admin
Zanu-PF’s Mashonaland West provincial leadership has said it will recall any Member of Parliament it feels is under-performing. Specifically, the provincial chairperson, Cde Temba Mliswa, says all MPs have a responsibility to discharge their duties within the framework of the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (Zim-Asset).
As should be known by every Zimbabwean by now, Zim-Asset is Government’s economic blueprint for 2013 to 2018.
It is on proper implementation of Zim-Asset that the zanu-pf Government hinges its hopes of delivering on its election promises and improving people’s standards of living while developing the country.
Naturally, it being a document crystallised by zanu-pf for implementation by its cadres deployed to Government, the party has an interest in how Zim Asset is treated by all its members.
This should ideally start — apart from the obvious fact that every Zimbabwean has a stake in Zim-Asset — with councillors actively working to implement the economic blueprint in their own spheres.
This goes up to MPs and, of course, the executive. zanu-pf’s Mashonaland West leadership has, with its statement to MPs, brought to the fore a fundamental aspect of Zim-Asset that has not been properly addressed: that of accountability. Yes, we all know that ultimately responsibility for implementation of the economic blueprint lies with something called “the government”.
But what is this “government”? If targets set in Zim-Asset are not met, who is held accountable? Further, what happens to that person who by failure to properly implement his/her bit of Zim-Asset kills the whole thing?
The ruling party’s Mashonaland West leadership says on its part it will descend on MPs hailing from that province.
It is a bold statement by Cde Mliswa, and it remains to be seen if it is actually implemented as declared.
Whether Mashonaland West does it or not, is however, not the most important thing.
What is important is knowing what will happen to ministers, their deputies and permanent secretaries, principal directors and directors, and the entire chain down to the lower ranks of the civil service, when they fail to perform and implement Zim-Asset as expected.
We say this because we have had many other economic blueprints in the past. On paper we all accept that they are brilliant. But somehow they have never delivered the milk and honey that was preached to the electorate.
It is appreciated that external factors have a huge impact on the results realised from such economic blueprints. These external factors range from currency and commodity markets that we largely have no control over, to natural phenomena like drought, to deliberate attempts to sink plans through imposition of illegal economic sanctions.
We do not have much control over such things. But we do have control over how ministers and their staff in Government behave when entrusted with the weighty responsibility of doing their best to make Zim Asset work. In countries like China, deliberate under-performance by civil servants is treated no differently to treason.
In Zimbabwe, lethargy, tardiness and downright laziness are tolerated to amazing extents.
And when you throw corruption into the mix, in addition to the external factors referred to earlier, Zim-Asset’s chances of success are greatly curtailed.
We are told that Government is increasingly operating on results-based mechanisms.
It would be good to see how the results-based approach can be implemented in regards to the performance of ministers and their staff.
Zim-Asset’s chances of success are pinned largely on how those tasked to implement the most major aspects of it approach their duty to the nation.
Online Reporter