An indigenised juice is perhaps what Zim needs

By The NewsDay | Dec. 10, 2012 | 4 Min read

It is festive season and nature has already dressed up for the mood.

Opinion by Tapiwa Gomo

The two main political parties seem to have adopted the art of serenading with the ambience of the season. Your vote is what they want in exchange for promises.

It’s a risky game, where one pays before getting a service. If you are unhappy with the deal, you wait until the next election. There is no repayment, neither is your vote redeemable.

If you sniff from the hype created by MDC-T’s juice economic blueprint and Zanu PF’s conference themed “Indigenise, Empower, Develop and Create Employment,” there is every reason to believe that perhaps, our politics has taken a stride towards the right direction.

And it certainly has opened a manger of cud for many hungry analysts to chew in what is otherwise an arid environment.

It is commendable that for once, we are discussing policy. But it is too early though to be fooled by these mantras, as there is a good chance that they will soon find space in the shelves of oblivion, paving the way for weaponry that inflict pain on people towards voting for the most ruthless. You can see their lips still drip with blood as they speak the language of policies of their promised future.

Let’s leave politics aside for now and take a glance at the matter at stake. The MDC launched its economic blue print which is very elitist, economistic and capitalistic in nature.

Keep Reading

It is pro-labour, favours wealth accumulation by both foreign and local capitalists, full of global narratives palatable to the international capitalist audience and yet so remote from local realities, thereby basing itself on assumptions that are even beyond the MDC-T’s control.

Consequently, it lacks formidable development flair if we look at the new and emerging forms of development.

Among its benchmarks, the MDC-T targets to create one million jobs between 2013 and 2018, that is assuming they are now in full control of government. That is a big assumption. The language of creating employment resonates with youth constituency who arguably constitute the large number of voters should they decide to do so.

In the absence of figures, it is not easy at this stage to analyse zanu PF’s targets, so let’s break down those of the MDC-T. One million jobs in five years equals to an average of 200, 000 jobs a year in a country with an unemployment rate of between 60% and 70%.

I must say it looks very realistic than promising everyone a job.

But the key question is 200, 00 jobs enough especially if their policy depends largely on foreign investors. Perhaps a college student would want to know to what extent is the MDC-T is going to reduce unemployment rather than just say one million jobs.

Hence, while it is melodious to promise youths jobs since it is the majority’s primary concern, it is even more sustainable to establish a conducive environment where both the young and the old can invest in their own ideas than wait for foreign investors to give them a job. Therefore, before promising youths jobs, it is vital that the environment that has caused high unemployment and lack of investor confidence is addressed as a first step.

Without that, the country would be regressing towards the models of the past where it looked like we had a strong economy that was not controlled by us.

Coming from a point of view which asserts that centralised economy in the hands of few is not a good foundation for a future developmental country, juice must appear obsolete, a remnant of the old modernisation period which is being ushered into our future.

Zimbabwe finds itself in this current state of affairs because its economic base was anchored on one sector – agriculture – which at the time was owned by a group of people with multiple allegiances.

When politics got angry, they and their money had somewhere to go.

Perhaps a lesson to be drawn from that experience is that while foreign investment sounds politically appetising, especially for African politicians, there is need to create a local entrepreneurial culture which can resist the vagaries of angry politics. Zanu PF have done this differently, but they have given their people a reason to defend.

There are also other Zimbabweans such as Strive Masiyiwa, Trevor Ncube, Nigel Chanakira etc whose business interests remained in the country even when politics got angry. This is what the country lacks, a large economically empowered people who can defend both the country and their interests.

Finally, on a close analysis, both the MDC T and Zanu PF’s policies reveal some serious inadequacies when read as stand alone. You can not develop people by depending on foreign investors, as investor comes with the intention of making profit.

Similarly you can not inculcate and strengthen a culture of local investment with a grab-and-take policy in the name of indigenisation.

Therefore, an economic blueprint such as that of the MDC-T is not only self-defeating but unsustainable in the long term, while the Zanu PF one remains developmentally and theoretically sound but practically flawed, economically inefficient and politically anarchic.

However, the two policies can very well complement each other which therefore suggests another collaborative partnership between the two parties. It is possible. President Barak Obama recently invited Romney to tap into his ideas on the economy, why not in Zimbabwe?

lTapiwa Gomo is a development consultant based in Pretoria, South Africa