admin
Johanes Chinotimba
The proposal to allocate US$5 million to the Constituency Development Fund is a welcome move that only demonstrates the magnitude of Government’s people-centeredness.
The CDF was introduced in 2009 as the best model of financial devolution that aimed at fostering equitable development and poverty reduction at community level. It was expected that the CDF would allow MPs to respond directly to the developmental demands of their constituencies.
However, Government must draw some lessons from the way some Members of Parliament administered the US$50 000 CDF allocated to each of them in 2010.
Many MPs failed to account for the money amid allegations that they used it for their personal benefit.
Government had to institute investigations which were, nevertheless, scuttled by certain powers which feared exposure. Once bitten, twice shy. Ordinarily, one would expect Government to set right previous flaws before disbursing the money, lest the money falls into a bottomless pit again.
Some of the MPs who abused the fund were Cabinet ministers, meaning they had other sources of income. With hard times now believed to be hitting most of these MPs, if Press reports are anything to go by, more abuse of the CDF is certainly on the horizon.
The audit of the CDF which the then Ministry of Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs mysteriously aborted must be completed and bring culprits to book.
Fortunately, Mrs Virginia Mabhiza, who was the permanent secretary in that ministry, holds the same portfolio in the Ministry of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs which now handles the CDF.
She knows the whys and wherefores of the incomplete audit, because she is central to the logical conclusion of the issue.
Of the 20 glaring cases of abuse that had been unearthed, MDC-T legislators ruled the roost as they seemed to view the constituency assistance initiative as a fast-closing window of opportunity to loot.
Sensing further humiliation, the then MDC-T Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Eric Matinenga, stopped the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission from continuing with investigations on the pretext that he was going to carry out a wholesale audit.
ZACC never received the promised audit report from Matinenga who also blamed Tendai Biti for not funding the audit exercise.
But then, Matinenga is gone, having opted for the easy way out rather than be humiliated in an election.
Whether the suppression of the ZACC probe was a ploy to foil the investigations or not, justice must still take its course. Those who will be implicated must not be allowed to lay their hands on the funds again.
If enacted into a law, the proposed CDF Act would go a long way in curbing pilfering of the fund.
The Bill proposes establishment of a CDF board which will be responsible for the administration of the fund and some CDF committees which administer it at constituency levels.
The approach to CDF would be more perfect and participatory if the expenditure decisions could be decentralised further to ward levels. Thus, the CDF committees should cascade to ward levels. The constituents themselves must propose membership to the CDF committees.
The current structure gives the MP a substantial control over the fund. Unlike the current structure where the MP, Senator and the councillor manage the fund, the ideal structure would be that one proposed in the CDF Bill. The MPs should only sit on the CDF committees as ex-officio members exercising the oversight role on projects.
In Kenya, the administration of the CDF has been effectively transferred from MPs to CDF officials who are accountable for any loss or embezzlement of the money.
The CDF board, which must be constituted as a matter of urgency, must be very strict on the disbursement of the money. The board or the ministry (in the absence of the board) must only release the money after being satisfied with the project proposals submitted.
It must make sure that all stakeholders are involved in the process of project identification. It must verify the authenticity of the quotations as this was one avenue that was used to steal the kitty.
The communities must be empowered with information on the CDF. They must receive training on the proper procedures of managing the fund, the importance of their participation, tendering and contracting, implementations and operations, monitoring, evaluation and auditing of all the projects.
Previously, not many were privy to the CDF, a situation that also obtained in Uganda where 87 percent of the population was not aware of the funds four years after introduction.
The MPs of the previous Parliament did not consult the communities on their needs and priorities. As a result, priorities more often were misplaced. For instance, in Mabvuku, market stalls were built for people who had gone for years without safe water.
The media should also take an active role in monitoring the administration of the CDF with a view to exposing possible abuse. People like Tendai Biti had to vomit vulgar words on a national radio station after being quizzed to account for the kitty. No amount of threat should stop the media from playing its watchdog role.
There is also need to increase the fund. The demand for funding developing projects is considerably higher than the actual funds being released. Hopefully, the proposal submitted to the Treasury on upping the funds by US$50 000 per constituency, will be given a nod.
The disbursement of the fund should not be based on the “one size fits all” model. The allocation should be based on poverty index. Honestly, a poverty-stricken constituency like Buhera South cannot be put on an equal funding footing with Mt Pleasant constituency.
With proper management and optimal utilisation, the CDF can eventually make communities financially independent of the central government. With the projects being implemented by locals, job creation and resource retention within the constituency can be guaranteed.
Online Reporter