Dear editor
In its eagerness to address many of the problems confronting the country, the Khama administration has been rattling off initiatives at a dizzying speed.
Some have delighted me, others I have found, to be frank, frightening. I have discovered that I am not alone in this ambivalence. Many people (probably the majority), like me, are both delighted and frightened. A significant minority are simply delighted, and for them, the new administration is headed by a messiah who can never put a foot wrong. Many others are simply frightened by recent developments, and as a result, believe that all that which has been most celebrated about this country will be lost forever. A not insignificant number are waiting with bated breath. No other administration has, in recent memory, caused so much angst and excitement at the same time.
What delights many?
The framework for taking the country forward based on the four Ds outlined by the president at his inauguration speaks to many issues that have been troubling ordinary the Motswana for quite some time. These include unemployment, general inefficiency and slow delivery of services, poor and/or non-implementation of projects, chaos on the roads, spiralling crime (especially predatory crimes), incivility, problem-drinking and intolerable noise-nuisance in residential neighbourhoods etc.
These are real problems that affect the quality of life of many Batswana across the class divide in rural and urban centres alike. Previous administrations tended not to focus on most of these niggling problems except the big two: poverty and HIV/AIDS.
However, in the long run seemingly minor problems such as problem-drinking, petty corruption, incivility and noise nuisance destroy the very fabric of society and give the country a bad name. For instance, we have now earned ourselves a reputation (not undeserved) around the world as a nation of reckless drivers. We are well on the way to being added to the list of countries that are unpleasant to live in because many residential neighbourhoods in our cities are becoming unliveable due to end-of-month-Gumba-Gumba-type parties and slum-style mechanics with wheezing and screeching grinders who wake you up at five o’clock in the morning everyday. When do people get to rest? How about the elderly and sick children? What about those who are studying for examinations? It is not surprising therefore, that, whenever the President announces a new initiative, there are gushes of delight all round as it appears that someone is at last going to addresses some of the problems that have been neglected for a long time.
Why are people afraid?
The government seems to want to tackle many of the problems that it has correctly identified as the most troubling in a rush and without reflection and, in many cases, without a proper policy framework to guide the implementation of contemplated solutions. It would also appear that announcements are made in a most informal fashion at Kgotla meetings without prior debate in the top echelons of the bureaucracy, Cabinet or Parliament. Such an approach is potentially disastrous.
A good example of this is the proposed 70% hike in alcohol taxes. The social and economic implications of this decision are far-reaching: job losses (estimated at 40 000), losses to the economy (shedding of 1billion pula worth of share value at the stock exchange) and a huge knock in investor confidence caused by uncertainty-all in order to test the theory that the more expensive the alcohol, the less the consumption. These are matters that require deep reflection, consultation, research and debate.
Many of us do not find the argument that there is little information on alcohol-use and problem-drinking convincing. It was not difficult for me to uncover information to the effect that the University of Botswana has in the past conducted a comprehensive study (on behalf of government) on types of beverages consumed in Botswana, consumption patterns by class and occupation and the impact of alcohol on health, work, crime etc. Surely this could be updated to inform policy? I seem to remember attending a course in my student days at U.B where the relative effectiveness of different models of alcohol control was discussed. The vast knowledge and expertise of social scientists is there to be tapped but there appears to be an inexplicable disdain for knowledge on the part of the government.
What many people find even more disturbing is the apparently cavalier attitude of government towards that sacred instrument upon which this Republic is founded: the Constitution.
One cannot pretend to hold the constitution sacred while one takes the axe to same constitution through invidious legislation such as the Media Bill and Pubic Servants Bill. The control freakery suggested by these bills is frightening. We are told, out of the blue, that we have to register our names against our cell phone numbers. Curiously, the government did not see any need to consult the public or justify its actions or seek to reassure us how and when the information obtained would be used or whether any oversight mechanism would be set up to prevent possible abuse. Insidious. Where we would expect our country as the oldest democracy on the African continent to be working hard to entrench civil liberties through such legislation as Freedom of Information Act and Whistle Blowers Act (as newer democracies have done), it is bent on diminishing our rights and frightening us into submission. Doesn’t the government realize that it is better to be respected for the good you have done than feared for what you might do to people?
Another source of worry is that there has been blurring of policy and operational matters. As I understand things, under our model of government, Ministers and the President are primarily concerned with policy, not operational matters (at least not directly). As it is, it is the Ministers who want to micro-manage everybody and everything while neglecting matters of policy.
For instance, the best way to handle the problem school or clinics that have fallen into disrepair is not to give instructions for a specific school/clinic to be fixed but to determine whether there are policy guidelines/schedules for the maintenance of schools/clinics and if they exist, find out why they have not been followed.
The President and his Ministers should not be concerned with minutiae such as missing windows and the dozing security guard as it will mean they have little or no time to discuss policy. Indeed, recent initiatives, including the 70% hike on alcohol taxes, have all the hallmarks of policies made on the hoof.
To conclude, I would caution that while many people are excited about many of the government’s proposals, they are uneasy about the way these proposals are announced. They are also concerned about the apparent the lack of reflection that seems to precede the announcement of these proposals given their likely impact on many aspects of our lives.
Some of the recent initiatives could easily bankrupt the country, scare investors and most importantly ruin our democracy. It has always been the tradition of governments in this country to base policy on research (hence the various research units in our ministries) and to pilot projects/programmes before they are rolled out. That has been the secret of our success in the past. Now we seem to be in a mad rush to implement edicts and musings of the president instead of doing things in the time-tested fashion. It has been said that we should not worry about the new way of doing things because the government means well ÔÇô that, simply, will not do- we must remain vigilant because (as someone has put it) ‘the road to hell is sometimes paved with good intentions’
