CENTRAL bank chief Gideon Gono has told ministers blaming him for the RBZ’s troubles to do the honourable thing and “resign in protest”, insiting that without the bank’s forced intervention they would not be enjoying the luxury and power that comes with government office.
In an interview with New Zimbabwe.com on Thursday, Gono said: “This GNU (Government of National Unity) behaves as if they dropped from Mars!
“If I had not done what I did there would not have been the 2008 harmonised elections, and if what I did is bad, illegal and terrible; and the government does not want to accept or takeover this debt from the books of RBZ, why don't the entire government or those who only see evil out of my deeds resign in protest at being a bi-product or political and financial genetic descendant of RBZ illegalities?
“Let us see those clean souls in government ... (who think they are) direct descendants of Saint Peter, Saint Mark and Saint John resign as a sign of their clean conscience and purity of deeds.
“They should put up or shut up and desist from the habit of pointing their fingers at RBZ or Gono (because) they are the prime beneficiaries of those same actions and rescue programmes we embarked on."
Gono is furious at being made the fall-guy for the country’s near-economic collapse over the last decade, with critics accusing him of effectively running a parallel government that was accountable only to itself.
They insist his quasi-fiscal operations – which saw the RBZ fund various government programmes including elections, acquisition of farm implements and luxury vehicles for government officials – helped stoke world record inflation which reached 11.2 million percent in 2008.
The RBZ is now technically insolvent, saddled with debts of up to US$1.1 billion, forcing the institution to put several assets up for sale and retrench hundreds of staff in a bid to cut costs.
Treasury has refused to assume responsibility for the debt, infuriating the RBZ chief who insists that the majority of the expenditure was “demanded and authorised” by successive finance ministers.
Gono says the government owes the RBZ US$1.4 billion and argues the institution can easily liquidate its obligations if treasury pays up.
He said he was being blamed for mobilising funds for key grain imports and for barely managing to keep the economy on its feet as the country was buffeted by the combined effects of sanctions and collapsing productivity in all key economic sectors.
“We had a whole nation to feed when we failed to fully utilise our farms,” Gono said.
“Importation of grain was a necessity so that we survive and my critics also partook in eating the imported grain as sadza or bread ... that is why (these critics) are around and able to speak like they do (otherwise) they would have died.”
The RBZ chief said had found himself backed into a corner when the government called the 2008 general elections without bothering to check whether the funding was available.
“If you go into or call for elections without the necessary funding, what else do you expect the technocrats to do? Just fold their arms and say 'it can't b done'? Well, I operate on the basis that I would rather try to do something and be blamed for it tomorrow than take the easy route or behaving like a statue.”
He warned that fresh polls expected to be held early next were equally threatened by the unavailability of funding.
“Without that guaranteed funding, I don't see those elections being held soon, more-so if we make the mistake of assuming that someone else besides ourselves as Zimbabweans is going to extend a helping hand to fund the elections,” he said.
“The consequences of under or no funding will both be catastrophic and embarrassing to all given that this time around the RBZ is nowhere near or able to support the inevitable funding hiccups associated with all previous elections.”
Gono said he regretted raiding bank statutory reserves as well as NGO and corporate accounts as the country -- frozen out by Western donors – struggled for foreign currency.
“The raiding of people’s funds was and remains controversial and regrettable, but what softer alternative was there to the constitutional necessity to having the elections for instance and other imperatives we had to defend?”