The Sunday Mail
Comrades, we are faced with the reality that the old economy dies, if not dead as a donkey already. And I shed no tears for it.
In the first part of this series (“Sacrificing the future for FDI”) published in The Sunday Mail of March 29, 2015, I drew attention to concerns over an indigenisation programme losing momentum post-July 31, 2013, despite having been endorsed by our majority and having cast the election result in favour of a Zanu-PF Government.
Having won the elections, our new Government launched Zim-Asset in October 2013.
This second part of the series will underscore the reality that our Government cannot expect to achieve Zim Asset’s objectives and vision, thereby fulfilling its July 31, 2013 mandate, with any lingering shadow of doubt or backtracking on indigenising Zimbabwe’s economy.
The heart of Zim-Asset —much as it does invite increased FDI — is its guiding Vision for “An Empowered Society and Growing Economy”.
Ultimately, it is about “an empowered society” that shall be the foundation for Zimbabwe’s sustainable socio-economic development and prosperity.
There is no doubt that Zimbabwe must engage and attract foreign investors to inject capital into our economy, but certainly not at the expense of measures to ensure our indigenous society takes control of and achieves a growing economy, one partnering and trading with the world, but ours all the same.
The Constitution of Zimbabwe mandates that the State and all institutions and agencies of Government at every level must promote “self reliance” and foster commercial enterprise to empower Zimbabwean citizens.
It goes further to call upon the State and Government to take measures to empower marginalised persons, groups and communities in Zimbabwe through affirmative action.
The Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act goes on to define empowerment as “the creation of an environment which enhances the performance of the economic activities of indigenous Zimbabweans into which they would have been introduced or involved through indigenisation”.
Comrades, we are faced with the reality that the old economy dies, if not dead as a donkey already.
And I shed no tears for it.
It was always a “host economy” wasn’t it? A leech imposed upon our majority indigenous economic aspirations by monopolising foreign economic interest.And we embarked upon killing it, didn’t we? With our aspirations for economic emancipation, for a new indigenous economy.
Naturally, we have had to endure the socio-economic pains of economic transformation. It has always been a temporary pain, only prolonged by our lack of unity of purpose, corruption, policy inconsistency, lack of boldness in execution and deficient ideological conviction.
You only need to observe the cynicism towards President Robert Mugabe’s sincere call for the Diaspora to inject capital into our new indigenous economy.
Dear Zimbabweans, within and beyond our homeland borders, it is our economy that knows no political divide and prejudices.
It is an indigenous economy that must be our last resort when grasses beyond prove not so green or welcoming after all.
It is not Robert Gabriel Mugabe’s economy; has never been claimed as such.
He has only been the shepherd, leading it back to our meek unsure souls yet longing for what was expropriated and deprived us.
That became his crime, as defined for us by the West from whom Robert Mugabe demanded restitution.
All he has requested of us is that our now empowered indigenous societies “judiciously exploit” reclaimed natural resources with our enterprise and hard work.
And yet our response is cynicism, quick fixes and corruption only to be the cowards and blame it on the messenger, Robert Gabriel Mugabe.
At the October 2011 launch of the Chegutu, Mhondoro-Ngezi, Zvimba Community Trust established from the indigenising Zimplats, President Mugabe underlined that: “The indigenisation and empowerment laws are not intended to stifle foreign investment, far from it. It is important to note that the economy cannot grow if it excludes the majority of the country’s population.”
President Mugabe envisions our local/rural communities becoming “empowered societies”, critical to growing our indigenous economy.
He believes: “Community share ownership trusts are a vehicle for broad-based participation in shareholding in various businesses by our communities. The proceeds from such participation shall be used for the provision of social and economic infrastructure.”
Does our Government, appointed by President Mugabe, reflect such vision so as to appreciate the potential of CSOTs as a critical “empowered society” to contribute to achieving Zim-Asset’s goals?
CSOTs can significantly contribute towards the Zim-Asset Food Security and Nutrition, and Value Addition and Beneficiation (agro-processing) cluster outputs by investing proceeds from their new shareholding and “seed capital” towards such economic agenda.
It will not only be to the economic benefit of the local communities, but certainly build a brave new indigenous national economy, from the grassroots up.
Our rural communities are primarily agro-based economies; much as our national economy has been an agriculture-driven economy.
What stops CSOTs from playing their part in producing the 400 000 tonnes of meat, 20 million layers and 50 million dozen eggs that Zim-Asset seeks to have produced?
