admin
THE devolution programme by the Second Republic has shown its worth, not just in the theoretical arena of moving money to local authorities, but in the far more practical area of moving decision making into communities and giving priority to innovative ways of developing areas.
The main thrust of devolution budgeting, to implement Constitutional requirements to move appropriate decision making downstream, was to transfer some of the funding set aside for infrastructure from line ministries to local authorities on the basis that these, elected by local communities, would be able to set priorities.
The basic idea was that the people who needed the new infrastructure were better able than some bureaucrat in Harare to figure out what they needed first, and even to sort out conflicting ideas.
For example two ministries might both want to do add to their services in one district and put in bids for the required funds at budget time. Yet there is only enough money for one development this year and one the year after next, yet because the development used to come down the line from ministerial head offices, there was no listing of what other ministries were doing.
Devolution avoids this, by having an agreed list of priorities, which might involve several ministries, but a single annual budget, so the list is gradually worked through.
This, at least in almost all the rural district councils and the odd urban authority has worked rather well. Each ward or a few thousand people has put up its pet project, often a school or a clinic, and in discussion on the council the priority list becomes established.
As the money flows in, the priorities are crossed off the list one by one.
But in practice something even better has been arising, sustained community involvement and several sources of finance.
It appears that a lot of communities, especially in rural areas, are prepared to get started long before finance is available, and even where this is using the system to attract more financing and to climb the priority ladder.
We are seeing an increasing number of new schools and clinics especially being commissioned where the community has come in with a lot of labour, plus local materials such as stone, sand and in several cases even the bricks.
This willingness has then attracted funds, usually those supplied through the devolution programme, from the rural district council, to buy the non-community materials such as cement and roofing, and to pay for the skilled labour.
But it goes even further. A high percentage of Parliamentarians representing rural constituencies use this community involvement as a yardstick for effective use of their share of the Constituency Development Fund, and so add their extra bit.
Then others, including the line ministry, come in. We have reported on major companies, as part of their corporate social responsibility programme, donating materials. The odd effective PVO might help as well.
We need to remember that a rural clinic is not just a clinic.
It needs a borehole, it usually needs solar power, it needs medical equipment. Even the actually building programme needs to include at least couple of cottages for the nursing staff.
It is not much different for a school, even a primary school, where furniture and textbooks are a definite requirement, where solar power is increasingly seen as a necessity, and again in rural areas where housing at least increases the odds of being able to attract those long-service dedicated teachers that can make so much difference.
But at the heart of one of these projects to initiate something new is that community involvement.
Looking at it from the point of view of the rural district council, the local MP, the nearby large company looking for something effective, the person drawing up the Government borehole programme and everyone else who wants to help, it is a definite plus to do something useful where there is a very real need expressed in practical terms by the community.
We have all heard of new schools, or clinics or other infrastructure that never really get used much, or never really attract the support they need from a community, and which sometimes even are vandalised.
When a community has moved hundreds of wheelbarrow loads of sand and stone, when members have taken their share of wielding pick and shovel to dig foundations and level sites, those responsible for the more mundane financing are sure of several essential points: the community really wants this, maintenance will never be a problem, and potential vandals will understand that this is a good place to avoid.
That community involvement ensures that the community takes ownership, to use the jargon, although it goes a bit further than that in the eyes of the community, who see a lot of ownership.
This sort of behaviour, while fairly common in rural areas, is often missing in urban areas.
Harare and surrounding towns in its metropolitan province have seen in recent years these huge “land baron suburbs” without development and without many of the essential infrastructure like roads, schools and health facilities.
Yet a great deal more community development would see far more of these needs being met.
A quick collection by a few honest people making arrangements and passing around the hat would at least hire a grader, and sometimes just fuel has to be bought, to turn what seem to be river beds into at least graded gravel, which is easier to maintain than bad tar.
It could also see primary schools, at the very least, within walking distance of most homes. As those rural households now building several new primary schools tell reporters, with four-year-olds needing to attend the earliest classes, even 5km walks are far too long.
The Government itself is involved in providing major clinics in some of the new suburban areas, but we still have authorities like Harare City Council that last built and staffed a clinic when the city was half the size, and seem to assume that everyone using their health services owns a car, which is often not the case.
Sometimes those of us in urban areas need to think like those in rural areas, even if our councillor is totally useless as so many urban councillors are, and find active and honest local people ready to act.
Once that starts, then bothering the council and bothering the local MP and seeking additional sponsorship from companies seems to be the way forward.
Devolution is more than a line item in a national budget. When most effective it is local communities acting and then being able to access the funds now available and then being able to lead a much better life.
Online Reporter