admin
The mps had actually been paid for their services during the three-year long drafting undertaking.
What they are demanding now is over and above what they received.
It includes payment for the use of their motor vehicles and adds up to about $19 million, give or take a million.
MPs in the Zimbabwean House of Assembly are from three political parties: the MDC-Tsvangirai, Zanu-PF and the MDC-Welshman Ncube. There are a few in both the lower and the upper house who are presidential appointees.
These appointees are virtually Zanu-PF since they were appointed by the first secretary of Zanu-Pf in his capacity, however, as the President of Zimbabwe.
For the purpose of this article we shall not mention names nor give each of the concerned MPs a political party tag.
Suffice it to refer to them only as MPs who were part of Copac.
When each MP was campaigning he or she promised to do one or other thing for the people if voted into either Parliament or the Senate.
They promised to offer their respective constituencies leadership, a quality characterised by an ability to guide and advise to initiate projects and source investments and aid to sensitise constituents on social, cultural, political and economic issues.
Social matters include education and health. Education encompasses formal and informal modes.
Health means the absence of diseases and their actual as well as potential cause and how to prevent and to cure them.
Those causes of diseases range from poor diet to poor physical environmental conditions such as lack of water or unmonitored dirt or contaminated water such as vermin-breeding pools and swamps as well as open wells and dams.
In this regard MPs (I mean really good Mps and not self-seeking money-chasing political mercenaries) use the good, old time-honoured dictum which declares that “prevention is better than cure”.
With that they improve the habitability of their constituencies by eliminating actual and possible causes of diseases.
Cultural matters start with the language spoken in the constituency and end with religion. The MPs’ responsibility is to highlight the people’s constitutional right to enjoy the freedom of worship.
As MPs represent usually, if not invariably, multi-religious communications, it is not his or her duty to one religion. MPs have no right to question the voter’s right to worship or not to worship, does not infringe upon other people’s (including the worshippers themselves) right to life and normal pursuit of happiness.
It was most revealing that when the Njelele shrine was being repeatedly abused by some iconoclasts recently, there was no critical voice whatsoever from either the House of Assembly or from the Senate in defence of those who worship at that traditional centre.
Can or should we expect such a voice in the not too distant future? It is better late than never. That is what MPs are expected to do: to defend their cosmopolitan nation’s cultural values. The Njelele shrine is an international rather than a regional religious centre.
The political role of MPs is of course to popularise their respective politics in their constituencies. The appointed Mps have a moral duty to promote the image of their mentor for obvious reasons.
Popularisation of a political party involves satisfying the expectations of their people, in their case the constituents. These expectations are based on the promises made by the MPs while they were campaigning as candidates. None of them is in this case on record as saying he or she would as an Mp enrich himself or herself at the expense of the nation by claiming allowances whenever an opportunity seems to occur.
They promised to improve the lot of the people by creating employment, accommodation, making food available, accessible and, above all, affordable. However it now appears that they have forgotten about employment generation and are now making food available, accessible and affordable to themselves by demanding what little financial resources the Government raises by taxing the very same people (voters) who are now forgotten.
We all know how financially constrained the Zimbabwean Government is. MPs are (or should be) much Zimbabwean by dint of their privileged position.
Governments by and large get their financial resources from only two sources: taxes and loans (borrowing).
It does not make any sense whatsoever for the Ministry of Finance to send personnel to the South African government to negotiate for a loan while our MPs are clamouring for unjustifiable allowances running into millions. Are we borrowing to pay them?
Mps ought to get loans from banks and other financial institutions to enable them to exploit Zimbabwe’s national resources that occurr in great abundance throught the country.
Using their national positions, it should be relatively easy for MPs and Senators to get loans especially for industrial and commercial projects particularly in their respective constituencies.
The should in addition to this guide emerging industries and commercial entrepreneurs on how to access such loans for investing in their constituencies.
Professional planning can help MPs and Senators to develop their constituencies socially, culturally, politically and economically so that they could leave them much better places than when they found them.
l Saul Gwakuba Ndlovu is a Bulawayo based retired journalist. He can be contacted on cell 0734328136 and on email [email protected]
Online Reporter