Monday’s coup d’état in the People’s Party (PP) seemed like the right thing to do. PP’s leader, Joyce Banda, has displayed all the signs of a reluctant and, sometimes, clueless captain of a rudderless ship that is riding choppy waters.
After that coup and the subsequent developments, we now know that those who thought regionalism was on its way to the grave celebrated way too early. We—particularly politicians—think about protecting the interests of our respective regions first before the national concerns. We also know that parties’ constitutions (even Malawi’s own Constitution) are just worthless collections of high sounding legal jargon which nobody cares for. We further know that Banda has the devil-may-care attitude towards her leadership of the party and couldn’t care less if anyone led it so long as she was left alone to brood over her losses.
Since PP’s elective convention in 2013, Banda has lost vice-presidents faster—and more of them—than a Standard One pupil would lose her pencils in a year. Alright, I admit, I may have exaggerated but, if within two years of refreshing your leadership, you have had five deputies—three elected and two appointed—ditching you, it is serious indictment on your suitability as a leader. Maybe not even a Standard One pupil could be that careless with her pencils.
JB, to be fair, hasn’t done herself any favours by holing up in South Africa, insulating herself from the challenges and the insults her followers have to live up with.
That alone would have been enough to call for a convention—or whatever instruments it is that manages these matters—to push for a leadership that is amicable as it is acceptable. Or even a coup d’état.
Hence, the Monday putsch would have assumed a veneer of acceptability and respectability had the coup plotters done the right thing by seeking a consensus of like-minded individuals from a broad spectrum of the party’s membership across all the regions.
Alas! It lost all pretentions of righteousness after its leaders reduced the coup to a regional affair than a national concern they wanted it to be or it should have been.
Former vice-president Khumbo Kachali may be an astute politician but some of the characters which PP regional leader for north Christopher Mzomera Ngwira cited as making him fit for the leadership of the party are laughable at best and pathetic at worst.
Ngwira suggested that the mere fact that Kachali has a police officer assigned to him—that by virtue of his position as former vice-president, a position to which, rather than being elected to, he was simply appointed—made him the ideal person to lead PP. Maybe. Maybe not.
Kachali became Malawi’s vice-president without subjecting himself to the will of people nationally. In terms of national politics, he is as raw as any and to imagine he would command universal respect and support in the PP, let alone nationally, is gullibility redefined.
Let’s not forget, Kachali is a turncoat of some fearsome reputation. He was in the United Democratic Front (UDF) and when it seemed its fortunes were changing for the worse, Kachali was one of the first people to bale out for Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
After being chucked out of DPP alongside Banda, they founded PP, where fortune—fate, maybe—found him in the right place at the right time when he was appointed Malawi vice-president following the death of Bingu wa Mutharika.
Last year when Banda made it subtly known to Kachali that he was unelectable as vice-president, he threw a fit and campaigned for President Peter Mutharika against his own leader.
One year on, after Mutharika has ignored him for rewards for his sweat in the campaign, Kachali and his minions would have us believe he is the next best thing to lead PP to glory. Maybe he is, depending on the standards the party is aspiring for. After all, even cockroaches have leaders but that doesn’t make them better than the vermin they are leading.
Monday, August 17, 2015
Monday, June 22, 2015
Either Mutharika or Kachaje lied
Having combed with a fine toothcomb through The Daily Times’ story about Economics Association of Malawi (Ecama) suggesting that President Peter Mutharika lied on the economy, I have failed to come across a statement where Gregory Gondwe, the author, quotes Ecama’s president Henry Kachaje as saying “Mutharika lied on the economy”.
Which is why I find Ecama’s rambling rebuttal to the story needlessly provocative, lacking coherence and direction, contradictory and built on shaky ground. And a waste of resources.
Perhaps, Ecama could have stated their case better by publishing Kachaje’s presentation for us to judge how 'unprofessional' The Daily Times or the journalist were, if at all. They didn’t! I would have expected them to, at least, reproach Gregory for quoting Kachaje out of context or inventing quotations. Shame, they didn’t either!
