Friday, April 25, 2025

Splitting of the Ministry of Agriculture Is Wrong

Share

The decision by President Rupiah Banda’s government to split the Ministry of Agriculture into two government ministries is one of the most absurd decisions a government can make. One would perhaps agree with the split if it was a line Ministry that actually performed the functions of rearing fish and livestock and tending to food crops (including maize, cassava, sorghum, millet, sweet potatoes, beans, wheat, and groundnuts).

This is clearly a decision designed to create sinecures for some of the MMD leaders who have not yet been compensated for their contributions to MMD campaigns. Vice-President George Kunda should not expect Zambians to accept the rationale he has presented to Parliament for the split. It is absolutely unacceptable and irresponsible!

What Zambia needs is a Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security that is designed to advise the Republican President on, and spearhead the implementation of, policies relating to the following: sustainable agricultural development and long-term food security – including the provision of agricultural incentives, support to agribusiness establishments and agricultural research centers, damming rivers, and construction of irrigation canals; and coordination of national programs and activities pertaining to agriculture and food security with those of the private sector and both provincial and municipal governments.

Such a Ministry should support all kinds of agricultural pursuits and en­deavors, including dairy farming, ranching, fish farming, horticul­ture, and crop husband­ry.

Splitting such a Ministry into the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives and the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries will only contribute to the usual duplication of effort that characterizes the current structure of government. For example, cooperatives can be established by growers of food crops as well as farmers in the livestock and fisheries industry – the split in the Ministry will mean that each one of the two new ministries will separately handle this function!

Instead of creating sinecures, we should be thinking about how Zambia can attain sustain­able agricultural de­ve­lopment and long-term food secu­rity through such measures and initiatives as the following:

  1. Zambia National Service: We should fully and promptly revive and revitalize the Zambia National Service (ZNS) production camps, which should accept enroll­ment by Zambian citizens on a volu­ntary basis, as well as promo­te and bolster agri­cultural pro­duction in the camps thro­ugh greater fina­ncial support and generous condi­tions of service for ZNS person­nel. Vacated refugee camps dotted across the country should also be utilized for agriculture-related training, crop production, and other vocations to be facilitated by a cadre of skilled and professional trainers.
  2. Provincial Agricultural Estates: We should require all provinces to create revenue-generating agricultural schemes, and to use a portion of the output of the schemes to maintain their own local food reserves.
  3. District Councils: District councils which current­ly run municipal farms as part of their commercial undertak­ings should be encour­aged to continue running such farms.
  4. School Production Units: All educational and training institu­tions should be encoura­ged to join in the nation’s quest for greater agricultur­al output and food security. In this endeavor, we should require each and every student and trainee to actively participate in agriculture-based production units at their schools, colleges and universities. Their partici­pation in such units should be graded and noted in their testimoni­als.
  5. The Military and Civil Police: Police camps and military barracks and garrisons should also be expected to initiate and maintain agricultural production units.
  6. Agricultural Incentives: We should provide for attractive agri­cultural incen­tives to boost both small-scale and large-scale farm­ers. As provided for in the World Trade Organizati­on’s Uruguay Round acc­ord conc­luded in December 1993 in Punta del Este, Uru­guay, WTO mem­ber-countries’ quest for enhan­ced food security precedes the need for progres­sive redu­ction of governmen­tal supp­ort for, and protection of, agricultural activities in order to enhance market access and com­peti­tive­ness interna­tionally.
  7. Agricultural Inputs: We should promote effi­ciency in process­ing, sourc­ing, and distribution of agricultural inputs by provi­ding for informal trade in agricultural inputs among farmers, and the crea­tion of a “Far­mers’ Hold­ing Company” by farmers (through a low-interest loan, if need­ed), to supply low-cost inputs nationwide at zero value-added tax—inc­luding seeds, seed­lings, ferti­lize­rs, pesti­cides, insecticides, stock feeds, and grain bags. The cooperating farm­ers should as­sume ownership of the com­pany as founding sharehold­ers, and the com­pany should prefera­bly be registered and operat­ed as a corporate entity. Besides, we should encourage farmers to engage in direct and informally initiated far­mer-to-farmer trade in low-cost and orga­nic agricultur­al inp­uts—including compost, chick­en-droppi­ngs and cattle-dung manures—and young birds, ani­mals and species of fish intended for breed­ing.
  8. Agriculture-Related Imports: All the various kinds of imports that are currently exempted from customs duty should continue to enjoy the duty-free status—including fertilizer, irrigation equipment, irrigation pumps, tractors, machinery for soil preparation and cultivation, harvesting and threshing machinery, poultry machinery, fungicides, and herbicides.
  9. Marketing of Produce: We should create—in collaboration with the Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU), the Millers Association of Zambia (MAZ), the Zambia Cooperative Federation (ZCF), and other relevant stakeholders—a marketing system for all kinds of agri­cultural produce designed to provide for the following: direct sourcing of such produce from farmers by mill­ers, re­tailers and other industrial buyers; and procure­ment of unsold produce by the Food Re­serve Agency at wholesale prices for preser­vation and/or distri­bu­tion to government institutions like boarding schools, colleges and hos­pitals.
  10. Irrigation Schemes: We should actively seek to create and maint­ain irri­gation schemes at tax-payer expense, including the damming of rivers and const­ruction of irri­gation can­als nationwide. We need to promote all-season crop production—January through Decem­ber.
  11. Other Imperatives: We should create feeder roads and maintain old ones nationwide, im­prove training conducted in agri­cultural re­search centers, provide for low-interest loans for erecting secure storage facilities, and extend incen­tives to agri­busi­nesses and canners and proce­ssors of agricultural pro­duce.

