The Harare City Council (HCC) has announced via the media that it is at advanced stages of entering into a deal with an as yet unnamed South African based company to refurbish the capital city’s water delivery system.
Sunday Opinion by Takura Zhangazha
The deal is estimated to be at a cost of close to US$3 billion. HCC officials are on record as referring to the pending transaction (subject to cabinet approval) as a prime example of public private partnership.
In the same deal, it has been publicly indicated that residents are expected to have an added benefit of internet broadband connectivity that the South African company would provide. This is regardless of the fact that we already have three mobile phone companies and multiple internet service providers sharing a stake in the fibre-optic cables that are being dug into the soils of Harare.
But this somewhat inexplicable benefit in relation to water is somewhat besides the point until one reconsiders previous announcements by one of the very well paid directors in the HCC that they intend to privatise water service provision in Harare through prepaid water meters. So it will be a combination of internet/broadband technology linked to ensuring that water is privatised (which is the actual intent of HCC and central government.)
And this is not the first lauded loan/investment deal around water reticulation that the council has indicated it has entered into. There is the still unresolved matter of the Chinese National Machinery and Equipment Import and Export Corporation loan guarantee that was also reported in the media as having been abused. Especially where it came to matters to do with procurement.
So even if the latest arrangement with the yet to be publicly named South African Company is at advanced stages of finalisation, the HCC seems to be keen on papering over the cracks of a very murky approach it has taken to public private partnerships.
This is specifically in relation to the evident lack of context that the HCC is functioning in. It appears as though they are “open game” to almost any proposal from whatever company has come their way. So long the proposal appears to make them appear as though they are “rationalising” (also read as privatising) local government social service delivery.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
Apparently including another one on public transport which was reported in another newspaper. All of which have come back as either done or almost done deals with the resident and ratepayer not having full cognisance of them. Or how these will literally make access to water the right of only those that can afford it?
The lack of context is even more evident where and when those at the helm of the HCC are as arrogant as insisting that the extravagant salaries they pay senior employees are not only in order but never explain how they fit in the broader scheme of things. (All of this while simultaneously sponsoring a Premier Soccer League football team on the basis of what former finance committee chairperson has referred to as irrational grounds.)
What therefore obtains at the HCC is an unfortunate if not deliberate intention to sweep scandals under the carpet under the guise of “work in progress”. That the media chose to write stories of unnamed companies investing in the capital city without evident deals of the full import of the same on residents and ratepayers is also most unfortunate.
For instance, who really carries the burden of the US$3 billion investment cost? In any event, if it is an investment and not a debt, does the respective and unnamed South African company start owning the city’s water? And how many jobs is this project expected to create for Harare or any numbers if ancillary manufacturing industries are to re-emerge?
Furthermore, if there is interaction between central and local government on broader economic policy, how does this specific investment deal fit into the still controversial indigenisation and economic empowerment policy?
What is probably continuing to obtain, as has been the case in the last decade, is the literal “selling” of the capital city’s resources for a song, without adequate policy research or democratically arrived at understanding of context.
Such “sales” of council property have come in the form of either properties in return for liquidity or in terms of outsourcing council mandates with the evident intention of privatising basic social services beyond the reach of a majority poor resident or ratepayer.
l Takura Zhangazha writes in his per-sonal capacity: takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com
