Examining the Shadows: A Critical Analysis of UPND’s Three-Year Track Record
By Dr Mwelwa
The United Party for National Development (UPND) administration in Zambia has touted a series of achievements over the past three years. However, a closer inspection reveals a tangled web of underlying issues that raise questions about the sustainability, ethical considerations, and long-term impact of these so-called victories.
Beginning with the employment of 75,000 public service workers, while this move certainly injects vigor into the public sector, it simultaneously inflates the wage bill by a staggering K9 billion annually. This exacerbates the country’s fiscal challenges, particularly against the backdrop of dwindling mineral royalties and a Zambia Revenue Authority struggling with under-collections. One might argue that without concrete fiscal reforms and improved revenue collection, these jobs could become a financial albatross around the nation’s neck.
Next, the restructuring of $9.8 billion in external debt ostensibly provides more capital for social sector investments. However, this decision essentially kicks the can down the road, deferring the problem to future generations who will grapple with inflated interest payments. The reshuffling of debt may provide short-term relief but poses significant long-term financial risks that could confine Zambia to an endless cycle of borrowing.
The case of Mopani Copper Mine acquiring a new equity partner and the Zambian government raising its stake to 49% is emblematic of another concern. Although this move is said to rejuvenate jobs and economic activities, it appears that the mine was undervalued—sold for what many consider a pittance. This raises questions about the deal’s transparency and the potential loss of a pivotal national asset at a bargain price.
Kitwe and Mufulira councils recently managed to eliminate all statutory arrears following Mopani’s payments, purportedly improving service delivery. Yet, this improvement seems superficial without establishing a sustainable revenue stream to maintain these benefits. The temporary windfall may prompt immediate service enhancements, but without ongoing financial health, the risk of reverting into arrears is high.
The transition of Konkola Copper Mines (KCM) from courtroom battles to boardroom negotiations led to a $250 million release for settling debts and enhancing community contributions, along with a 20% salary increment for workers. Despite these apparently positive developments, underlying issues like diminished copper production continue to plague the enterprise. The persistence of these problems diminishes the overall impact and casts a shadow on the effectiveness of recent interventions.
First Quantum Minerals (FQM) announced a $1.3 billion capital reinvestment in the Kasanshi Mine, an investment touted as the first in seven years. While this may seem promising, one must question why seven years lapsed without prior investment and whether this influx of capital will be prudently managed or squandered. Additionally, the commissioning of Africa’s largest nickel mine by FQM creates 930 local jobs and begins commercial ore mining, yet the broader question of environmental sustainability and equitable benefit distribution remains unaddressed.
The $1.3 billion reinvestment in Shaft 28 in Luanshya, a site dormant for over 20 years, and the dewatering process initiation align with the UPND’s narrative of employment booms. However, this development also raises concerns about the economic feasibility and environmental implications of kickstarting long-dormant projects. Similar doubts loom over the future of Mingomba Copper Mine, despite the allure of an initial $2 billion investment.
Infrastructure projects like the Lusaka-Ndola Dual Carriageway and Chingola-Chililabombwe-Kasumbalesa road under the PPP financing model are hailed as job-creating ventures. However, while 3,000 jobs emerge from the Lusaka-Ndola project, the cut in the project’s funding from $1.2 billion to $650 million raises alarms about the quality and longevity of the project.
On the front of energy and sustainability, the commencement of projects like the 500MW solar power plant in Ngabwe and the 100MW solar plant in Chamuka area, along with policy revisions to include net metering and the open access policy, are steps forward. Nonetheless, changes driven primarily by fiscal pressures rather than genuine commitments to sustainability might not hold under incoming administrations.
Even culturally inclusive moves, such as inviting various traditional leaders as Guests of Honor at ceremonies, are mired in optics rather than substantive unity-building. These gestures may resonate symbolically but lack a tangible impact on deep-seated cultural and regional disparities.
In conclusion, while the UPND government’s three-year track record includes numerous initiatives, each of these accomplishments carries significant caveats. The immediate gains are often overshadowed by long-term financial burden, questionable transparency, and sustainability issues. Moving forward, it is imperative to scrutinize these headline achievements rigorously to ensure they genuinely benefit the Zambian populace without mortgaging the country’s future for short-term political gains.
While the writer has brought out important issues,he does not offer solutions to the many issues.
It’s not his job. He is merely giving a qualitative assessment of the UPND government’s performance in their 3 years at the helm.
Lack of transparency in the management of public assets should serve as a Red flag about the possibility of Industrial Scale Corruption!
Anything done without Parliament approval should be treated as Null and void! Lack of consultation with the People’s Representatives is a big omission and does not sit well with the spirit of honesty and transparency which are key ingredients good governance!
Excellent insight shown here in your response!!!
Note that everything carries some level of risk. Managing the perceived or real risks is key. Given the highlighted initiates, then the UPND government has done well. If such initiatives were not done, critics as usual would have had a thing or two to say. Even marriage has some risks associated with it.
The counter arguments that this writer is using to rubbish the success of the government are spurious and are not based on facts neither can they be substantiated.
Lets look at what he says about Shaft 28, “However, this development also raises concerns about the economic feasibility and environmental implications of kickstarting long-dormant projects”.
The investment is by a private company, who would know much more than he does about the economic feasibility of the project and even it fails it will cost the government of Zambia nothing but would have created employment at some stage.
There are too many of these so called “Dr” in Zambia and Africa who lack common sense and are semi-literate but publish because they think they are clever.
There is a saying that goes: “In the land of the blind the man with eye presumes himself to be king”