Governors can do with a bit of more truth

COME on, Swapo governors. It won’t do you any harm to tell the truth. These past two weeks have seen intensifying media reports on the upcoming local and regional council elections.

As a result some of the regional governors who are no longer standing on Swapo tickets have been quoted as stating that they are going into full-time farming, becoming full-time housewives, or going to concentrate on other personal issues.
As far as I can recall only one was on record as stating that he was ready to serve the party and the people in a different capacity. That ‘capacity’ was surely referring to the imminent appointment by President Hifikepunye Pohamba as regional governor with new and more powers.
I don’t understand why politicians find it difficult to tell the truth, even if it won’t hurt them. Especially those who hold responsible positions!
Why should dishonesty take the front seat when it comes to politicians?
In some countries, specifically in Europe, politicians have resigned after they were caught lying.
On the African continent our ‘elected liars’ regard it as some sort of sport or art to remain in office.
That is why there is a tale about an accident in which a plane, carrying politicians, crashed near a village. When the survivors reportedly approached the villagers for help their answer was a resounding “no”.
When a journalist asked the villagers why they ignored the fate of the politicians, one answered: “You never know when they tell the truth”.
There are of course professions where some regard it quite acceptable to lie.
Lawyers would fit in that category as they habitually substitute a ‘guilty’ plea with ‘not guilty’ when they defend rapists, murderers and other clients and use their talent of lying to generate income for their next splashy trip to Mauritius or some obscure place with a beach and lots of expensive drinks.
With reports going around – and to an extent confirmed by the Permanent Secretary of Local Government – that most of the governors will be appointed in a capacity equal to that of former regional commissioners, transparency should be paramount.
People who are about to be appointed in such capacities need to be trusted because their new duties require transparency.
When they continue with political lies which some used for gimmicking throughout their terms as governors, that is unacceptable.
Pathological liars have no place in regional leadership, especially since they will carry much of the dreams and hopes of the people through decentralisation of responsibilities.
What we need are people with gazillions of ideas to uplift the living standards of so many depressed rural populations.
Since Independence, most of our regional economies have struggled. The best among them only sputtered.
That is why anyone steering the regional ship will be more than a bootlicker or a ‘progressive’ pygmy who don’t think big and act as such.
Because of the many hurdles facing our regions, it will be suicidal to appoint people who just seek fame and fortune like bees seek honey. In other words people with the sole aim of staying in the limelight.
My understanding is that the commissioners/governors will have a skeleton staff of highly technically skilled people (some at the level of a Permanent Secretary) to assist them in their work.
Such skilled personnel will be expected to operate in tandem with already existing regional staff – something that needs very clear guidelines to avoid office conflicts.
While the idea behind the appointment of commissioners is a good one, former governors will be expected to work hard while keeping a low profile – something which might be a bit of a problem for those who have become self-styled demigods of regions.
Their new duties will be true to the fact that leadership can’t be faked for long. And they shouldn’t transform those offices into retirement villages.
Maybe, while we are at it, since the President seems to show increased powers, he should think of ‘real experts’ when appointments are made for the skeleton staff instead of using political affiliation as the main benchmark.