The Sunday Mail
Walking on busy city sidewalks on a day like any other, empty canisters of Broncleer are visible – typifying an astounding phenomenon of the contemporary Sunshine City.
Broncleer is a banned substance concentrated with an intoxicating substance called codeine sulphate.
Youths and other folk overdose on the syrup to earn a quick, easy and cheap high. A US$2 bottle, they say, can intoxicate as many as four persons.
At Harare’s Fourth Street rank, I have seen traders smugly selling it in broad daylight, it’s all business-as-usual.
Any wonder why 65 percent of our youths are said to suffer from mental problems due to drug and substance abuse according to the Zimbabwe United Nations Association?
How this long-embargoed and deleterious commodity is still creeping into our country in such appalling quantum is a mystery.
Broncleer is just one of the restricted and prohibited imports pilgrimaging their way into the gullible mouths of local consumers. Expired drugs, pornographic materials, skin lightening creams, soaps and lotions, fresh fruit and vegetables, dangerous and harmful drugs and hazardous substances are part of the catalogue of the prohibited imports that still come through.
The Zimbabwe Revenue Authority says it “has been charged with the control of these import and export restrictions and prohibitions”.
I understand the police and other Government departments also assist the tax man. If these agencies are doing their job properly, then why is all this still happening?
The above is possible, thanks to “informal border posts”.
It is unspeakable to note that the number of informal border posts in Zimbabwe is almost three times more than formal ones.
While we have just 18 formal borders, the known informal ones are not 20 or 30 or 40 – they are 51.
Our formal borders themselves are already porous. And then we have 51 informal ones!
People use them too, to illegally move to and from neighbouring countries without requisite paperwork, with some moving foreign currencies or wildlife and related products.
One danger of these informal borders is that they can be used to move large volumes of money out; this in an economy already battling a liquidity crunch.
The tax man is also prejudiced of significant revenue when goods that should pay duty are moved through informal borders.
Government is so much in need of money right now, especially noting that the tax man missed revenue collection targets for the first half of 2014.
And nobody monitors the standard of imports passing through informal borders! Not to mention the infringement of trademark, copyright and patent rights.
We really cannot allow all this to continue happening as it is a danger to not only our economy but to national security too.
I believe that the main reason why traders are using informal borders is because of the high transactional costs for Zimbabweans in international trade.
The cost of exporting and importing for Zimbabweans is higher than average regional costs. It costs US$3 765 to export a container from Zimbabwe against a Sub-Saharan average of US$2,108 (and as low as US$1 695 in Lesotho).
Importing is much more expensive, as one has to part with US$5 660 per container (the regional average is US$2 793, with Namibia paying US$1 905).
The costs of exporting and importing, using formal channels, have risen since last year and this might be motivating traders to use informal borders to avoid paying duty.
Red tape is also pushing traders to opt for informal borders.
Out transport and trade infrastructure at formal border posts is not up to scratch. Consistent power outages and poor Internet connectivity due to poor telecommunication infrastructure compound this.
This explains why it takes 53 days, on average, to export goods from Zimbabwe, when it takes only 16 days in South Africa. Importing takes 71 days, on average, for Zimbabwe and only 21 days for South Africa.
As long as this prevails, informal borders will thrive.
A report by the Senate Thematic Committee on Peace and Security in July 24 highlighted that the challenges faced by police manning borders include inadequate human resources, escalating corruption by customs and immigration officials, and unavailability of heavy vehicle scanners to detect potential smuggling in containers.
We surely cannot allow the freeze of public service recruitment compromise our borders. We need appropriate manpower to effectively guard our borders for the national interest.
Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi has said: “There is need for Government to look at the issue of unfreezing posts at such border posts because you will find that a border post that I am talking about which is Beitbridge, it is one of the busiest border posts in Sub-Saharan Africa. So there is need for enough manpower to man the border post.”
While most formal border posts operate 12 hours, informal border posts operate 24 hours.
There are no physical inspections for goods, and diseases can be easily passed as phytosanitary measures cannot be enforced.
There are no queues at these informal borders, just as there are no booths for duty payment.
They are express highways, where anything enters Zimbabwe through the “green zone”.
Can an industrial policy succeed in a country with more informal borders than formal borders?
There is a new vibe not only in Zimbabwe, but the region at large, to promote industrialisation. The communiqué of the just-ended Sadc Summit of Heads of State and Government says regional leaders are “directed that industrialisation should take centre stage in Sadc’s regional integration agenda”.
We already have two policies seeking to promote industrialisation, namely Zim-Asset and the Industrial Development Policy.
The irony is that since the IDP’s launch, capacity utilisation has fallen from 57 percent in 2011 to 39 percent last year. And every one percent drop in capacity utilisation sheds thousands of jobs.
An industrial policy cannot be effective in a country with porous and informal borders.
The main instruments anchoring our IDP are import substitution and tariff protection. However, these are rendered sterile by porous borders .
The IDP says: “The situation in Zimbabwe demands that we rely on it (import substitution) to offer temporary protection for our industry to counter the surge in the disruptive imports of cheap and dumped goods which can be easily produced locally.”
How is this possible when goods are getting into the country undetected? What is the use of banning imports when they still find their way through informal bordered posts to compete with locally-produced goods?
We might as well not have an industrial policy! If we really want to incubate our local industry, then we have ensure secure borders.
The IDP also reads: “The principle of import substitution… will have to be applied in conjunction with an alignment of our tariff regime… ensure that industry gets the necessary protection… the adjustments sought will in the majority of cases require a raise in tariff levels.”
Even if import tariffs are raised to 1 000 percent, they won’t help if informal borders exist. It is like giving with one hand and taking back with the other. There is nothing to celebrate about tariff protection if we have informal borders.
Local industry has even adopted the if-you-can’t-beat-them-join-them attitude. Industry knows that the industrial policy won’t work in this environment.
Zim-Asset is a four legged giant, and value addition and beneficiation is one of the four legs it should stand on.
Zim-Asset will be a limping giant if we attempt to foster value addition and beneficiation with this appalling number of informal and porous borders.
A limping giant cannot conquer in war.
Priority should be given to mechanising border posts to tackle corruption and smuggling. This should also enhance cargo movement.
Even from ancient Biblical days, the signature of a nation’s sovereignty was its walls’ strength.
Bishop Lazarus will vouch that Nehemiah was solely dedicated to narrating the rebuilding of walls and gates of one city.
What are we doing about our very own borders?
