Aussenkehr’s Farmers: Out And Back Into Poverty

LET us not beat about the bush here.

The issue is not whether the small-scale farmers at Aussenkehr's State-owned Orange River Irrigation Project (ORIP) have failed. That is not what brought about steps to evict them. It is all about their resistance to being manipulated and hoodwinked into enriching a small group of individuals based in the offices of the Agriculture Ministry.
The grape farmers owe more than N$3 million to Agribank and Coolfresh - a service provider appointed by the Government to help the people produce and market their products abroad.
Coolfresh was appointed in 2009 by the Ministry of Agriculture after the previous service provider reportedly mismanaged the marketing of the grapes produced by the small-scale farmers.
Because of the mismanagement, the small-scale farmers were reportedly N$2,5 million in the red at Agribank and Coolfresh agreed to pay off that debt before taking over as service provider.
Coolfresh reportedly paid a total of N$1,5 million in June last year towards a portion of each farmer's debt but the remaining N$1 million was not paid over.
Coolfresh claimed the farmers violated their agreement with them and they could not continue to pay their debts.
According to the agreement the farmers were supposed to market their produce through Coolfresh alone. The ORIP farmers have reasons for bypassing the Dutch-owned Coolfresh. They claim the service provider is impoverishing them and monopolising their farming.
Coolfresh International reportedly discontinued the N$4 000 a month the farmers used to receive as part of their “advance payment” on their profits, but were still expected to pay for and use the services from Coolfresh Namibia, who asked for a five per cent surcharge on all services provided to the farmers.
They also accuse Coolfresh Namibia of keeping them in the dark on the particulars of their financial status, only providing basic forms stating income and expenditure, while leaving the farmers at the mercy of Coolfresh’s business decisions.
Coolfresh said they withdrew monthly payments from the farmers when they breached the contract by selling dates to another buyer.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Coolfresh subsequently came up with a tripartite agreement (which, by the way, the Ministry negotiated on behalf of the farmers instead of they themselves). The agreement gave total control of the farmers’ cash flow and business decisions to Coolfresh.
This means that the farmers who were empowered are now being disempowered.
This after Coolfresh was given the right to market their produce and failed to lift the people out of poverty.
As the new tripartite agreement stands now, it will only benefit Coolfresh and Agribank, whose debts will be paid off.
The farmers, however, claim that Coolfresh also owes them money for their produce and the Ministry of Agriculture is not moving an inch to help them recover those funds but instead hammers them for not paying Coolfresh and Agribank.
How can Coolfresh run the business side of ORIP while the farmers are supposed to take responsibility for their accounts? Why should Agribank threaten them when they know very well that Coolfresh takes all their profit and gives them peanuts as change. Their destiny is not in their own hands.
The big question thus is: to whose benefit is the Coolfresh deal? Why is Coolfresh claiming that the farmers are under training while the Ministry officials like Permanent Secretary Andrew Ndishishi regard them as masters of their own destiny? A debt of N$3 million among 20 farmers amounts to around N$150 000 which each one of them owes.
I am sure Agribank is owed bigger debts than that and Government has lost millions without taking such drastic steps against others.
While Ndishishi was at Trade as PS, N$100 million vanished without trace but nothing happened to call for his suspension.
I am not arguing that people who accumulate debts should not be traced and held accountable. No.
But nobody should be more equal than others and someone needs to start standing up for the rights of the farmers.
The group are just demanding their due on the basis that their produce is worth what they sell it for.
But people like Ndishishi, a regular at the election results centre after every five years with a brief hardly anybody knows about, are busy destroying the exact purposes for which ORIP was established - the empowerment of the people.
The end result of such action is the promotion of the growing unemployment problem.

Our Roads Are A Dice With Death

CABINET this week announced the formation of a special committee to investigate the causes of the road carnage in Namibia, as hundreds of people are being needlessly killed and maimed because of the way others drive.

Travelling on Namibian roads is to play dice with death. Road safety is not only what you do to the community (in terms of heavy fines and penalties) but it is what we do with the community.
The Cabinet decision to launch a two-week investigation is a welcome one but Cabinet members, for one, need to slow down and lead by example. Often you come across their vehicles speeding recklessly.
At some stage Members of Parliament debated the carnage and some argued that there was a need to change the law to allow those with fast cars a 160 km/h speed limit.
Yet, most accidents come about as a result of speeding, dangerous driving, overtaking, general recklessness and drunk driving.
It is a fact that even in cases where drivers have little control, such as an animal on the road, they can prevent death and destruction if they keep to speed limits.
Some of Namibia’s roads have turned into valleys of death. Here I refer to the Otjiwarongo/Otavi road; the Grootfontein-Rundu road; the Swakopmund-Walvis Bay road; the Windhoek-Rehoboth stretch and the Tses-Keetmanshoop road. On those roads the murderous carnage has become a continuous nightmare to many families and to the authorities as well.
One reason for such depressing and monotonous news is corruption in certain traffic departments which continues to plague the country’s fight against the carnage.
Some officers continue to take or solicit bribes in exchange for licences for people who can hardly keep a car on the correct side of the road while changing gears.
You see the result of such corruption almost every day in the city: Some people are not even capable of getting into or out of a parking bay.
Heavy-duty traffic at night also continues to cause havoc.
Recently Cameroon banned night-time public transport between cities after a spate of deadly accidents, many involving drunk driving on the country’s infamously poor roads.
Apparently night traffic in Cameroon only represents about 5 per cent of human transport, but 35 per cent of road accidents.
Not all truck drivers, for instance, are bad at what they do but many transport companies need to reconsider their recruitment policies.
They need to hire qualified, competent drivers to minimise the carnage on the country’s roads. Some drivers are hired simply because they have driver’s licences and sometimes these are illegally acquired! Some companies also fail to have regular inspections of the roadworthiness of their vehicles.
Some of the issues I mentioned continue to be covered by regular campaigns.
The best way to avoid accidents has always been not to rush and to leave for destinations timeously.
Members of the public must also be vigilant and report to the authorities those who break the law.
We find too many drivers with devil-may-care attitudes on our roads.
The worst group remain our taxis and the Namibia Bus and Taxi Association needs to read the riot act to colleagues instead of all the infighting going on. There is a need to threaten taxi drivers into obedience!
Some simple math tells us the following: If roughly 2 000 registered taxis each commit one unlawful driving act an hour, carrying four passengers over an eight-hour working day, there are 80 000 illegal instances every day to which Namibians are subjected.
That is why in 2007 while he was Transport Minister Joel Kaapanda expressed concern about the number of illegal taxis on Namibian roads and called them “death traps”.
But as soon as the campaign is intensified against illegal taxis, owners start crying and we have also seen violent demonstrations because of that.
In a lot of instances, taxis are involved in avoidable accidents which turn out to be costly to both the Government and the people.
What is needed is a sustained approach of removing arrogance and danger from our roads through the rigorous application of heavy fines for all road users.
Our roads will continue to play a dice with death as long as authorities deal leniently with road hogs, drunk drivers and vehicles that are not roadworthy.
Road safety should be everyone’s business.

National Council In Walvis Bay: For Work Or On Holiday?

THE last time I attended and covered the National Council, I ended up in hospital. It was so boring that the pain I’d had for two days intensified to the extent that I was booked into hospital for a minor operation.

