid some reflections by all concerned citizens, let me suggest (1) several points that I feel deserve approval, and (2) several points that I feel definitely require deeper questioning. Then let me (3) propose some next steps. Others who have done in-depth analysis should share their reactions, so that all this discussion can help the members of parliament intelligently debate the President's speech. (Hopefully he will be receiving daily up-dates about this debate during his long stay out of Zambia at this very critical moment!) 

 

 

It was encouraging to note that the President early in his speech praised a vibrant media and civil society in Zambia for “providing necessary checks and balances for democracy to flourish.” It will be important to remember this praise when government regulation of media and civil society is discussed. These “necessary checks and balances” must not be diluted by partisan desires to control and stifle.

Relating to education needs, the President wisely urged greater attention to be paid to the promotion of skills training - an effort so central to enhancing the employment possibilities of youth. And regarding agricultural policy, his cutting of crop levies is happily received as is his effort to introduce more sanity and equity into the fertiliser distribution programmes. 

A tree planting programme that can boast the leadership of our founding President is surely welcome, since current rates of deforestation threaten to make Zambia a desert nation within the next several decades. 

 

The health and education sectors of Zambia were highlighted strongly by the President. It is obvious that this country will never move forward without greater commitment to improve the circumstances of our greatest natural resource, the Zambian woman and man.

When he spoke about the need to curtail demands for “unrealistic salaries,” I wonder whether his immediate audience on Manda Hill heard and understood his explicit reference to ministers and members of Parliament. Surely realism must begin with this highly-paid and generously “gratuity-fed” cadre of public servants. 

A mention of “access to justice for all” was coupled with the welcome announcement of legal aid extension throughout the country. A blatant and shameful disgrace to Zambia today is the presence of so many legally-unattended to prisoners languishing in inhuman conditions in our overcrowded prisons. 

 

Finally, the President spoke openly of the desire to privatise some state media in order to promote better information dissemination. This is certainly a good point in securing the intelligent discussion of issues facing the nation. Any non-partisan evaluation of State-owned media - both print and electronic - would acknowledge the need to free it from the heavy hand of government and ruling party control. 

 

 

In my opinion, the speech of the President, besides deserving some of the approval mentioned above, calls for some deeper questioning of several very important points. 

 

For example, his reference to a “public debt management strategy” linked to “sustainability” for new loans certainly requires clearer examination. Civil society groups like our JCTR-hosted Jubilee-Zambia have long been crying for clear constitutional guidelines and strict parliamentary oversight of new loans, lest we continue on the slippery path currently being experienced of falling deeper and deeper into debt.

 

The President mentioned that the April 2009 Indaba recommendations would be reviewed by Cabinet. But after five months, we can surely ask (1) what are those recommendations, and (2) when, if ever, will they be publicly communicated and effectively implemented? A similar question arises about strong monitoring and evaluating (M&E) when programmes like the Private Sector Development Reform Programme is being implemented. What would be key indicators of its success?

 

Much attention is paid in the Present's speech - and elsewhere - to the potentials of the Multi-Facility Economic Zones (MFEZ) currently being set up in Zambia. But we have yet to have answers in this speech - or elsewhere - to three key and reasonable questions about the MFEZ: (1) how much are Zambian investors being involved as, say, over against the number of Chinese investors?; (2) what are the laiddown guarantees for fair wages, safe conditions and free unionising in the contracts relating to the MFEZ?: and (3) how are environmental protection concerns being clearly built into all of the structures and operations of the MFEZ?

 

Gas and oil explorations are being promoted, the President repeated to the nation. But what sort of safeguards are being put in place so that Zambia doesn't fall prey to the “resource curse” experienced by so many other African countries - e.g., loss of control, corruption, ecological damage, etc.? And relating to our primary resource, copper, the President's light treatment of public worries over the retraction of the “windfall tax” surely needs greater clarifications.

 

Given all the serious controversy surrounding the ZAMTEL privatisation, definitely more than 50 words should have been given to the topic by the President.

 

Moreover, the burning issue of corruption and the government's handling of this problem of such destructive character needed more attention in the speech. A suggestion I've heard is simply for the President to call together a group of citizens from churches, civil society, business and trade unions, academia and political parties for a frank discussion of why there are very sincere doubts and questions about his profession that “corruption is a major concern to my government” and “I will not hesitate to take action against those found wanting.” 

 

For the President to say that the APRM process is “working effectively and already assisting government to enhance democracy and good governance” needs specific instances to be cited. And the country needs to be told more about what it means for the constitution-making process to be completed soon. Will this mean what the public have been demanding: a new Bill of Rights, a national Referendum, and most of the excellent Mung'omba Commission recommendations put in place? 

 

NEXT STEPS

 

During the next three weeks, Parliament is expected to react to the President's speech of last Friday. Then on October 9 the Minister of Finance and National Planning will present the 2010 National Budget. These three weeks are an excellent time for in-depth probing of the national vision, government pledges and personal commitment expressed in the President's speech. 

 

May I suggest three obvious steps to assure good use of that time? First, let there be less partisan politicking and more intelligent debate about issues such as those listed above. This will demand less praise singing and fewer personal attacks!  

 

Second, let MPs listen to the cries of the citizens they claim to represent, asking them for their opinions on directions that the government should be taking at this crucial moment.

 

Third, let the media, both government and independent, highlight the Parliamentary debates and invite wider public discussion of all the issues being raised. 

 

Steps taken such as these suggested here might assure that when the National Budget is laid on the table, we will see more of the theme proposed by the JCTR and its partners, CSPR and Caritas: “Economic growth with equity: investing in the dignity of the people.”

Related news items: