admin
One of the ways in which a government builds a reputation and over time earns the support of the people is through consistently meeting the electorate’s expectations and keeping honest and open channels of communication.
Reports in yesterday’s Chronicle indicated that the Government, through the Ministry of Transport, Communications and Infrastructural Development, was being found wanting with regards to communica-ting in good faith on the dualisation of the Plumtree-Mutare Road with reports that the road would be partially dualised.
The reports contradict earlier ministry pronouncements that indicated that the road would be dualised and we feel Parliamentarians are justified in seeking clarity due to the apparent confusion in the ministry.
The director of roads in the Ministry of Transport, Communica-tions and Infrastructural Develop-ment, Engineer Nelson Kudenga, told Parliamentarians that the highway did not have the traffic levels to warrant dualisation. He was speaking when he appeared before the Parliamentary Committee on Transport and Infrastructure Development on Monday.
However, former ministry permanent secretary Mr Partson Mbiriri and Zimbabwe National Roads Administration chief executive officer Mr Frank Chitukutuku had earlier said that the highway between Bulawayo and Harare would be dualised.
In fact, President Mugabe is on record as having instructed that the road be dualised instead of a simple rehabilitation and we thought the project had accommodated those adjustments.
“There has been confusion that we are going to dualise Plumtree-Mutare, it came out in the papers but it’s not true.
“There is no traffic in the country at the moment that requires dualisation, we know the media are saying there is traffic but it’s not there,” said Eng Kudenga.
According to Engineer Kudenga, it’s the media that is creating confusion rather than officials in the ministry. We beg to differ. We believe it is high time the ministry adopted one position on the issue of the road project so that their internal differences do not filter into the newspaper pages. Surely, if there are such differences within the ministry, one wonders what has been communicated to the contractors.
We believe the Minister should step in and set the record straight and we agree with the MPs that it is now difficult to know who to trust. Also, Parliament is a serious institution that exercises an oversight role over the executive and we believe it should be accorded that respect instead of being tossed back and forth by being fed contradictory information.
Engineer Kudenga contends that the $206 million Development Bank of Southern Africa loan facility was only meant for road rehabilitation, a position parliamentarians consider an unfortunate turn in view of earlier statements from ministry officials.
“We had Chitukutuku telling us that negotiations for the dualisation with DBSA were at an advanced stage and now you are telling us that there is no dualisation, now we don’t know who to trust,” said Hurungwe North MP Cde Peter Chanetsa.
Clearly, it is not the media that is gunning for dualisation but even MPs are quoting ministry officials that spoke to the Parliamentary Committee as the source of that information.
The Government cannot afford to deal with perceived slow progress on the road project and the confusion surrounding the terms of the project at the same time since it then creates the impression that what could be slowing down progress, especially from the Bulawayo end, could be the apparent confusion over whether there shall be piecemeal dualisation or complete dualisation.
Online Reporter