Donors can fund Malawi

Government faced many hurdles in 2015.In this interview, EPHRAIM NYONDO talks to Chancellor College political science lecturer MICHAEL JANA on this and other issues.

Q

: It is without question that the critical thing of 2015 was government capacity to manage the economy. One key area was President Peter Mutharika’s charm offensive to bring back the donors who stopped supporting our national budget. We ended the year still without donors. How have you assessed the Mutharika administration’s failure to bring back the donors?

A

: I think the Mutharika government is in a bad negotiating position. The theft and corruption cases that Mutharika inherited, the resultant aid freeze, and the desperate quest for the resumption of aid has opened a huge window where donors and other interests, as expected, want to push in their agenda as a condition for the resumption of aid. Now Mutharika is facing a situation where he has to negotiate for the resumption of aid whose conditionality is now not only the prosecution of Cashgate cases, but a whole spectrum of how Malawi should manage its political, economic and social life, thereby risking Malawi as a country remote-controlled by the donors. Some of the donor conditions such as fiscal discipline are in line with the interests of Malawians, but some are obviously debatable, controversial, and some not in line with Malawi Government plans and priorities. You know, the donor regime is not philanthropic but political; and I think Mutharika has not so far cracked the politics of it to convince donors to resume aid. I mean, if the same donors funded the corrupt Mobutu Seseseko albeit in a different context, they surely can fund Malawi now.

Q

: President Mutharika has maintained his 20-member Cabinet for two years, of course, with periodic reshuffles and changes. The move, according to officials, is to help cut back on public expenditure. Beyond that, we have also seen the President alternating commercial and private jets when flying out. On the whole, how do you assess this government’s resolve to cut on public expenditure?

A

: I think Mutharika’s government has shown encouraging signs in facilitating fiscal prudence. You have talked about the lean Cabinet; and indeed most measures within the Public Sector Reform Programme. In general, however, I think there have been steps forward and some backwards—the funding of a political entourage to the UN meeting being an example of a backward step. And again, it is not just about cutting back on public expenditure, but more importantly what you spend your resources on. In this regard, I think government needs to rethink its development expenditure

policy, for example, the subsidy policy.

For instance, I think resources spent on Malata subsidy programme would be better spent on subsidising some productive sector or even improving the quality of the revamped community colleges to improve entrepreneurial skills of Malawian youths. Government needs to invest in production and not consumption if the Malawi economy is to flourish. But I think Mutharika has been grappling with discovering a magic development strategy in a political context where there is an enduring culture of spending State resources merely to buy political support.

Q

: The opposition, as a government in waiting, is key in providing alternatives to government. However, there have been criticisms regarding our opposition in the way it operates in Parliament and also on political podiums. The criticism has been to the effect that the opposition, apart from just faulting government on policy, has failed to bring alternative choices. How do you asses this?

A

: I think there are two issues. Firstly, there is a winner-takes-all culture in Malawi politics. As a result, the opposition, as a group of losers excluded from any influential connection to government decisions, criticises the Executive to discredit the ruling party and not to offer constructive alternatives. And this makes sense to them, I mean, what if the ruling party ‘steals’ the opposition ideas and takes all the credit, do you think the opposition will stand a chance in the next elections? So, there is a political logic to the opposition criticism in Malawi.

Secondly, I think there is lack of robust development research and engagement within the opposition. Most comments from the opposition on critical policy issues are, therefore, either instinctive or basing on the limited knowledge and experience of the speaker. There is often little robust research into the issues raised by the opposition to offer any credible alternative to most pertinent government policy positions.

You can actually see these two anomalies manifesting themselves, for example, in the lack of use of the Parliament Private Members bill opportunity where the opposition, who are in the majority, fail to push in some of their agenda.

Q

: In 2016, what are your aspirations for the nation and how would you want government and those in opposition to address them?

A

: I think government should strengthen efforts to facilitate the growth of the productive sector, especially in the private sector. Otherwise, dependence on donors will continue to be the norm and Malawians will never have meaningful freedom to choose their destiny. This, of course, will take a long time, but the interventions should start now. To craft robust strategies, there is need to create and/or make use of development forums where politicians, technocrats, academia, the private sector, the opposition and key organisations debate key development issues and strategies and map the way forward. For instance, I have read really great research by Malawi academics on Malawi that has ended up in international journals and none in Malawi Government offices. We need to bridge such gaps and promote developmental deliberative democracy.

Q

: Any other remark?

A

: I think the future of Malawi development lies in its productive capacity and not donor aid. Government needs to improve the quality of its industrial policy, and if there are any negotiations with donors, the aim should be to use that external financial injection to promote its productive capacity that will move Malawi towards economic independence. n