A few years ago, two years to be exact, this newspaper called for a public debate on the sustainability of the country’s Hiv/Aids public programme.
A medical doctor and former permanent secretary in the Ministry of Health, Edward Maganu, now living somewhere offshore, embraced the call and tried to offer a perspective through a number of op-eds.
Other than Dr. Maganu our call went unheeded.
Our worry stemmed from the fact that while in the past as a country we could afford to pay from public coffers for the programme with the economy in a freefall that started somewhere in 2007 such an assurance was no longer available.
For Botswana, money never used to be a problem.
But now it is. And a big problem at that!
Another dimension is that under Festus Mogae political commitment towards fighting Hiv/Aids was guaranteed.
Under Khama that guarantee is no longer guaranteed.
We assume it under our own peril.
Where Khama has followed on Mogae’s footsteps on fighting the disease, such following has been half-hearted and not without grumbling.
Where Mogae was hands on, Khama has chosen to operate at arms length.
Of course, Mogae had made the fight against Hiv/Aids a centerpiece of his government, and we acknowledge that there was always going to a textural difference between the two men on how they ran the country. But given that Hiv/Aids threatens the very existence of Botswana as a nation, it is well in order that a State President should have it as his top most personal priorities ÔÇô priorities that are not delegated to subordinates.
A combination of these factors has meant that, as a country, we always had to have our ears on the ground with regard to Government’s commitment towards paying for the Hiv/Aids Programme.
Not least because from early on there was never any blue print which put an obligation on government to shoulder the burden.
Everything was done out of goodwill and out of a public duty by a government that at the time felt urgently obliged to save a nation that faced annihilation.
Now we have thousands and thousands of people whose lives are basically at the mercy of Government.
These are the people who are on ARVs, but who are uncertain not just about the long-term sustainability of the program but also about the commitment of their Government to finance such a programme.
Catastrophe awaits this country should, for any reason, Government decides to pull the plug on free ARVs.
Scientific research shows that the effects of taking the drugs and discontinuing are much more horrendous than instances where drugs had never been taken at all.
When that happens, resistance of the virus is almost a given as is the advent of strands of many other opportunistic diseases like tuberculosis.
Reports that people who have hitherto relied on government for the purchase of ARVs could at one point have to pay for themselves are, to be fair, not new.
To put the whole thing into perspective, two years ago, during an event to commemorate the international AIDS Day, President Ian Khama reminded the nation about the true costs of the programme.
He reminded the nation that, by and large, Botswana Government had received assistance from development partners for which as a nation we had to be grateful.
He asked the development partners not to turn their backs on Botswana as the war had not yet been won.
In the same breath he reminded the nation that in the main the greatest burden, notwithstanding international assistance, was shouldered by Botswana Government, the finances of which were now undergoing a strain.
We think this was an honest, frank and statesman-like assessment which is very rare in our Government.
Having started such a debate we think it is only in order that the President should go all the way by telling the nation just where his Government stands with regard to financing the Hiv/Aids public programme.
This is important not only to help avert public uncertainty, but also to reassure the donor partners.
Currently, there are mixed signals coming from Government and this is not helpful.
Government should not apply to HIV/AIDS the same tactics it did when it decided to kill the second university.
While Government’s handling of the second university was ham-fisted and bad enough, the HIV/AIDS will be catastrophic because in here we are dealing with lives directly.
Tragically, we also have a Vice President who is acting like the president’s poodle.
As the most senior person on the NACA Board, the Vice President is supposed to be a link between Government and civic organization and partners helping Botswana to fight HIV/AIDS.
But to a larger part, owing to his erratic and often thoughtless statements, we are left wondering if General Mompati Merafhe should be a representative of Government on such an important body during this all too critical phase our nation is going through in its history.
Not for the first time, we find ourselves calling on a public debate of the state funded HIV/AIDS programme.