By Kellys Kaunda
IF THE 2026 ELECTIONS WERE DECIDED THROUGH A POLICY DEBATE AMONG PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES, HICHILEMA IS VERY LIKELY TO WIN …. UNLESS ….
As I increasingly listen to more politicians seeking public office, I ask myself this question: assuming the August 2026 presidential elections were decided through policy debates, who is likely to carry the day?
And assuming that the panel of judges consisted of technocrats judging the arguments for their technical integrity and knowledge of the policies the candidates would be referring to, there’s more than a fifty percent chance that Hakainde Hichilema would emerge victorious.
His argument that threads its way around debt restructuring; fiscal discipline to avoid excessive public expenditure while delicately balancing against social expenses intended to cushion the vulnerable against osterity measures; gingerly navigating the mining sector carefully choosing tax regimes and rates so as not to scare away investors while at the same time not depriving the nation of the benefits of its own natural heritage; with a watchful eye monitoring how the proceeds from the mines are being applied to build foreign reserves, and stabilize the exchange rate; furthermore, how these proceeds are being applied to other national development needs makes for a logical argument.
In response, what are contenders to the ‘throne’ saying? I am afraid to say that the majority make arguments that can’t pass basic technical standards of the disciplines in question.
The arguments are mostly common-sense in nature or pedestrian in their construction.
It’s not too late to salvage the situation. The PF Secretariate has or used to have a research department. Its responsibility was that of assisting leadership in making informed policy pronouncements.
The UNIP used to have one along with a library. When PF came into office, it set up the Policy Monitoring Research Center, PMRC, because it realized that informed policy pronouncements facilitate believability and possible acceptance by the intended target audience.
Believe you me, it’s not easy to put up credible arguments against the many policy challenges of a nation. It’s a task that requires concerted efforts.
However, when all is said and done, it’s the voter who has the final say. For him or her, logical argument or no logical argument, one way or the other, they will decide the next leader.
The voter’s decision sometimes defies logic. I guess this might explain why candidates in Zambia couldn’t care less about the quality of their messages. When a microphone is placed in front of them, even just breathing air into them seems enough.
But while this might offer a sense of security to those candidates not bothered about the integrity of their campaign messages and credibility of their policy arguments, it’s too risky going into so important an election on such a fragile intellectual foundation.
No one can tell with absolute certainty what factors will affect the outcome of an election.
It is indisputable that good ideas and good and logical arguments do shape or do contribute to factors that influence election outcomes.
It’s therefore important to prioritize investment in technically credible policy arguments.
We Zambians love politics and are addicted to politics. Daily, we may spend 99% of time on politics and 1% on productive ventures. Politics, Gossiping and Rumour mongering are indistinguishable and synomious. Actually two things that we love very very much are: Politics and Beer and both of them are unproductive!
Simpo Sitali, add to these addictions, the high levels of functional illiteracy in the country. There is still many people who believe in supernatural powers and witchcraft leading to all sorts of despicable conduct and reactions. Some faith based believers are also often the same people who easily belief in witchcraft. We dont have serious organisations who can deal organise effective functional and civic literacy.