Friday, March 30, 2007

LETTERS - Opposition, Mining Taxes and Criticism

Levy and the opposition
By Maurice
Friday March 30, 2007 [02:00]

The views as expressed by Ronald Chola regarding UPND President Hakainde Hichilema's statement over his readiness to meet our Republican President Levy Mwanawasa (Postbag 23, March 2007), cannot pass without comment.

According to Chola's school of thought, HH is being opportunistic by making himself available to meet the President of this nation, a country in which HH is leader of a large opposition political party.

To begin with, Chola should be made to know that the Democrats (Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama) as cited by him (Chola), cannot meet Bush because after all, Bush has no business with them;

whereas in the case of HH, Levy has business with the opposition that includes HH. So the comparison of Zambian and American politics in this matter does not apply and needs to be dismissed altogether.

Chola should also be made to know that being in the opposition does not mean one should always oppose what those in the ruling party are doing even when it is right. What Chola wants to see is a situation where the opposition are always in the opposite, always squeezing and pressurising Levy, even when we are supposed to work with him for the development of our nation.

This type of politics won’t take us anywhere. Chola and many others of that sort should know this.

Checks and balances...! Which ones are these Ba Chola, that HH and the other opposition leaders should provide to Levy's government? We don't need any parallel government in Zambia.

There’s only one government, and so the opposition are expected to deliver. How?

The answer is simple...by working with the government, and this includes offering suggestions to those in leadership; offering advise to them; correcting them by way of dialogue as opposed to attacks and pressure.

Levy alone will not be able to develop this country, neither will the oppositions' pressure on him. Instead, this will make the skins of those in government become thick; they will always work to fight back with all the machinery availabe, thereby diverting from the real issues that need government's attention.

For HH, I know you are a smart person, and you won’t listen to such senseless attacks as those from Ronald Chola. Go and meet Levy and offer to him some of the solutions to the problems our many Zambians are faced with. There is nothing sinister in HH meeting Levy. Let the 'American' think-tank go ahead with his school of old loser-winner politics. Zambia belongs to us all.





http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=24463

Taxation in the mining sector
By Nkula Kaoma
Thursday March 29, 2007 [02:00]

In the ‘Saturday Post’ issue of March 24th 2007 , you carried a story where Justice minister George Kunda told Parliament that the development agreements entered into with mining companies were above the law.

This sweeping statement coming from Kunda has very dangerous implications. Taking into consideration Kunda’s lies over the illegal nolle prosequi that he facilitated over the now jailed Bulaya and the constitution-making roadmap, we need the input of the Attorney-General to clarify that statement.

The development agreements that Kunda referred to are provided for under section 9 (2) of the mines and minerals Act which among other things have altered the payment of mineral royalties from 3 per cent as provided for in section 66 of the mines and minerals Act to 0.6 per cent; royalties are a form of taxation.

Article 114 (3) of the Constitution provides that, “Parliament may make provision under which the President or the Vice President or a minister may by order provide that, on or after the publication of a Bill being a Bill approved by the President that it is proposed to introduce into the National Assembly and providing for the imposition or alteration of taxation, such provisions of the Bill as may be specified in the order shall have the force of law for such period and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by Parliament:”

The information available is that these development agreements like earlier stated, among other things altered the payment of royalties from 3 per cent to 0.6 per cent and that they were signed by the minister and the new mine owners.

Bearing in mind that royalties form part of taxation, were these development agreements presented in the National Assembly by the President, Vice President or Minister as “orders” seeking to alter taxation known as royalties as provided for by Article 114 (3) of the Constitution?

In signing government agreements, the Attorney-General plays a leading role, can the new truly learned Attorney-General clarify this matter for the nation.

If these development agreements were not presented as “orders” in the National Assembly seeking to alter taxation, then they are in breach of the Constitution and any other law (section 9 (2) of the mines and minerals Act) which is inconsistent with the Constitution, that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency be void.

As such, these development agreements can be altered by government without any breach so as to impose meaningful taxation in the mining industry for the benefit of the country.
It will be interesting for Kunda also to show the nation which law is below these development agreements or may be the Constitution is not law.




http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=24512

What has criticism achieved?
By T. Mukelabai
Friday March 30, 2007 [02:00]

One day the big man and his team are the victims of incessant criticism from disgruntled citizens, the next the critics have done the nation a great service in putting the government in line.

This means that those who sing praises are the enemies because they will send the government to sleep. There is just no knowing what to say to please the big man. So be careful all the stooges and bootlickers - you may just be rewarded with a kick in the teeth for committing the correct crime.

As for the corruption fight, it is very dangerous to be part of the fight especially when you do not know who you are fighting against. Ask Rev Nyirongo, she will tell you all about it.

For the Reverend, the greater evil was to be seen not to tow the line. This was in spite of the fact that she thought she clearly recognised the enemy.

You see, when you live in glass houses, you should quickly learn that there is no throwing stones. If I were the power that be, I would have called her and told her "You see, Rev here we do not go consulting all and sundry. We first request the great one whether to squeak or not. Next time ask me first or you are out." But no, in this corruption fight there is only one fighter, everyone else is a spectator.

After all, the buck stops at his desk. So all you ministers be warned publicly, no careless opening of the mouth without permission or you are out.

Labels: ,

posted by MrK @ 3:51 AM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home