Just 30 minutes of sitting in the public gallery of the National Council could easily make you age! There should be a way to make the debates livelier and more colourful.
I am thus in two minds over the decision by the lawmakers to move part of their next session to Walvis Bay. It is a great decision to take Parliament to the people and will be historic as it will be the first regional session of the National Council outside Windhoek.
But will their discussions become more inspiring, colourful and robust? I doubt that.
You hardly get enlightened debates from the National Council as our MPs are guilty of not doing research on some of the topics on the table.
Speeches are quickly scribbled on small pieces of paper and while you can clearly see that the piece of paper in the MP's hand has two or three written words, they go on speaking for longer than the time allocated to them.
Now, I don't say people should not have scribbled pieces of paper. I admire people who speak off the cuff, especially when they make sense.
A recent example of such people was the Ghanaian President John Ata Mills. What a pleasure to have watched him speaking without looking at notes but making very good sense on diplomacy, economics and other pertinent issues.
But, when someone is droning into a microphone, as do many of our Parliamentarians, it is a waste of time and other resources.
I am told that the National Council will have two-and-a-half hour meetings in Walvis Bay from September 13 to 22. This is apparently part of the objectives in the strategic plan.
On the agenda is, among others, discussion on the Industrial Property Bill as well as standing committee reports.
I am not far off the mark if I say that 95 per cent of those in the National Council have not read the 125-page document which was passed by Cabinet in 2005 already and only got to the National Council now.
Yet it is an important bill which, although not written to entertain, provides for the registration and protection of patents, industrial designs and trademarks.
The least we can expect from our Parliamentarians is to provide lively debates even if they hardly make sense. There are hardly foes in the National Council, because it is an almost 100 per cent Swapo gathering, but cutting each other down to size with colourful language can work instead of the 'sleep-for-pay' sessions.
The move to Walvis Bay will be a costly one. The MPs will get travel and subsistence fees as well as accommodation money on top of their sitting allowances. Staff of the National Council as well as those who will do the recording must also travel to the coast.
As the MPs arrive in Walvis Bay, they will probably drive straight to the sea and throw in coins to greet ancestors before heading to their hotels for lavish dinners.
During the sessions they will waste all their energies on trivia like complaining about how their work (like properly scrutinising recommended legislation) is crippled by a small budget, lack of NBC coverage and how we should maintain peace and tranquility in the country.
Are those not perhaps just convenient ways of deflecting attention from what they are not doing?
I don't think they need additional funds for MPs to read through proposed legislation. Do they?
Unless our MPs prepare well for the coastal session, it will turn out to be an expensive exercise and a time of much yawning, much like the ones in Windhoek.
As a result an opportunity to show the coastal community how committed they are to the work will be wasted while thousands of dollars will go down the drain.
It is for the MPs to prove me wrong.

Namdeb Dispute: A Lose-Lose Situation

THAT the Bogenfels dispute and industrial action was allowed to run on for more than 15 days, in the process causing losses of N$50 million to Namdeb and Government, is beyond my understanding.

The company informed the media this week that N$40 million of the N$50 million which went down the drain through the industrial dispute had been destined for the State coffer.
Looking at news coming from Namdeb and the Mineworkers’ Union of Namibia corridors, the dispute is not a simple disagreement over housing and other allowances. More so after MUN Oranjemund branch secretary Gert Iikela said workers would continue their strike, described as illegal by the company, until the company’s general manager, Mitford Mundell, was removed.
The workers are calling for Mundell’s head because he allegedly compromises safety at the mine and does not respect the interests of the Namibian workers.
I believe Mundell is but a scapegoat and that the Namdeb sparkle will fade even further unless the deep-rooted differences are solved.
Such differences are, unfortunately, not limited to Namdeb.
In almost every parastatal we see ‘fat-cat clubs’ living large while the workers at grassroots level struggle to make ends meet.
Think about it: how much will it cost Namdeb to give the group of workers the allowances they want? Juxtapose that against how much the company is losing daily because of the strike.
I do not want to promote illegal action by workers. I am against unruly behaviour but there is a need to look closely at how polarised our society is. So much so that it prevents us from addressing the root of our economic troubles: the continuing stagnation of ordinary workers’ incomes despite rising corporate profits, wages of the elite and, to some extent, worker productivity.
Ok, it could be a principle issue for Namdeb not to bow to what they see as unnecessary pressure by the workers. They probably do not want to set a precedent.
But do we generally ever see grossly overpaid executives go on strike? Why not?
Exactly because they have remuneration which ensures that members of the ‘fat-cat club’ are well paid without having to haggle over the millions they deny the ordinary workers.
On the other hand, the ordinary workers spend hours to threaten, toyi-toyi or even strike in order to earn a pittance, just to keep their heads above water. And as soon as the workers have their demands met, it is negated by the huge increases then awarded to members of the ‘fat-cat club’ while the price of necessities such as food and transport also take their toll.
It is why workers use strikes such as the Bogenfels one as a tool of leverage in labour-management conflicts, withholding their work to win fairer treatment and respect from recalcitrant employers.
Strikes such as these must not be taken lightly.
There is clearly a need for bosses to also tighten their belts. No one can dispute the fact that, in Namibia, inequality continues to deepen to levels not seen before.
This then has a ripple effect on the dependants of the ordinary workers who must scramble for a piece of the meagre salary.
If we do not look objectively at strikes such as the one at Bogenfels there is the risk that such events will become annual occurrences.
Let us thus not maintain poverty by failing to provide adequately for workers’ needs because it represents a shocking indictment of huge companies such as Namdeb in which the Government has majority shares.
As things stand currently, there is no winner at Namdeb. Neither the workers; nor the employer. It is a lose-lose situation. Something we can all avoid.

