By Kurayi Prosper Masenyama and Nick Mangwana
Introduction
Following
widespread queries, questions and concerns received by our respective Department
and District from Party members, supporters, ordinary citizens, Zimbabweans in
the Diaspora, prospective and current investors following the publication of an
article titled ‘Government in Major Climbdown’ by The Sunday Mail newspaper of
25th-31st May 2014 we feel compelled to present this
submission putting a number of matters into perspective.
Background to indigenisation and economic
empowerment
The indigenisation and
economic empowerment policy is firmly in line with the Zanu P.F ideology of
people empowerment. The policy is following the sequence of political
independence, mass education, land reform and resettlement. The policy is
deeply entrenched in Zanu P.F thinking as evidenced by its adoption as theme
for the following Annual National People’s Conferences:
- Chinhoyi, 2013: ‘Zim Asset: Growing the Economy for Employment and Empowerment
- Gweru, 2012: ‘Indigenise, Empower, Develop and Create Employment
- Bulawayo, 2011: ‘Defend National Sovereignty, Consolidate Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment’
- Mutare, 2010: ‘Taking Total Control of Our Resources Through Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment’
Thus, it is beyond doubt that the policy has
been the Party’s foremost programme and main message going into the 2014, July
31 harmonised elections.
Legislation
Implementation of the policy
is directed by the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act (Chapter 14:33)
passed in 2007. There are also supporting Statutory Instruments 21 of 2010, 34
of 2011 and 66 of 2013. The new constitution also guides the implementation of
indigenisation through a number of sections directing the expansion of the
programme and identifying groups to be prioritized in its beneficiation. Thus,
the policy is firmly embedded in the country’s legal framework.
Sectoral
Approach to Indigenisation
The indigenisation and
economic empowerment programme has always been implemented differently across
sectors quite contrary to the so-called one-size fits all approach as alleged
by a number of individuals and media organizations. Statutory Instrument 21 of
2010 directed the set up of Sectoral Committees under the National
Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Board (NIEEB) to advise Government on
the implementation of indigenisation in their respective sectors. The
Committees were chaired by Board members and comprised experts in the
respective. The recommendations from the various sector committees were adopted
and are in the process of being implemented by the responsible Ministry. The
only recommendations not adopted were by the Mining sector committee where a
different framework was implemented in the sector.
Milestones
Covered Thus Far
Despite the harsh economic
environment and the inconsistencies surrounding the existence of the Government
of National Unity a lot of positives have derived from the implementation of
the indigenisation and economic empowerment policy. Thousands of companies have
complied with the 51/49 principle, a number of Community Share Ownership and
Employee Share Ownership Trusts have been established across the country.
Various communities have received CSOT funds and implemented infrastructural
projects that are already visible in various areas. We, however, note with
concern that quite a number of companies have failed to comply with some of the
requirements of the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act (Chapter
14:33).
Impact
on Foreign Direct Investment
The
indigenisation and economic empowerment programme was never meant to dissuade
foreign investment in Zimbabwe as widely alleged by a number of individuals. It
is primarily meant and intended to enable Zimbabweans to participate
meaningfully in the mainstream economy. It actually encourages foreign
investors to consider partnering local Zimba abweans with the relevant
expertise and capital in business ventures in a win-win situation. It is our understanding that what investors
require from the Party and Government is policy clarity and certainty. As a
Party, and responsible Department we have done everything possible to provide
this clarity and certainty. Thus, so far we are still to encounter a situation
where a serious company disinvested from the country or a potential investor
reconsidering decision citing indigenisation as the primary cause.
Policy Review and
Suggestions Going Forward
We
herein put it on record that the indigenisation and economic empowerment policy
is not and was never cast in stone. As a Party and certainly the Government
which governs on behalf is always ready to receive and consider suggestions
that can enhance the realization of the broad aim of the policy i.e to
economically benefit the majority of Zimbabwean citizens. In this light we have
received and considered sector committees recommendations, the Supply and
Distribute Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment (SADIE) model as articulated
by the former Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor Dr Gideon Gono. We are
therefore excited by the suggestions of the Production Sharing Model and the
Joint Empowerment Investment Model as articulated by The Sunday Mail attributed
to Politburo member Professor Jonathan Moyo. The suggestions will certainly be
considered by the Party and incorporated into the indigenisation policy
framework with due regards to the original intention of the programme.
We, however, refute the
unfortunate allegation that considering reviewing the policy to make it more
amenable to both indigenous Zimbabweans and foreign investors represents a huge
‘climb down’ on the part of the Government and the Party. Policy making is
never about climbing up or down, but about planning and implementing what is best
in a given scenario be it a political, social or economic environment.
Furthermore, we also have to
put it on record that Zanu P.F is a democratic force that allows robust debate
in policy discussions in its various organs. However, once the policy is adopted
as Party position every official, member, associate, affiliate or supporter has
an obligation to articulate and support it through thick and thin. Thus, it is
naïve to associate a broad Party policy with a single Department or individual,
normally responsible for its implementation. It is even more absurd to view the
adoption of changes or revisions suggested by Party members as a victory for
the concern members and a defeat for those who had been articulating the agreed
Party position. Thus, trying to divide Party functionaries into policy
moderates and hardliners/radicals is a futile attempt to drive a wedge and kill
the transparent and democratic ethos of the Party.
Conclusion
In the final analysis the
grand stage for the revival of the Zimbabwean economy has been set. The
adoption of the Zim Asset programme is a sure step of progress going forward
and deepening of the economic empowerment programme. Consideration on improving
the country’s programmes and policies is always on-going and appreciated.
However, the current position of the Party on indigenisation and economic
empowerment has been unwavering and consistent. If this consistency is
replicated at Government level the investors will have a clear message on what
needs to be done resulting in positive and secure decision making creating a
win-win situation for the investor and Zimbabwe as the host nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cde
Kurai Prosper Masenyama (left) is the Zanu P.F National Director for Indigenisation
and Economic Empowerment and Cde Nick Mangwana (right) is the Chairperson of Zanu PF UK
No comments:
Post a Comment