Scrutiny of subsidies, dawn of a legacy

 It goes without saying that, as a country, we are one of the poorest in the world. Subsidies are meant to prop us up in terms of food security, health, literacy levels, gender inclusion and many more.

We have had various subsidies with a positive impact on our society since independence. And these subsidies are still part of our daily lives. However, the lack of exit strategies has done more harm than good. To this day, we still enjoy subsidised water, electricity, education and healthcare, even though this has left the said service providers in tatters.

Normal operations have become a nightmare to parastatals mainly due to a lack of proper capital investment over the years. Water boards, Escom and many other parastatals are struggling due to these continued subsidies that have left the government collecting less revenue. This is a discussion for another day. Today, we are

 looking into the Farm Input Subsidy Programmme (Fisp).

When government embarked on the programme, it had spectacular success. Malawi was touted as a country that was able to achieve food security in the least time possible. We all smiled and supported it.

It is this support of the subsidy programme that has cost us a lot. We became self-satisfied. We stopped questioning the exit point of the programme. A point at which we would have enough produce to feed ourselves and have extra produce to sell to meet the cost of farm inputs in subsequent years without depending on government subsidy.

That day never came and government could not hit the exit button. The support fertiliser subsidy enjoyed from the general

 public meant votes to politicians and a cash cow to some quarters. It no longer represented a gateway to self-reliance for the poor, but rather a york on our necks that we could not get out of.

When we had acute shortages of forex, government was still draining coffers to support the programme despite the fact that it was no longer serving its intended purpose.

Government could have

 invested in the biggest fertiliser production company in southern Africa to ease draining forex, but politics, corruption and impunity had taken centre stage. Government had become blind to the available options even though they well knew that at the level the subsidy was being operated, the economy could not afford it in the long run. Malawians were bleeding money. But as usual, the rural masses ululated and clapped hands out of ignorance to the under dealings.

A light at the end of the tunnel came when Ministry of Agriculture decided to grab this bull by the horns in the 2020/21 financial year. Processes and systems were reviewed. The government managed to save around K20 billion! Bravo!

We can choose to call it a saving, or simply money that was ending up in the wrong pockets annually before 2020/21 Financial Year. We were being scammed in broad daylight.

It is encouraging to know that government, through the Ministry of Finance, has raised a red flag on the sustainability of the programme. Phew! At last the Government of Malawi has woken up to stand with the people.

Let them come up with a proper multi-sectoral exit strategy for this programme. So far, the Ministry of Agriculture has already proven its capacity in implementing change. They can lead in managing the exit strategy to ensure proper mitigation measures are in place to protect ordinary Malawians.

This should not end there. A review of all subsidies needs to be carried out to see how feasible they are at present and in the near future. Let us look closely into free healthcare and free education for starters to see if some changes can be made to save funds to re-invest in the same areas.

This should also extend to water, electricity and all other areas. The review process should be done in a transparent manner to ensure the masses are part and parcel of the process for them to own the implementation phases. A better Malawi is possible if we all work together.