Nowhere in the story does Gregory quote Kachaje directly as saying Mutharika lied to the nation about the economy. And nowhere in its published tantrum does Ecama say Gregory misquoted Kachaje. What the journalist used was inference or interpretative journalism. If someone says “John does not say the truth” it is not farfetched to infer that John is a liar. Just as there are million ways of skinning a cat, they are even more of saying someone is a liar. Kachaje used one of those.
Gregory directly quotes Kachaje, on economic growth, as saying: “How can we be sure that ‘the economy is expected to rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent’ when we have just experienced the worst floods in recent history and agricultural output is expected to drop by 30 percent?” In his State of the Nation Address in May, President Mutharika said on the subject: “It is estimated that the economy grew by 5.5 percent and it is expected to rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent or higher from next year.” Interpretation? Mutharika lied.
On inflation, Kachaje rhetorically asked in his presentation last week: “How will the interest rates go down when inflation is unlikely to drop significantly? How will people’s disposable incomes increase when they will be buying food at higher prices?” He was, in all probability, responding to what Mutharika said in that address: “We expect annual inflation to fall to 16.5 percent in 2015 compared to 23.8 percent in 2014. The decline in inflation is expected to increase people’s disposable incomes and interest rates are also expected to decline in 2016.” Interpretation? Mutharika lied again.
Kachaje and Mutharika are patently not singing from the same hymnbook and only one of them can hold the truth. The journalist in Gregory just brought up that fact. Mutharika is a lawyer. And a politician. And politicians are not necessarily noted for their preference for truth. Kachaje, on the other hand, is an economist. Not just a riff-raff economist picked off the street; he is the boss of them all, including those boys and girls Mutharika relies on for advice on the economy.
And when he barks on the economy, people sit up and listen. Kachaje is an authority on the economy. Hence, when Kachaje says that what Mutharika said on the economy is more suited to a John Grisham novel than reality, you need to put those facts into perspective. And that perspective is that Mutharika lied on the economy. Kachaje didn’t have to say the words out loud.
What Mutharika said can only wear a veneer of truth if Kachaje took it on the chin and confessed that his presentation was an uninspired attempt at economic fiction; that the economy would probably rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent irrespective of the worst floods we have experienced in recent history or a downturn in agricultural output by 30 percent; that interest rates would decline, as Mutharika hopes, even if inflation is unlikely to drop significantly.
Only on that score would we say what Mutharika said was the truth and Kachaje lied. Otherwise, Mutharika lied on the economy.
Which is why I find Ecama’s rambling rebuttal to the story needlessly provocative, lacking coherence and direction, contradictory and built on shaky ground. And a waste of resources.
Perhaps, Ecama could have stated their case better by publishing Kachaje’s presentation for us to judge how 'unprofessional' The Daily Times or the journalist were, if at all. They didn’t! I would have expected them to, at least, reproach Gregory for quoting Kachaje out of context or inventing quotations. Shame, they didn’t either!
Nowhere in the story does Gregory quote Kachaje directly as saying Mutharika lied to the nation about the economy. And nowhere in its published tantrum does Ecama say Gregory misquoted Kachaje. What the journalist used was inference or interpretative journalism. If someone says “John does not say the truth” it is not farfetched to infer that John is a liar. Just as there are million ways of skinning a cat, they are even more of saying someone is a liar. Kachaje used one of those.
Gregory directly quotes Kachaje, on economic growth, as saying: “How can we be sure that ‘the economy is expected to rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent’ when we have just experienced the worst floods in recent history and agricultural output is expected to drop by 30 percent?” In his State of the Nation Address in May, President Mutharika said on the subject: “It is estimated that the economy grew by 5.5 percent and it is expected to rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent or higher from next year.” Interpretation? Mutharika lied.
On inflation, Kachaje rhetorically asked in his presentation last week: “How will the interest rates go down when inflation is unlikely to drop significantly? How will people’s disposable incomes increase when they will be buying food at higher prices?” He was, in all probability, responding to what Mutharika said in that address: “We expect annual inflation to fall to 16.5 percent in 2015 compared to 23.8 percent in 2014. The decline in inflation is expected to increase people’s disposable incomes and interest rates are also expected to decline in 2016.” Interpretation? Mutharika lied again.
