Maravi

Choosing who to vote for

Choosing who to vote for
By The Post
Mon 09 May 2011, 12:10 CAT

Leadership is a crucial element in national development. Countries that have excelled in socio-economic development often attribute the attained success to committed and visionary leadership in the course of their history. The opposite is also true; widespread poverty and low human development strongly points to incompetence and failure of leadership.

In essence, countries like Zambia that find themselves at the tail end of human development ranking are a sad reality not just of failed leadership, but also of a more insidious breed of national politicians whose sole aim in ascending to power is the ransacking of public resources for personal gain. The combination of incompetence and greed in political leadership renders well-meaning attempts towards good governance and socio-economic development futile.

Dr Peter Matoka, a veteran politician and academician is emphatic about the need to elect the appropriate leadership that will take this country to greater heights. As one of the founding fathers of this country, he knows very well about the countless dreams and aspirations of the majority of the Zambians that have gone under the drain over the years due to poor leadership.

His appeal to the electorate to cast its vote in the 2011 elections in favour of a more enlightened and credible leadership is therefore timely and deserves serious attention.

Overall, Zambians are crying for good governance in the public sphere, social and economic development that will improve their livelihoods and an environment under which they are free of physical and verbal harassment from uncontrolled state agents, political party cadres and criminal elements.

These are legitimate expectations and pre-requisites without which meaningful human development is not feasible. A national political leadership that deviates from these basic requirements should not be accommodated.

The onus is on the Zambian voters to ensure that care is taken in electing the type of leadership that Dr. Matoka is referring to. How will the ordinary Zambian know that a political candidate ascribes to the virtues of good governance?

Indeed, there is no full-proof way of ascertaining this. There are however some pointers such as the individual’s track record, anti-corruption stance, the choice of friends and acquaintances and conduct during the election campaigns that often provide valuable clues as to the candidate’s good governance position.

A potential good leader is one that openly and candidly discusses his or her governance track record, abhors and vigorously fights corruption, avoids the company of and support of corrupt and criminal elements and conducts a clean election campaign.

Once such a leader is elected into office, the voter still has the obligation to monitor the conduct of the politician during the term of office and, if found wanting, to deny him or her a vote in subsequent elections.

In this way, a vote becomes a useful tool for ensuring that the desired leadership ascends to power. It is the only potent tool in the hands of the ordinary Zambian citizen to effect change and ensure good governance.

With regard to social and economic development, some minimum requirements are critical and non-negotiable in sustaining life and livelihoods in the Zambia of today. These include a guaranteed essential health care package, 12 years of schooling for every Zambian child, and functional social protection for those in need.

Unfortunately, 46 years after attainment of political independence, the country is still far from attaining these minimum requirements. This should be heartbreaking for the founding fathers of this country that have to painfully experience an erosion of the gains the country made in this regard during the early formative years after independence.

At this stage of the country’s history, life expectancy at birth of around 65 years should have been attained, fertility rate drastically reduced and the most common epidemics reversed.

However, attempts towards the development of an essential health care package or basic health care package since the 1990s have ended up being incomplete, misinformed, not implemented and hardly in line with resource allocation. As things stand, the Zambian voter’s health status remains one of the poorest in Africa and world over.

The fact that the current political leadership still puts a premium on equating progress in the health sector to the number of new buildings commissioned speaks volumes of the stagnation and sheer incompetence in managing health in this country.

For education, we have stated before that guaranteed education for every child is an effective way of ensuring equity in the long run between the well-to-do in society and those who are economically marginalised.

It is an ethical act, one that ensures that the parents’ economic status does not automatically condemn a child to a vicious cycle of low education, low incomes, high poverty level, and poor health, and so on and so forth.

In addition, it is common knowledge that the demands of the modern world require at least 12 years of quality formal schooling, a well-funded and strategically nurtured tertiary education sector and systematic link between academic research and industry.

Again, this is a minimum requirement that will help in developing a new generation of farmers, workers and entrepreneurs to compete favourably in the globalised village.

The education factor and technical expertise are especially crucial elements in moderating the cost and physical constraints faced by a small and landlocked economy like ours.

However, the current public education system falls short of this in so many ways and the required political drive to change the status quo has been absent for decades.

Social protection of the vulnerable in society, for retirees, unsupported elderly people, the physically challenged and many others remains haphazard, fragmented, and many times a non-priority.

It is often stated that a civilised society is judged by how it takes care of its vulnerable and marginalised citizens. Zambia would therefore not qualify as a civilised society.

The miserable existence of its citizens in need is a stark reminder of a political leadership that has alienated itself from the suffering of its citizens and is consequently unconcerned about public welfare.

It is therefore not surprising, that current official debate and policies on social protection and safety nets are characterised more by rhetoric, false promises and poor implementation than by tangible results.

The lesson being drawn world over is that a leadership that fails to tackle the fundamental basics of health, education and social protection is often ill-prepared and without the basis to tackle the nitty-gritty aspects of economic and political stewardship.

Similarly, citizens that have been denied access to appropriate education, health and social protection are neither able to effectively utilise the economic opportunities provided nor fully participate in the political process of their country. In other words, citizens with low human capital formation are politically disenfranchised and destined to fall into the poverty trap.

Maintaining peace and security is also a critical element in national development. Without peace and individual security, social and economic development is not tenable. Those who wield state power and have the legitimate monopoly in the use of force ought to ensure that the taxpayer is not subjected to unnecessary and inhumane victimisation.

Recent developments in this country involving law enforcement agents and political party cadres are not reassuring for the ordinary citizen. We are yet to see and listen to government leaders that clearly and comprehensively articulate strategies to reverse this ugly development.

The dilemma a Zambian voter faces in choosing an appropriate leader is quite huge. We have leaders that many times have nothing to offer the electorate and this country other than emotional appeals to personal wealth, age, education, family, regional and ethnic affiliations. Some candidates are technically, socially, and psychologically ill-prepared for their respective leadership positions.

There is currently no formalised training that would bring a member of parliament or a minister to speed with the requirements of their offices, and political parties have long given up cadre training as a requirement to hold the different positions.

With nothing much to offer, many candidates resort to winning votes by offering simple bribes and favours. Others over-indulge in the rhetoric of ‘I will do this for you’ and other empty promises.

It is a sickening spectre of greed and lies repeated in every general election and very far detached from what Dr. Matoka and millions of voters aspire for national development.

For Zambia to prosper and become a more just, fair and humane society, a political leadership that is committed and credible is required. Voters need to scrutinise the good governance track records of the candidates.

Has the candidate been involved in political and grand corruption? Did he or she support repressive and undemocratic practices? Is the candidate empathetic with the masses of the poor?

Does he or she fall short in articulating a vision that will transform the constituency or this country? Indeed if Zambia has to move forward in line with the aspirations of the founding fathers, good leadership is a necessity and it is the voters that will ultimately enable it.

Labels: 2011 ELECTIONS

posted by MrK @ 5:11 PM