Executive Mayors: Shouldn’t Be A Jobs-For-Comrades Scheme

IT seems like it is a given that executive mayors will soon be appointed to run cities and towns alongside chief executive officers on a full-time basis.

I have my reservations about the pace of introduction, how the appointments will be made, affordability of the position as well as how the reporting channels would work.
Local Government Minister Jerry Ekandjo this week again announced his intentions to push through the appointment of executive mayors in full-time positions.
Local authorities are also pushing for the appointment of full-time councillors but that’s non-negotiable in my view. To do precisely what when there are already so many council employees? I’m not prepared to entertain the possibility.
Some countries have executive mayors but they come with very strict working conditions and goals.
I believe that Namibian councillors, especially in the management which is supposed to have a bird’s eye view of council operations, operate in a ‘meeting councillors’ environment. Their only major task currently is to attend meetings and many do not have an in-depth knowledge of the workings of councils.
Getting a full-time executive mayor will thus be slightly more affordable rather than put councillors on such terms.
Such a mayor should run with the implementation of decisions in tandem with a chief executive officer (CEO). If the two operate well together, it could improve the speed of implementation of decisions by the administration.
Currently, we have management committees but they are part-time and their monitoring of the implementation of decisions is limited to the times they meet.
Because of the dynamics of local authorities, I prefer that executive mayors be elected instead of being appointed by a Minister or the President. They must be accountable to the voters.
Having said that, it might be difficult for reporting systems because voters will have a tough time to measure the success of such a person since they do not always have access to information which will help them to do so.
However, if they are appointed directly by either the Minister or the President, clear goals can be set and regular assessments conducted to measure the implementation of such targets.
Currently, the President appoints regional governors.
My problem with the appointment of the governors is the lack of clarity on their accountability.
We have no idea about the goals set for them, how they are measured and what will happen if they are not achieved. Basically the same which applies to the Ministers, whom, we are told, supposedly report to the President (appointing authority) at quarterly intervals.
For transparency’s sake, President Hifikepunye Pohamba needs to reveal the targets he set for each Minister and governor upon his or her appointment. Are they just appointments or performance contracts, for instance? If someone does not perform, what happens to them? Can they be fired or will they continue to collect fat cheques until the five year cycle is completed?
If we don’t know their targets, they remain solely accountable to State House and not to the electorate.
When such circumstances prevail, governance becomes pathetic.
It is partly the reason why some regional councils as well as ministries operate on an ‘auto-pilot’ system. You hardly hear what some governors, for instance, do.
With executive mayors, we need to bring in efficiency.
For starters, get people with good educational backgrounds who will drive the economy of a town and have a good world-view.
You can’t give someone with a narrow view millions and expect them to deliver! You might lead them into corruption. In other words, we need to scale up big time to get better outcomes.
I must hasten to caution that the negative to an executive mayor would be that they can become too powerful through either close links with the CEO or staff members. In the process they can destroy a council.
Others could be engaged in constant in-fighting with staff or CEOs and this could be to the detriment of the entire council.
But what is certain is that we don’t need a jobs-for-comrades scheme or to just get cadres of the ruling party in a opposition-dominated council. That also shouldn’t be the objective of executive mayors.
Those in authority need to think thoroughly before pushing through the changes to the appointment of executive mayors.

