Dora Siliya MP recently wrote an interesting article on the "Tragedy of Perception". I am excited to see MPs writing more. Here is the bit that caught my attention :
Let me bring you back to where we are currently, a cross road of perceptions. Are we doing better compared to 5 or 3 or 2 years ago? Do we have the right to freely assemble and associate? Are human rights being respected? Do we get a sense that our Government is fair and reasonable? Is the discourse on tribalism in Government perception or reality? Does the opposition have the political space to provide the much needed checks and balances? Is the Judiciary and Parliament operating without interference? Have the NGOs been coerced? Is the media reflecting society or just passive while sections of it push a narrow private agenda? Is the declaration of Zambia as a Christian nation just a perception?...Are we happy with our Zambia today?
These are important questions. But sadly the answers are not as obvious as Ms Siliya thinks. On each of those questions a case can be reasonably be made that life is better today than under MMD. So I think she is using the wrong counterfactual. My view on PF vs MMD is very straightforward. PF is so far not worse than MMD. Indeed, MMD was so bad that it is difficult to imagine anything worse.
The problem is that many people have with PF is that PF can and should be BETTER than it is doing. It is not living up to its promises so far. It is a question of aspiration. To compare PF and MMD's two decades of plunder is a losing argument. It is better to look at our socio-economic position and ask - are we fulfilling our potential as a nation? Is PF performing like we expect it to perform?
The best way to do that is to simply remind PF of its manifesto commitments on fiscal prudence, rule of law, lean government, separation of powers, reducing poverty, etc. But more importantly we can identify the key problems with PF. People can also point to the poor coordination of policies and the need for greater cohesion between governance objectives and economic policies.
The biggest challenge of the current government is that it is not coherent - the many parts of government are not singing together. Mr Sata has excellent ideas but he has no grand strategist. Someone who thinks across his ideas and turns them into a cohesive plan from politics to economics to international relations. He needs find a competent strategist who can ensure all of Government sings together. A Choir Master. A Grand Master Chef. A Policy Tsar. Whatever name you might use. Until that happens Mr Sata's vision will not be achieved. Economic progress will be made because the fundamentals will hold, but his vision will not be achieved to the limit.
The best way to do that is to simply remind PF of its manifesto commitments on fiscal prudence, rule of law, lean government, separation of powers, reducing poverty, etc. But more importantly we can identify the key problems with PF. People can also point to the poor coordination of policies and the need for greater cohesion between governance objectives and economic policies.
The biggest challenge of the current government is that it is not coherent - the many parts of government are not singing together. Mr Sata has excellent ideas but he has no grand strategist. Someone who thinks across his ideas and turns them into a cohesive plan from politics to economics to international relations. He needs find a competent strategist who can ensure all of Government sings together. A Choir Master. A Grand Master Chef. A Policy Tsar. Whatever name you might use. Until that happens Mr Sata's vision will not be achieved. Economic progress will be made because the fundamentals will hold, but his vision will not be achieved to the limit.
It is in those areas that Ms Siliya and her colleagues should focus. But I welcome her arrival in the writing sphere. One hopes there's more to come. We need more debate. Iron sharpens iron?
Question: Is PF failing or is it broadly on track?