THE debate on the Maize Import Substitution Programme, also known as Command Agriculture, has lost direction. The lies and insults being exchanged are not adding value to the programme.
By Fungai R Badza,Our Reaader
Let the truth tell the story, so we can learn from the experiment.
And learn fast we should, before the second phase of the programme, which is a mere three to four months away.
The Press should not, as alleged by Higher and Tertiary Education minister Jonathan Moyo, over-hype government programmes.
Deceiving the public was never the intended mandate of one daily stable.
Instead, the stable should be calling for strict monitoring and evaluation to ensure proper husbanding of both public funds and public land.
The first lesson, as reported recently, seems to acknowledge the programme was rolled out late.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
The second obvious one was that the budget was inadequate for the intended hectarage.
The third and fourth lessons are of inadequate storage facilities and under-capitalisation of the Grain Marketing Board (GMB), which results in it failing to execute its mandate as the guaranteed buyer of last resort.
Other lessons will probably also show soil chemistry and biology are also equally important as fertiliser and seed, while the aggregate value of non-performing contracts, should it be greater than 10%, could suggest a lack of prudence on the part of the authorities.
Clearly, even though the books of accounts for the project are yet to be tabled as they should, projected information from the Ministry of Agriculture suggests the targeted two million tonnes of maize from the targeted 400 000 hectares will not be achieved.
That should be of concern to everyone, especially Air Force Commander Air Marshal Perrance Shiri, who, according to a report, is running the programme, instead of the GMB.