Kachaje and Mutharika are patently not singing from the same hymnbook and only one of them can hold the truth. The journalist in Gregory just brought up that fact. Mutharika is a lawyer. And a politician. And politicians are not necessarily noted for their preference for truth. Kachaje, on the other hand, is an economist. Not just a riff-raff economist picked off the street; he is the boss of them all, including those boys and girls Mutharika relies on for advice on the economy.
And when he barks on the economy, people sit up and listen. Kachaje is an authority on the economy. Hence, when Kachaje says that what Mutharika said on the economy is more suited to a John Grisham novel than reality, you need to put those facts into perspective. And that perspective is that Mutharika lied on the economy. Kachaje didn’t have to say the words out loud.
What Mutharika said can only wear a veneer of truth if Kachaje took it on the chin and confessed that his presentation was an uninspired attempt at economic fiction; that the economy would probably rebound to higher levels averaging 7 percent irrespective of the worst floods we have experienced in recent history or a downturn in agricultural output by 30 percent; that interest rates would decline, as Mutharika hopes, even if inflation is unlikely to drop significantly.
Only on that score would we say what Mutharika said was the truth and Kachaje lied. Otherwise, Mutharika lied on the economy.
Saturday, May 2, 2015
As scandalous as they come
On a scale of one to 10, I am caught in sixes and sevens about which is the most mind-numbing and insensitive between Minister of Information Kondwani Nankhumwa’s suggestion that Malawi should buy a presidential jet once the economy improves and Malawi Congress Party’s decision to celebrate the life of Dr Kamuzu Banda and honour its veterans.
For starters, Nankhumwa’s suggestion is ridiculous and a colossal insult to the time we live in. I will take him on his word that every country in the world may have a presidential jet, but I am certain those nations buy them with the sweat from their collective brows and without hurting the poorest. Such is the state of Malawi’s economy that, if it were not for vanity, we should ill-afford those fuel-guzzling monsters that make the presidential convoy, let alone a jet. So pessimistic am I that I just do not see the economy picking up that enough resources which can be set aside for that vanity project without hurting the poor.
For the President to jump on commercials airlines may not make economic sense — what with the time lost, the inconvenience of waiting in airport terminals, the ignominy of rubbing shoulders with riffraff and, need I add, the loss of his otherness and respect — but if we must buy our own presidential jet, we should desist from dipping our hands into donors’ funds: “economy improving” suspiciously sounds like a euphemism for “when we receive donor funds”.
The last time we bought a presidential jet, the deal started so badly it had to end similarly. From the British throwing a fit over abuse of their resources to fund the luxury purchase to its diabolical sale by the Joyce Banda administration, it was doomed from start to finish. We are yet to regain the goodwill of the British in the form of budgetary support. And the government’s Account Number One is yet to receive a single penny from that transaction.
It was one scandal too many and the least the country needs at this point, when we must all put our collective shoulder to the wheel, is a repeat.
Now to the MCP. The quest by the party to rekindle a non-existent, idyllic past under Dr Kamuzu Banda knows no bounds. According to MCP, Malawians ought to remember Kamuzu for such achievements as “roads, hospitals, universities and airports, among others.”
Sure, we should, but when will MCP organise a national event to mourn the lives of men and women cut down needlessly by Kamuzu’s agents, thousands who were driven into involuntary exile for fear of death, hundreds of thousands who suffered one way or the other at the hands of the man whose birthday will be celebrated on May 14?
If they cannot do that, they are well advised to keep news of the celebration in-house. Kamuzu was not everyone’s cup of tea. This announcement is like dancing on the grave of the man you have killed as his relations look on helplessly.
I feel a colossal mistake was made after the referendum in 1993. Much like what happened to the Nazi in Germany after the Second World War, MCP should have been banned for eternity, if only to curb the cultism that has followed since Kamuzu’s death.
MCP did enough damage to the psyche of Malawians to last a lifetime. What Kamuzu did in terms of development has actually damaged subsequent leaders who have adopted the same minimalist attitude.
Bakili Muluzi spent an entire 10 years yelling about how he had freed Malawi from the jaws of autocracy and dolling out K50 to poverty-stricken Malawians and termed it empowerment. His supporters wept a great deal when Bingu wa Mutharika swept into town, who complained with bitterness how Muluzi had reduced him to a 2-minute man and built ports where there were no ships. Joyce Banda spent two years in office doing nothing of substance but distributing goats.