In the Value Addition and Beneficiation Cluster, can bee-keeping in our communities not be enhanced by CSOTs to achieve the projected 500 000 litres of honey?
What of Honde Valley and Chimanimani’s avocados being directed towards the anticipated 14 000 tonnes of avocado oil, or have Nyanga, Mutoko, Murehwa or Mazowe’s fruits producing 100 million litres of fruit juice?
If CSOTs pursue such ventures, not only will they create jobs and generate income to grow their funds, but so, too, will rural economies begin to grow and modernise all to create a network of local economies that become a foundation for our national indigenous economy.
To whom is land being allocated?
Why not to Gwanda, Umguza or Umzingwane CSOTs situated in prime cattle country and sitting on US$11 000 000 in seed capital at their disposal?
Could they not invest in cattle ranching and, in the process, help rebuild our national herd and establish a beef production and processing value chain?
What of Mazowe and Bindura CSOTs, with a guaranteed US$10 000 000 over the next five years?
Can they not produce wheat, maize or small grains?
Mutasa and Marange-Zimunya CSOTs could embark on a joint venture and build Zim Asset’s planned avocado processing plant in Rusitu Valley (Chimanimani).
Must Tongogara CSOT’s US$10 000 000 not look to investing in the surrounding Shurugwi hills and plains endowed with vast mineral resources?
It all requires a bold start, one only reassured by follow-up support from the very Government that is empowering these communities.
But instead, we are only reminded of sacred and messiah-like foreign investors whose return we must look to while our local confidence and endeavour at “self-reliance” is battered.
And thus, we will see our media clamour to cover Britain’s DFID launch of a US$72 million Fund for Livelihoods and Food Security.
Must the breaking news and applause be for guilt-stricken handouts by those with much to atone for, whose malicious sanctions destroyed our very livelihoods they now want to remedy?
It is only to be allowed access to resources now under our control, knowing they must appease our souls they injured.
But who reports on the inspiring efforts for “self-reliance” in agriculture by our CSOTs?
Has our media cared to report on Gwanda CSOT rehabilitating Guyu Chelesa and Sukwi irrigation schemes?
It has resulted in 106 hectares being made irrigable and set for increased production in arid Matabeleland South.
Ah, yes, the media and Government are preoccupied for the Queen’s return.
One editor boasted, upon sensing a conflicted and unsure indigenisation programme, that his paper was now proved right that indigenisation must be done away with.
God forbid, that we beat our chests over prophecies for our own doom.
He would condemn us to a “host economy” while claiming to inform in Zimbabwe’s best interest, and to save us from Robert Mugabe and Zanu-PF.
Dark comedy it is.
We would think the editor and his paper would be “telling it like it is” on the potential of empowered societies being established, thanks to indigenisation, and write to inspire their contribution to a growing indigenous economy.
Instead, they tell it like they prefer, to disparage and discourage a national agenda.
Would we not have our own Royal Bafokengs scattered across Zimbabwe?
The Royal Bafokeng are a wealthy platinum-endowed South African community, which, through its 13,4 percent shareholding in Implats, invests in Zimbabwe’s platinum (Zimplats and Mimosa).
Is there any good reason why our empowered communities must not be encouraged and capacitated to invest in their own natural resources?
There must be greater effort by Government to turn these districts in which empowered local communities are based, and with geographically unique and distinct economic advantage, into the only real and sustainable “special economic zones” that will enhance food security and provide raw materials for our local industries.
Is Robert Gabriel Mugabe’s vision and Zanu-PF’s ideology the problem really; much as we must ask in the same breath whether foreign investors are the coveted remedy to our temporary transformative pain?
Are we, Zimbabweans at home and abroad, and our mindset, not our own curse committing “economicide”?
The beautiful are indeed being born.
They are CSOTs, which constitute the “empowered society” Zim Asset envisions “growing the economy”.
Join me then, as this new dawn breaks, to dance upon the grave of a dead “host economy”.
But we dance in celebration, knowing that the grave of Rhodes’ depriving economic legacy becomes blinded by the vision of “An Empowered Society and a Growing Economy”.
How death inspires hope for a brave new indigenous economy.
Rangu Nyamurundira is a lawyer and member of the Zimbabwe Youth Council Board. His views are his own and do not reflect or represent the views of institutions he is associated with.
