Home | Feature | WEALTH DISTRIBUTION VERSUS PEOPLE’S NEEDS

WEALTH DISTRIBUTION VERSUS PEOPLE’S NEEDS

07/04/2018 23:33:00 By Jan Sithole

Font size:

The poverty we have in Swaziland is artificial, deliberately created by those responsible for the distribution of wealth that we collectively create as a people.

After collection and collation of the revenue, Cabinet which is responsible for the distribution of same tends to systematically apportion big chunks of the resources to white elephant bound capital projects and ignore people-focused priorities and development at the expense of health, education, they dish more resources to security forces even though we are fighting no war.

Where they decide to allocate increments, they do so selectively but obviously at the expense of the majority public servants. The few rich are getting richer and the majority poor getting poorer.
There is an English adage that says ‘penny wise, pound foolish’, and this is so true in all spheres of life, politically, economically, socially, culturally and otherwise.

One of the many examples are: while a mosquito is so small that it cannot pick up weight when put on scale even that which is used for babies at birth, that mosquito if ignored and left unattended, the person ignoring it is risking an unintended night shift, because the noise that it makes will threaten that person the whole night.

realise ANY harvest

Secondly, socially, if a farmer were to eat seeds instead of planting and nurturing them with all necessary ingredients, that farmer would not realise any harvest at harvesting season and would not be able to sustain his/her farming business. If a government ignores service delivery to all basic needs of the people, such as health, education, road infrastructure, basic needs such as shelter, taking care of the vulnerable groups such as the elderly people living with disabilities, orphans, widow, youth, women and workers in creating productive jobs and taking care of the welfare of the people, that government is running a risk of losing confidence of the electorate.

That is why a plural system of government is most preferred the world-over because it guarantees checks and balances on behalf of all the people of that country against government policies that would otherwise undermine people’s priorities versus priorities of the elite.
That is where the current system of government in the country is failing. Mark my expression, I am separating the system of government from Tinkhundla structures, because I regard the Tinkhundla structures as ventures designed for community development and decentralisation of service delivery to the people.

system of governance

These structures remain physical buildings and not a system of governance as long as government has centralised power, centralised priorities, centralised services and fails to deliver services.

As long as people do not participate in decision-making and policy formulation, as long as the public broadcaster only serves the executive and not the people, as long as policy and budget is constructed and implemented top-down, and views of the people are not considered and their priorities undermined, such a system fails to meet the basic ingredients of the simplest definition of democracy - the government of the people by the people - our current system of governance is dictatorship of the people by the cabinet.

As such, it is a dictatorship, people are only involved once every five years to ballot but, after that exercise, their priorities never feature in the government budget. I want to thank the brave members of the 10th Parliament who have, at least two times, boldly stood in the way of an executive-prioritised budget that did not consider the priorities of the citizenry.

Over time and repeatedly, parliamentarians have called on government not to depend on SACU and taxation as sources of revenue, but have always called upon government to create jobs through mining, manufacturing, retail, tourism, creative industry and industrialisation as espoused by the African Union and SADC. This would be possible with policies that would promote beneficiation and producing value added finished goods, as opposed to giving away our primary products without value addition. There is no wisdom in only growing trees and sell them, then go out and import tooth picks and furniture.

Any government governing structure at country level, which knows that it is mandated and hired by the people, will always want to serve the interests of the people and would want their input before a national policy is concluded upon.

people the paymasters

This is because the correct definition of government is for government to know that the correct relation between government and the people is that the people are the paymasters and those who govern are the servants of the people. But in a dictatorship system of government, it is the government which dictates policy to the electorate without prior involvement and consultation.

In my comments made above, I talked about the problems of ignoring little things and little complaints because they come from the people. The Russian revolution was sparked by the price of bread alone.
Good politicians will always know that there is a difference between peace and systematic long institutionalised silence.

Good politicians will know not to mistake information dissemination from consultation. Good politicians will always want to balance revenue base for the country. I am seeing trends where the Cabinet has reneged on their responsibility to create jobs through mining, manufacturing, commerce, retail and tourism in an attempt to raising the economy, creating jobs and broadening the tax base but decided to zero in on taxation of the people employed or not employed.

I say this when looking at the present Finance Bill before Parliament, which seeks to tax people beyond the marrow, where they suggest among other things to superlatively introduce new taxations in the face of an epoch where they have invoked a zero increment, let alone the cost of living adjustment when the inflation is on the increase. The proposed taxation components range from birth certificates, IDs, passports, new toll fees, increase in electricity tariffs, increasing VAT...the list is endless.

If this is not reconsidered, it will do just the opposite of what is intended. It has the capacity of seeing many businesses close down. It will cause a majority of the people of Swaziland, tax-evaders and criminals, not to qualify for election, as the majority of the unemployed will be expected to pay an escalated graded tax when they do not have any earnings.

potential uprising

It has the capacity to ignite a citizen discontent and a potential uprising and industrial peace and political uncertainty beyond what currently exists.

In a competitive pluralistic system of governance, where multi-party is allowed in line with the international treaties of the freedom of association, political parties have a duty to create a manifesto that informs the people how they would govern if they were given a mandate through the ballot box. The manifesto would talk to all issues that affect the people and the country’s development politically, economically, socially and culturally.

Because a plural system is open, competitive and democratic, each contesting political party would have their manifesto, ideology, vision, mission and values. They would be forced if they won the mandate to govern, to live to the promise they made in their manifesto during campaign times.

expectations of voters

The genuine expectations of the voters would be for the party they have given a mandate to govern, to deliver on their promise made during the campaign era. In the event they fail, the people who are mandate- givers know that they would not vote the same party into power, come next round of elections.

The Elections and Boundaries Commission has in the past invited political parties to participate in the elections.
I hope the commission will assist the government, local authorities and law enforcers that parties should, therefore, be allowed to campaign, assembly and conduct their business without interference as electoral stakeholders.