Maravi

Michael and minibus ride

Michael and minibus ride
By The Post
Mon 05 Dec. 2011, 14:00 CAT

What is Michael Sata trying to communicate by taking a minibus ride in Livingstone? Is it cheap politics? Is it cheap populism? Michael has never had a problem travelling on minibuses, public transport. He used to travel on public minibuses before he became President.

The justification that Michael gave for this in Livingstone was that of cost cutting. This may not appear to be a convincing reason for his minibus ride. But there is some truth in it. Michael seems to be greatly troubled by the level of government expenditure, especially that around the presidency. The extravagance of State House seems to irritate him.

This is understandable. Michael is not a man that is so easily moved by material things, by luxury and extravagance. Michael seriously wants to reduce the cost of running State House and the government in general. But he seems to lack clarity on how to do it. And he probably needs help on how to go about reducing government expenditure so that more money is spent in satisfying our people's basic needs.

Michael's attitude on government expenditure cannot be faulted. To make Zambia prosperous, will require intense effort, which should include among other things, the effort to strictly practice economy and combat waste, that is the policy of building our country through diligence and frugality. There is need for us to pay special attention to economy.

Our leaders must not indulge in wastefulness and extravagance. Michael is trying to lead by example. The lesson is there and attention must be called to it. Thrift should be the guiding principle in our government expenditure.
A dangerous tendency has shown itself of late among many of our political leaders and senior government officers - an unwillingness to share the joys and hardships of the masses, concern for personal glory and gain.

There is need for our political leaders to be modest and prudent and serve the Zambian people heart and soul and never for a moment divorce themselves from the masses of our people. In all cases, they must proceed from the interests of the people and not from self-interest or from the interest of a small group.

Michael is showing us the spirit of selflessness that is required of our leaders. With this spirit, everyone can be very useful to the people. A man's ability may be great or small, but if he has this spirit, he is already noble-minded and pure, a man of moral integrity and above vulgar interests, a man who is of value to the people.

If all the money that our government collects from taxpayers and all the grants or aid we receive from the international community were utilised prudently and without waste and extravagance, the standard of living of our people would today be much higher. Look at where the wastefulness that was in our Ministry of Health has left us! Look at where the wastefulness in our agriculture has left us!

It is good that Michael, as President of the Republic, is ready to sacrifice his comfort and sometimes endangering his life in doing so. This is what good leadership entails. This is what it means to put the interests of one's people first.

All Zambians of goodwill cannot but go along with this spirit of Michael, even if it means that they must give up their privileges for more equitable distribution in the social community. We cannot close our eyes to the realities of poverty in which the great majority of our people wallow.

We recall the words of Saints John and Ambrose: "If a man who was rich enough in this world's goods saw one of his brothers in need, but closed his heart to him, how could the love of God be living in him?" (1Jn 3:17); "The earth belongs to everyone, not just to the rich."

In his homily against riches, Saint Basil presents this dialogue with a miser: "Share the crop you have harvested with your fellow men, tomorrow it will have rotted. What abominable avarice it is to let it rot before giving it to the needy!"
"How do I do injury to others," asks the miser, "by not giving them what is mine?"

"Which goods belong to you? Where did you get them from? You are like the man at the theatre who wants to keep others from the performance, who wants to derive exclusive enjoyment from the performance that everyone has a right to see.

That is how the rich are.
They say that they are the rightful owners of goods that belong to all, goods that have been expropriated for themselves simply because they were the first to lay their hands on them. If each person kept only what was necessary for day-to-day needs and gave the rest to the needy, there would be no more poverty or extravagant luxury.

The food that you hold belongs to the hungry. The clothes in your wardrobe belong to the naked. The shoes that are growing old in your house belong to those who have none. The money you have buried belongs to the poor. You are oppressing people whom you could help... it is not your avarice but your unwillingness to share that condemns you."

The poor of our country, over whom our politicians have been elected to serve, know from experience that they must count on themselves and their own initiatives more than on the help of the politically powerful, of the rich. It is primarily up to the poor to effect their own betterment.

They must regain confidence in themselves. They must work zealously to fashion their own destiny. Changes must be made; present conditions must be improved.

It is high time that the poor, supported and guided by their legitimate political leaders, defended their right to live.

Most Zambians find themselves in a state of poverty, the injustice of which cries to heaven for vengeance. The alienated masses in the rural and urban areas are increasing at an accelerated rate.

In all our activities, our goal should be the liberation of our people from every sort of servitude that oppresses them: the lack of life's necessities, illiteracy, the weight of sociological structures which deprive them of personal responsibility over life itself.

We should work together toward the construction of a society in which all persons will find their place, and in which they will enjoy political, economic, cultural and religious equality and liberty. The poverty situation, we feel, is the product of unjust socio-economic structures.

Our political leaders should follow Michael's example and somehow get close to the poor, because only close experience will teach them the great magnitude of the problems that afflict the majority of our people.

They must therefore reform the structures of our government so that such contact really takes place. So long as our political leaders do not actually share the problems of the people - lack of basic necessities, insecurity, unemployment, and so on and so forth - they will not be able to identify themselves with the people, especially those who are poor.

We believe that we are in a new historical era. This era requires clarity in order to see, lucidity in order to diagnose, and solidarity in order to act.

We consider it irreconcilable with our developing situation to invest resources in excessive bureaucracy, luxury and ostentation, or the deficient administration of the community. It is our collective duty to give recognition to and to stimulate every profound and positive attempt to vanquish the existing great difficulties.

Situations of grave injustice require the courage to make far-reaching reforms and to suppress unjustifiable privileges. The fight against injustice is meaningless unless it is waged with a view to establishing a new social and political order in conformity with the demands of justice.

Michael has the right attitude towards government expenditure. What remains is to put in place an efficient, effective and orderly system of realising this. There is too much wastage and a serious lack of economy in the conduct of government business.

It will not be enough for Michael alone to reduce his privileges and waste. This needs to be extended to all in government. But Michael shouldn't cheat himself that government expenditure, wastefulness can be reduced without a fight.

Those who are building mansions and acquiring all sorts of wealth as a result of weaknesses in government accountability will not take it without a fight. What Michael is trying to do is destined from the beginning to generate opposition and conflict from other sectors of society that seek to maintain the status quo or even increase their share of economic and political power.

When one identifies with the interests of the poor, one will undoubtedly come into conflict with the interests of other sectors of society and their allies. Therefore, this requires fortitude, which can be translated as the refusal to abandon the poor in their suffering.

Unless we critically grasp this fact, we will never understand how, even after a change of government, people will continue to waste, misuse, abuse public resources as they did before. Clearly, there is need to convert both our hearts and our institutions to respond to the course of the poor. There is need for all of us to join Michael in the crusade of cutting down government expenditure, of eliminating waste in government business.

Labels: MICHAEL SATA

posted by MrK @ 6:52 PM