Succession In The Opposition: Time For Some To Make Way

IN less than four years Namibians will head back to the polling stations to elect a new president.

But too much time is spent on the Swapo succession race when there are other parties which need to get their houses in order.
The Rally for Democracy and Progress, DTA of Namibia, United Democratic Front of Namibia and the National Unity Democratic Organisation all need new leaders if they are to be agents of change in the coming elections.
Together with Swapo, the political parties need not only to look for a younger president but also involve youth in the country’s mainstream politics.
Currently Namibians are preoccupied with everyday worries from the scores of people flocking the rubbish dumpsites to make ends meet with what other people see as health-hazardous garbage, hundreds of thousands who don’t have jobs, or enough to eat, or clean water, or a roof over their heads, or access to quality education and safe neighbourhoods and access to healthcare.
So a debate about a presidential candidate, especially in the opposition political parties, will probably be eclipsed by concerns about these tough economic times and how people struggle just to hold on to what they have.
But politics is also a bread and butter issue.
Whoever takes office as a leader of the country, in most cases, decides the path the rest of the country takes in future.
Thus, even if, judging by the current political environment, it might not look like the opposition will take over State House in three years’ time, there is nevertheless a need for introspection for those parties.
Before I look at what’s available and throw in some younger names as possible options, I need to point out that opposition parties need to move away from ‘opposition politics’ which is built on statements and rallies focussed mainly on criticising Swapo rather than rallying the masses to provide change from grassroots.
That is also one of the main reasons why many parties are dying a slow and painful death. Most will look like the real ‘new kid on the block’ for a year, or at most three, but quickly start to fade away, giving voters very little, if any, optimism.
Thus, unless opposition parties get beyond the attitude of criticism to build an alternative that will resonate with the majority, Swapo might well rule until “Jesus comes back”, as one of the party leaders recently said.
At Independence the Democratic Turnhalle Alliance was Namibia’s main opposition with 21 seats in the National Assembly. Today they have only two.
The party went on a serious backwards slide.
Current leader Katuutire Kaura (70) took over in 1999 after Mishake Muyongo went into exile following the Caprivi secession.
Under Kaura the support base did not only gradually thin out but the National Unity Democratic Organisation and Republican Party left the DTA.
Kaura is a well-oiled speaker and someone with good ideas, but his time at the party’s helm is up.
In 2005 the young McHenry Venaani prematurely challenged him but Kaura managed to see him off in style.
In fact, Venaani’s challenge also cost him the party’s secretary general position and ultimately a seat in the National Assembly where he had made mature input during debates.
With the experience he picked up, Venaani could be a good candidate who will not only draw votes from his tribal background, but also from people, young and old, who want intelligent debate and action.
Another leader whose time is long up is Justus //Garoeb (69 year in December) who heads UDF since 1989.
//Garoeb is a respected politician by both friend and foe in the National Assembly but he is hardly there!
Also, under him the UDF has lost appeal – losing members of the alliance as well as a number of seats in Parliament.
UDF has a couple of leaders they can rely. Among them is Sebastian !Gobs (43) – the regional councillor for Khorixas and someone who has shown vigour.
Another candidate would be the Kamanjab constituency councillor Dudu Murorua (who will be 53 in a few days). The former governor of Kunene has shown the leadership required to rejuvenate the party. He is far from the truck driver and farm foreman that he was at some point during his youth.
I also believe that the next ballot papers should not carry the image of Kuaima Riruako (76).
Not only is he the oldest Member of Parliament, but there is a need for the Nudo leader to follow his age-mate President Hifikepunye Pohamba when he retires.
Even though Arnold Tjihuiko (61) is not so young anymore, he has been very vocal in the National Assembly and could push on for a few more years.
I am sure that, just as Nudo surprised us with Tjihuiko appearing second on their list in 2004, they have other candidates in the offing.
If Hidipo Hamutenya (72) harboured aspirations of forming an own party or leading an opposition party, the Rally for Democracy and Progress came a bit late for him.
The former Minister, with many years of experience in international diplomacy, was followed out of the party by a host of his supporters. Even before he left, Jesaya Nyamu (three years Hamutenya’s junior) became the first senior Swapo figure to be expelled since 1990.
Nyamu took the beatings for his former high school mate Hamutenya but the former Minister of Trade and also Mines, who defended Epupa and Ramatex vigorously, is not exactly young enough to take over the leadership.
Again, RDP also have scores of more youthful leaders waiting in the wings.
But the youngbloods can only emerge once others have made room.
It makes sense, and it is the right time, for the above leaders to make way.

