Find us on Google+

Saturday, 29 March 2008

Quote of the week (Michael Sata)

"....We are not in favour of variable tax or windfall tax based on gross revenue. We therefore suggest that these two taxes be abandoned.....".

- Michael Sata (Post 29/03/2007)

The Leader of the Opposition articulating a "reformed" position on the mining issue, in his letter to President Mwanawasa. The problem with the government approach to the mining question is the lack of consultation, not just with the mines but the people. Up to this day, the government has never released the analysis that underpins its decisions. Interestingly, Sata notes that Zambia should avoid unilateral action and become a lawless state like Zimbabwe. Is PF now trying to reposition itself as a centralist party?

Update :

The Minewatch blog has also picked up on this issue.

6 comments:

  1. Interestingly, Sata notes that Zambia should avoid unilateral action and become a lawless state like Zimbabwe.

    How is Zimbabwe a lawless state?

    Where and when did it break the law?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The point Sata made was that Zimbabwe's unilateral approach landed it into problems. The world is interdependent now, whether one likes it or not.

    On whether Zimbabwe is specifically a lawless state, I think it is..the rule of law has broken down by all accounts. But I conceed that neither of us are in Zimbabwe, and therefore its all hearsay, as they say.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The point Sata made was that Zimbabwe's unilateral approach landed it into problems.

    Frankly, that's the myth.

    Under the Lancaster House Agreement, Britain would compensate the white farmers for the land, while the Zimbabwean government would compensate them for improvements made to the land. That was the deal.

    So when in 1997, Claire Short wrote:

    I should make it clear that we do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe.

    it was Britain, which unilaterally reneged on it's own specific obligations, with regards to the Lancaster House Agreement.

    From the Zimbabwean Ambassy in Sweden's website:

    Sir Shidath’s response in the already cited BBC programme gives context to this turn of events. Asked whether Zimbabweans “were let down by the British” he said, “Britain let them down. Britain did not fulfil its promises and they found all sorts of ways to wriggle out and that was very unfortunate and that it is what had led to some of the bitterness …”



    http://www.raceandhistory.com/Zimbabwe/landfacts.html

    Check out this 'community land purchase model':

    Community land purchase model

    This model has many similarities to model 1 and 2, but it differs from them in that the community is in the driver seat for all decisions, while the implementing organisation only has enabling, supervisory, and disbursement functions. Most importantly, communities not only plan and execute their own settlement, but also search for the land they want to purchase and negotiate the price with the seller.

    Implementing agencies for this model may be local governments, the Community Action Fund, or a private entity such as a bank or a consortium of banks.

    In all other respects the community land purchase model is executed like a combination of the community participation and execution model, and the private sector models. All variants of the latter could be considered as options by the land purchasing community.

    The Government of Zimbabwe estimates that the total cost of the land reform and resettlement programme is US$1.1 billion. This will cover costs of;

    land acquisition and development.

    Infrastructure and services (roads, water, first crop tillage, schools and clinics).

    Farmer support and credit facilities.

    facts behind the land issue, The
    African Business, Apr 2003 by Versi, Anver

    ReplyDelete
  4. We have discussed this before. The Claire Short letter was extremely disrepectful. All analysts on Zim accept this.

    The point is that Zimbabwe is a sovereign state and rightly or wrong it chose its path. No one put a gun to their head. Its about time African nations stopped whinging and accepted some degree of responsibility.

    As it turns out now. Zimbabwe is now on the threshold of the unknown. Let us see what happens.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sata is a typical Bemba opportunist. He is the one who proposed in the 2006 campaign that the mining companies in Zambia be nationalized. His ideas are prehistoric! Its time to retire freedom fighters and start promoting educated and knowledgeable leadership. KCM & NFC have both accepted the new taxes thus stupidifying Sata's comments. Its the whites who are still scratching their heads over this issue. They have a hard time giving to ceasar that which belongs to ceasar!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Did Sata read the report issued by the Ministry of Mines on the competitiveness of Zambias taxes in comparison to other Copper producing states? Sata is a kaponya who makes unilateral decisions without consultation. He needs to learn to read first before he opens his foul mouth. His time is gone! Lets find credible leadership and not washed out politicians.

    ReplyDelete

All contributors should follow the basic principles of a productive dialogue: communicate their perspective, ask, comment, respond,and share information and knowledge, but do all this with a positive approach.

This is a friendly website. However, if you feel compelled to comment 'anonymously', you are strongly encouraged to state your location / adopt a unique nick name so that other commentators/readers do not confuse your comments with other individuals also commenting anonymously.