It must be remembered, throughout his 30 year rule, Kamuzu insulted the people of Mwanza and Neno and reminded us how he had freed us from the ‘stupid’ federation, as if that fight was a one man show. That’s the legacy Kamuzu left for his successors, who have played by the book.
As we leave MCP to their follies and plans to “honour [its] party veterans from the North, Central, South and the East”, perhaps they should also reflect on Kamuzu Banda’s victims or their relations “from the north, central, south and the east” who could really do with an arm around them. Maybe it is only me, but I find the whole idea of honouring Kamuzu with a day a tad scandalous and insensitive. Or even the mausoleum and the statue, which are a daily mockery to his victims. But that is only me.
For starters, Nankhumwa’s suggestion is ridiculous and a colossal insult to the time we live in. I will take him on his word that every country in the world may have a presidential jet, but I am certain those nations buy them with the sweat from their collective brows and without hurting the poorest. Such is the state of Malawi’s economy that, if it were not for vanity, we should ill-afford those fuel-guzzling monsters that make the presidential convoy, let alone a jet. So pessimistic am I that I just do not see the economy picking up that enough resources which can be set aside for that vanity project without hurting the poor.
For the President to jump on commercials airlines may not make economic sense — what with the time lost, the inconvenience of waiting in airport terminals, the ignominy of rubbing shoulders with riffraff and, need I add, the loss of his otherness and respect — but if we must buy our own presidential jet, we should desist from dipping our hands into donors’ funds: “economy improving” suspiciously sounds like a euphemism for “when we receive donor funds”.
The last time we bought a presidential jet, the deal started so badly it had to end similarly. From the British throwing a fit over abuse of their resources to fund the luxury purchase to its diabolical sale by the Joyce Banda administration, it was doomed from start to finish. We are yet to regain the goodwill of the British in the form of budgetary support. And the government’s Account Number One is yet to receive a single penny from that transaction.
It was one scandal too many and the least the country needs at this point, when we must all put our collective shoulder to the wheel, is a repeat.
Now to the MCP. The quest by the party to rekindle a non-existent, idyllic past under Dr Kamuzu Banda knows no bounds. According to MCP, Malawians ought to remember Kamuzu for such achievements as “roads, hospitals, universities and airports, among others.”
Sure, we should, but when will MCP organise a national event to mourn the lives of men and women cut down needlessly by Kamuzu’s agents, thousands who were driven into involuntary exile for fear of death, hundreds of thousands who suffered one way or the other at the hands of the man whose birthday will be celebrated on May 14?
If they cannot do that, they are well advised to keep news of the celebration in-house. Kamuzu was not everyone’s cup of tea. This announcement is like dancing on the grave of the man you have killed as his relations look on helplessly.
I feel a colossal mistake was made after the referendum in 1993. Much like what happened to the Nazi in Germany after the Second World War, MCP should have been banned for eternity, if only to curb the cultism that has followed since Kamuzu’s death.
MCP did enough damage to the psyche of Malawians to last a lifetime. What Kamuzu did in terms of development has actually damaged subsequent leaders who have adopted the same minimalist attitude.
Bakili Muluzi spent an entire 10 years yelling about how he had freed Malawi from the jaws of autocracy and dolling out K50 to poverty-stricken Malawians and termed it empowerment. His supporters wept a great deal when Bingu wa Mutharika swept into town, who complained with bitterness how Muluzi had reduced him to a 2-minute man and built ports where there were no ships. Joyce Banda spent two years in office doing nothing of substance but distributing goats.
It must be remembered, throughout his 30 year rule, Kamuzu insulted the people of Mwanza and Neno and reminded us how he had freed us from the ‘stupid’ federation, as if that fight was a one man show. That’s the legacy Kamuzu left for his successors, who have played by the book.
As we leave MCP to their follies and plans to “honour [its] party veterans from the North, Central, South and the East”, perhaps they should also reflect on Kamuzu Banda’s victims or their relations “from the north, central, south and the east” who could really do with an arm around them. Maybe it is only me, but I find the whole idea of honouring Kamuzu with a day a tad scandalous and insensitive. Or even the mausoleum and the statue, which are a daily mockery to his victims. But that is only me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)