Messing With The Press

THERE is a disturbing new trend in town. Journalists, already registered and accredited by the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology, are forced to get additional licensing for access to almost every event.

It’s one communication that Namibian journalists don’t want to get of late: a notice for accreditation. But that’s happening increasingly - almost on a fortnightly basis.
What those who do it don’t know is that it is illegal to demand accreditation to conferences. There is no law permitting the authorities to demand that journalists have those unnecessary cards which pile up on their desks every week.
Not only are the cards unnecessary because the journalists are already accredited with the ICT ministry, but also because it is such a hassle to get them.
Government argues that the registration and accreditation of journalists is undertaken to ‘empower’ them. It means they can access certain places such as State House with reasonable ease.
However, it is of no help when they have to re-do the process with the visit of every Head of State, Prime Minister, Minister or other foreign dignitary as well as almost every other local conference where they receive ham-handed treatment by organisers or those employed to facilitate the process.
Shouldn’t we embrace media coverage? If so, don’t curb it by making it difficult for journalists to have access to information.
In any case, the next morning, all those who made it such a mission for journalists to cover their events, still buy newspapers on their way to the offices to read about themselves or sit patiently in front of television each evening hoping to see coverage of these functions. They seek fame like bees seek honey but will not grant those who will afford them such a chance easy access to information.
I tend to think that such people have political agendas that appear to be media headline driven while they are hyper security-conscious. For what reasons, I don’t know, because the closest a journalist has got to attacking a leader in the recent past was by throwing a shoe at George W Bush!
In most cases the accreditation process is so disorganised that the event starts or is over before the accreditation is finalised.
This because of faulty machinery, bad planning and unnecessarily tight security contributing to reporters struggling to secure their accreditation for admittance to such venues.
Personally, I have witnessed instances where several accreditation forms were submitted by people who were not even journalists! We call them spies or spooks.
I have no grudges if journalists are asked to get accreditation for a visiting Head of State or other Very Important Person (VIP) as our Government, like others the world over, is probably worried about terrorists or foreign intelligence operatives infiltrating such venues.
But there have been cases where even intelligence personnel circumvent security checks by supplying details of journalists or pretended to be working for certain institutions such as The Namibian and got away with the cards.
So why not use the already existing media cards? These are checked over time by the Ministry of Information and since we are a small population with an equally small group of scribes, almost everyone knowing the other. In any case, even the intelligence already have the details of most (controversial) journalists!
Judging from the amount of accreditation going on in the country, I have started wondering whether someone is not getting a kickback for giving out the job to a certain company.. Or who is making money from printing the cards which no one even looks at once conferences start?
The media, like any other profession, should abide by the laws of this country but we have the right to defend our turf when something illegal is imposed upon us and licensing is one of them.
As it is now, the accreditation process is just time-consuming, negatively affects production and deadlines and is just an outright waste of public funds.
Let's do away with it.