Maravi

(NEWZIMBABWE) A different argument for devolution

A different argument for devolution
by Lovemore Fuyane
02/09/2010 00:00:00

ZIMBABWE’S current system of government creates a rather complex relationship between the elected officials and the electorate as far as effective representation is concerned.

Many have made proposals to reform the system, including the much-debated devolution of power to provinces. There is need for a radical, yet logical change in the role of elected constituency based representatives. This change will bring about a greater degree of democratisation and on the ground participation and accountability overall.

From the president, cabinet, governors right down to appointed district administrators, there is far too much distance between the elected officials responsible for delivering development on the ground and the electorate.

In our current system, the responsibility for development is delegated to appointed administrative officials through far too many layers such that it eventually loses meaning.

While indeed development must ultimately be delivered by professional administrators, it makes sense that the electorate are given much more of a say on a region by region basis. If you speak to people standing in voting queues during virtually all our elections since independence, most would probably tell you that the reason why they are voting for so and so is that they believe that their preferred candidate will deliver a better life for them and if it’s a parliamentarian, for their constituency in particular.

However, according to Sections 49 to 57 of the Zimbabwe constitution, the role of parliamentarians is clearly that of legislators, in other words the architecture of new and amended legislation. If indeed these constituency elected representatives truly represent their constituencies via this process, it’s very difficult to envisage a scenario where the best possible constituency representative actually crafts and persuades his colleagues to vote into a law a piece of legislation aimed at advancing the interests of his region in isolation. No single Member of Parliament can ever have a law passed on his own.

Whenever prospective parliamentarians campaign leading up to each election, few if any ever emphasise the fact that they look forward to being great legislators, or architects of great laws. There is an unspoken but common understanding that elected representatives ought to act mainly as agents of development for their constituencies, so why not formalise this and ensure it actually becomes their task officially and constitutionally?

Years ago, an important bridge collapsed in the Gokwe area of Chireya following heavy rains a few years ago, the local people approached their MP for intervention, yet their MP was a legislator and no law he would promote could have delivered a new bridge as quickly as the urgency of the matter required. The matter called for him to mobilise resources and consult the relevant arms of government, and yet it would be much quicker and simpler if in each province regionally elected officials could gather these resources and effect change immediately.

What is also worth noting is that globally, most development in legislation now emanates from ideas held by what I will refer to loosely as interest groups rather than geographical constituency bases. Examples include some of the latest thinking around new permutations on the protection of civil liberties of special groups such as children, gays, women or some other increasingly more prominent socially based groups, or greater security to prevent new forms of sophisticated crimes e.g. cyber crimes, international terrorism, money laundering as well as other areas such as environmental protection, entrepreneurship and international relations.

Very few legislative developments nowadays emanate from purely sub-geographical considerations. It makes absolutely no sense, therefore, particularly for a developing state to elect such highly celebrated officials on that basis.

Granted, when it comes to issues such as the sharing of income streams emanating from tapping into natural resources for commercial gain located in specific regions, at some point or other specific communities may have a more urgent need to address these than others. However, ultimately such natural resources especially in a country like Zimbabwe are to be found everywhere. In this instance, therefore, such an issue becomes of interest across the length and breadth of the country, again centering on groups rather than mere geographies.

The development of most pieces of legislation nowadays knows no geography. The most pressing issue in specific geographies is the accountability of elected officials as far as the delivery of a better life is concerned, and that translates to improved infrastructure, public services, healthcare, schools, public goods. In other words in specific areas people want real stuff and not ‘frameworks’ and language they do not always understand, well at least until they actually encounter a related matter.

Some of the most popular members of Zimbabwe’s parliament are those who, through whatever influence they could exercise respectively, delivered development to their respective regions, as with the guy who got the bridge fixed in time for the cotton harvesting season, it’s what people actually expect. This is the real basis upon which the election of constituency-based representatives ought to be, in other words devolution of responsibility and supporting resources to where it makes the most sense at provincial level and the creation of virtual project managers at constituency level.

On the other hand, the group of individuals concerned with developing legislation can and should really come from appropriate conglomerations of interest groups otherwise known as political parties on a proportional basis.

One might ask if in fact I’m not proposing a South African model and indeed I am, but only as far as the national parliament is concerned where legislators are elected on a proportional representational basis. It is the structure of the provinces where the model I’m putting forward differs from South Africa’s where I’m proposing that regional representatives act as development agents.

I must also emphasise that I’m not for a minute proposing the creation of provincial cabinets mirroring the national cabinet as is the case in South Africa, just merely that elected constituency representatives be given a role in what I would broadly speaking refer to as project management of development in their respective constituencies.

For the time being, I will not attempt to furnish all the finer details and be prescriptive on exactly how these elected representatives ought to work with local professional structures but do know that the argument I’m putting forward is what ought to inform our future direction. Indeed the idea remains open to further refinement by relevant experts.

Someone else might suggest that what I’m saying could be catered for by having provincial governors elected rather than appointed by the president and I would agree that although it’s not my ideal choice it would alleviate somewhat the challenge I’m highlighting by closing that gap between the elected and electors. The most ideal scenario for me however would involve some form of direct accountability for constituency representatives.

There are many aspects of development with a unique local nuance for which the local population needs to hold someone accountable. Indeed as ZAPU’s spokesman Methuseli Moyo, as well as many others recently wrote, aspects such as broad monetary and fiscal policy, foreign affairs and national security, national infrastructure and high level policy formulation ought to reside at central government, but the provision of local infrastructure and the running of development projects ought to be a lot closer to the people, in effect a strengthening of the democratic system.

We ought to make it that much easier for those individuals elected by the people to be accountable and just as easily removed when they do not deliver, period.

Lovemore Fuyane was born in Zimbabwe and lives in South Africa. He writes in his personal capacity

Labels: DEVOLUTION, MDC, MDC TRIBALISM, TRIBALISM

posted by MrK @ 12:09 PM