‘People wanted an action-packed speech’
On Monday, ULADI MUSSA, People’s Party (PP) leader in Parliament, made an emotionally charged speech in response to President Peter Mutharika’s statement during the opening of the Budget Review meeting last Friday. Our reporter BONIFACE PHIRI caught up with Mussa to clarify some of the points he raised. Excerpts:
| Q |
What was your initial reaction to Mutharika’s speech last Friday?
| A |
I wasn’t really convinced by his speech because when he came to Parliament, he knew there were numerous problems facing the nation and people were expecting responses to give them hope. But he left so many questions unanswered, such as why his government has decided to phase out the Junior Certificate of Education (JCE) examinations and the Primary School Leaving Certificate of Education (PSLCE). I am afraid that school will now be like a workshop with no academic identity. The speech was an insult to Malawians, including the Judiciary, donors, clergy and traditional leaders who came in large numbers to listen. It was a waste of resources for him to speak for just 23 minutes.
| Q |
The State House has argued that this is no time for long speeches, but action-oriented ones…
| A |
Indeed, people wanted an action-packed speech; a speech that would provide solutions to the prevailing electricity, water, forex and hunger problems, including an explanation of circumstances that led to the murder of Anti-Corruption Bureau executive IssahNjauju as well as the robbery at the German diplomat’s house. He should have explained why identification of beneficiaries in the Farm Input Subsidy Programme (Fisp) is being done at Capital Hill. The economy is not performing well that the President and his government must simply resign. The government last year said the economy would grow by 6.5 percent this year, but today they say the economy is shrinking; one would think government should have anticipated this.
| Q |
The president conceded in his speech that things aren’t well in the country and he specifically blamed Cashgate for the economic problems. Don’t you agree?
| A |
Everyone who got involved in Cashgate in 2013 during the reign of Joyce Banda was arrested and they are languishing in prisons while others are still being tried. Let government negotiate with donors, but I know there are certain conditions which the DPP government is failing to meet such as the probe into the K92 billion stolen during their previous regime. The Baker Tilly forensic audit only covered six months of Joyce Banda’s tenure and excluded the five years by BinguwaMutharika. So, the donors would like to have another forensic audit of those five years which government is reluctant to do. The IMF programme is also off-track and you can’t blame that on Cashgate, but the system.
| Q |
Don’t you think the way you reacted to the President’s speech was rather sarcastic and dishonourable?
| A |
No! In fact I was saying the truth and every element of my speech was reflective of the status quo and it indicated the reality on the ground. For instance, I talked about maize for which we appropriated in July, but there’s no single grain in Admarc depots and we wonder how the money was spent. I was trying to indicate to him that it’s possible to bring back donors by simply asking them what they require from us. If PP was ruling, we could have asked the donors to provide us with technical expertise in terms of auditing and financial management for the period they want. Malawians shouldn’t suffer yet there’s a window of opportunity for the donors to return.
| Q |
Some of your fellow PP MPs claim that the Northern Region is being sidelined in terms of development infrastructure and appointments. Do you agree with them?
| A |
I completely agree. The DPP government hates the North more especially in terms of appointments. I don’t understand why the appointing authority hates people from the Northern Region; nobody chose to be born Tumbuka, Chewa or Yao. We are all one and deserve equal treatment and candidates must be recruited on merit. I was particularly appalled by the way the appointment of the Clerk of Parliament was done and it’s quite disheartening and painful. A well-qualified and suitable candidate was not considered simply because he comes from the North despite him emerging number one in the interviews. This nepotism is also evident in the Cabinet where out of 20 ministers only six are not from the South; with four each from the North and two from the Centre yet the President has the prerogative to choose ministers from either Parliament or outside.
