The Sunday Mail
Howdy folks!
The 2016 National Budget was spot on when it said youth empowerment is crucial to the economy, especially as youths are the leaders of tomorrow.
I
t was indeed in harmony with the national Constitution’s declaration that it will take reasonable measures, including affirmative action programmes, to ensure that youths “are afforded opportunities for employment and other avenues to economic empowerment”.
When we look at the current strategies to tackle youth unemployment and try to reconcile them with the above policy and constitutional commitments, we reach attention-grabbing deductions.
The question is: Are we really doing enough?
What seems to be under the spotlight in attempting to address the joblessness epidemic grappling our nation is the Localised Empowerment Accelerated Fund (Leaf), a US$10 million revolving fund targeted at empowering the youths by supporting their business ventures.
This US$10 million facility will attract an interest rate of 10 percent per annum.
It is a good initiative in that it has set a quota for every district to ensure wider access.
And it also guarantees youths resources so that they won’t compete with those who are more credible borrowers in the mainstream financial services market.
The latest Monetary Policy Statement actually admitted that youths are excluded from formal financial services largely due to negative stereotypes that consider them as high risk-takers, as people who cannot provide collateral, have limited business and life experience and lack a track record or credit history.
The Central Bank actually believes that access to financial services could help youths become economically active, start their own enterprises, finance education and engage productively within their communities.
Then we have vocational training centres that Government has been rehabilitating with a view to equipping young people with skills that are relevant for them to thrive in the economy of the day.
We are also “stemitising”. Results will start to be realised in the medium to long term.
Other strategies are being implemented albeit on a smaller, or should I say less prominent, scale.
Youths, in their large numbers, are mainly looking at the above to be delivered from their economic challenges.
What seems to be the challenge with Leaf is Government’s proposal that “participating banks shall bear 100 percent risk as the decision to fund shall rest with them”.
Obviously this will increase and complicate access conditions to the Fund as banks try to ameliorate perceived risk.
Government, in a way, is actually saying to banks, “We do not trust these youngsters. If you are to deal with them, then you must be prepared to deal with the consequences.”
Normally, when people get a heads-up of that calibre, they will try to be very careful for nothing.
Where emphasis should actually be placed most is the bankability of the proposed project and the ability of its implementer, and constant monitoring of the project as it is being implemented.
But why should we also accept a culture where youths are expected to only write their business plans when money is put on the table?
This should be discouraged! Youths should be encouraged to develop their business ideas from an early stage.
While they are learning and acquiring skills in high school, they should be assisted to start developing ideas and business plans that they will implement later.
These plans can continue to be worked on and fine-tuned as they grow, so that the youths can have a profound understanding of their business models. This should also be reinforced through career guidance to ensure that they make proper choices in pursuing their targets.
The above will ensure that when money is put on the table, we have youths who are already grounded in what they want to do and they have concrete plans that they can relate to and are in a position to implement them successfully.
This is better than the current scenario where you can find a young person with a very brilliant business plan, which they, unfortunately, cannot even articulate or explain beyond what is written on it.
Youths have actually condemned themselves to mere speculators who pay other people to write the documents on their behalf and then present them as if they are their own.
When that kind of person is given capital, chances are very high that they will fail to implement the project and end up misusing it.
While part of the solution to youth unemployment is economic growth and fostering youth inclusion in that growth, we have not been experiencing the kind of growth that is satisfactory enough to warrant that.
Youth are actually falling by the wayside.
The IMF, in its recent End of Mission statement said, “Economic difficulties have deepened. Zimbabwe cannot wait and needs to act now. The El Nino-induced drought has hit the economy hard.”
A fusion of youth unemployment and a drought of this magnitude can only succeed in condemning youths to worse conditions.
It’s pushing them into a corner and they may be left desperate enough to do just about anything — legal or illegal, moral or immoral — for them to bust hunger.
If youths are the “leaders of tomorrow” as Government indicated in the National Budget, and if we want to preserve them so that they can take up those roles when that kingdom comes, we should be thinking along the lines of providing safety nets as a short term measure to avert hunger.
Going forward, we need the Youth, Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Minister to reserve certain sectors for youths, especially sectors that have lighter barriers to entry.
Youths cannot be expected to start large, hence the low hanging fruits must be left for them to partake.
Later folks!
