A case for provincialisation in Zimbabwe

A case for provincialisation in Zimbabwe

• Kevin Eagle and Gregory Stanton: Genocide in Zimbabwe

• Lance Guma: Mkhwananzi's mix of sense and non-sense

• George Mkhwananzi: Ndebeles and Zimbabwe national leadership

• Lance Guma: Lessons drenched in blood

• Black murder, white murder

• Dumisani Zifa Ndlovu: 'Mnangagwa has Matabele blood on his hands'

• Mnangagwa, Dabengwa clash over Mat massacres

• Mugabe faces class lawsuit over massacres

• Honour of journalist who first exposed Mat killings

By Sam Sipepa Nkomo

BEFORE and after independence in 1980, Zimbabwe had five provinces namely: Matabeleland, Mashonaland, Manicaland, Masvingo and Midlands.

A few years into independence, we divided these provinces into ten provinces namely: Matabeleland North, Matebeleland South, Manicaland, Masvingo, Mashonaland East, Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland West, Midlands, Harare and Bulawayo.

2. The first set of provinces had a critical mass and economies of scale. The second sets are too small and are not able to stand on their own.

3. There is a crying desire for development in the provinces. Some provinces are better developed than others. Sometimes there are feelings of favoritism and unfairness in the allocation of resources. Provinces are not the same in terms of soil, vegetation, rainfall, water resource, culture etc.

4. The three Matabeland provinces are some of the worst underdeveloped of the provinces. They are the poorer cousins of the other facilities in terms of health provisions, education facilities, poor rainfall, and poor availability of water, poverty and hunger.

5. It is a considered view that as we push for a new constitution for Zimbabwe, we should, for the sake of equitable development, push for provincialisation to be part of our constitution. A return of the original five provinces of Matabeleland (comprising the current provinces of Bulawayo, Matabeland North, and Matabeleland South), Mashonaland (comprising the current provinces of Mashonaland East, Mashonaland Central and Mashonaland West), Manicaland, Masvingo and Midlands.

6. The five provinces should have provincial legislatures that are elective, a provincial cabinet with a Prime Minister of the province elected by the provincial electorate. The provinces should also be represented in the national parliament. The modalities can be discussed and agreed.

7. The advantage of the provincialisation is that every one wins. There would be less complaints of the unfairness against Harare or National Government. The Provincial Parliament will be focused on the development agenda of their province. The province will be guided by the wishes of their provincial electorate in terms of what needs to be done. If the party that wins the elections in the province does not deliver, the chances are that it will lose in the next elections. The Provincial Prime Minister is accountable to the Provincial electorate.

8. Provincial Governments are found in many countries or the world. A good example is that of our next door neighbor- South Africa.Their system seems to be working for them and we need to look closely as we believe it would be the answer to our developmental problems.

9. The current Governors of the provinces are appointed and only answerable to those who appoint them. For the cities of Harare and Bulawayo, as indeed in other cities and towns, we do not need Governors but City Councils and Mayors, who must drive the development agenda of the city or the town.

10. The democratization of out institution requires a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Provincialisation would be an important milestone in our search for balance. Empower the provinces; include it in the new Constitution of Zimbabwe.
Sipepa Nkomo is former Chief Executive of Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe. He can be contacted at: nkomo@africaonline.co.zw
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
debate@newzimbabwe.com