33 COMMENTS

  1. Do not split the Agricultural Ministry please. It is like the duplicity of effort that goes with the Task Force on Corruption, DEC and ACC, plus them police service! One needs not be a genius to see the futility of this idea.

  2. But this idea was already mooted by LPM before he died…. just like the katengamaliro vehicles. The circus still goes on!

  3. I thought the cry haz been about the reduction of ministriez? We should be working towardz just about 12 effectively and efficiently run ministriez.

  4. Heee…thats good men. Let us not just end at Ministry of AGric . We can have one more like the Ministry of Thuggery and Bootliking. Let all our bootlickers have ministerial jobs. In Zambia we have a lot of money for the bootlickers. WE DONT CARE FOR THE POOR PEOPLE SO LONG WE ARE DOING WELL AS BOOTLICKERS.

  5. Isn’t this action actually going against the economizing process that almost all other countries are trying to use as a means to overcome the global economic crunch? Even richer and much more developed economies are actually reducing expenses, by reducing unnecessary small portfolio ministries, for example. Opening up another ministry will mean more expenses. If this is a way to compansate some more MMD cadres, the MMD leaders should rather fish out coins from their own personal accounts abroad, and pay for whatever capaign boost those intended to be compansated. If they use the method of opening a new ministry, this will mean that more money from the tax payer’s pocket will be used to pay up such Almost personal issues. The MMD organisers and advisers should stop this.

  6. No. 3, a point of correction. LPD never mooted the idea of spliting the Ministry as far as I remember. The appointment of 2 Ministers of Agriculture by LPM was on the grounds that the then ailing Ben Kapita couldn’t run such a huge Ministry single handedly given his then failing health. After last year’s elections, RB had nowhere to place his cadres including Brandford Machila. Thus Machila was appointed as the co-Minister of Agriculture with Brain Chituwo.

    As I see it, the whole idea of spliting the Ministry is to create more Ministerial positions for cadres.

  7. We left out some people . so we need to create jobs for these hapless individuals, its really difficult to do corruption these days,so we think by setting up another ministry we can avoid some newspapers publisihng our names.

  8. if i remember well this was a minifesto by UPND. They probably have a better eplanation and this change meant another adjustment somewhere which made sense. Ba RB kukopela kuzabaletelela. Why not appoint some assistant specifically for fisheries, awe sure elo lwanya pe Zed

  9. Sometimes one wonders, and rightly so, whether the people running the affairs of this state truly have brains in their skulls or they are just full of “ubwali”. As long as there are no consequences for such kind of foolish and costly decisions, the painful charade shall persist. The ball is squarely in the court of Zambians.

  10. We will also be introducing the post of DEPUTY PRESIDENT and DUPUTY VICE PRESIDENT OF ZAMBIA because i cant do the tour of the world, entertain foriegn heads of state and parliament work all by myself and Kunda…no no bane

  11. This article seems to be taking us back to KK does. People who are old enough will remember that we had in operation a lot of the things this article is proposing. We had a socialist state, albeit Humanism. Why propose these things and on the other hand accuse RB of being UNIP.

    Socialism failed us, it is not the most effiecient way to create wealth. Please dont just condemn, look back into our own history. Why repeat things that failed. Give us progressive ideas.

  12. The reason why agric has failed in this country is because it has always been used as a political weapon by the ruling party. Why is it feterlizer is still an issue 44 yeras after indepence? Every President we have has always made it look like this commodity is coming from his pocket hence making it difficult for non Unip and now MMD farmers to organize themselves properly. Professionals have been shunted to the side lines while politicians take centre stage so as to seen as doing us a favour by delivering this feterliser personally to cadres. Agric in Zim was very successiful until Uncle Bob came up with that idea— Here the Zambian govt could have learnt soming instead of sending people(mostly Cadres) to China and N Korea.

  13. I like the suggestions made by the author of this article. But lets look at the practicability of the suggestions. I think it will be very costly for government to implement them and as a result we will be spending more than we generate. I think the best way is to focus on the agricultural produces which wll be propfitable so that profits can be made. Products that are too expensive to produce can be imported. Like that agriculture will be profitable. And Yes! it is foolish to split the ministry

  14. the split will creat jobs dont just look at the minister ,there is also the deputy, ps, dps,directors of the minstry ,the kapokos and us the workmen ,atleast theGRZ has taken the lead in job creation the pivate shuold follow suit by splitting their departments so that we can have almost every one working.

  15. It would more effiecient to have two Deputy Minis under the same ministry if GRZ feels this Ministry is ‘heavy’. To create another Ministry mean GRZ has duplicate the entire ministry infrastracture (HR, equipment & office space). The RB UNIP strategy!!!

  16. #17 Deja Vu you so right. Its a shame indeed because this sector with good roads could undoubtedly have made Zambia a bread baskert with all that abundent fetile land.. Its very upseting

  17. At a time Zedians want a reduced cabinet,Someone at the helm is pushing,pushing and pushing for a duplicate MACO at the expense of taxpayers!!.MACO has departments for all that has been mentioned above and manned by competent agriculturalists and what RB is pushing for has everything to do with appeasing his friends.Hegemony is so deep-rooted in Zambian.Ask Sata,he once enjoyed it and wants it again but this time “Azachiona!!”

  18. Spliting the Ministry is not the solution but the funding to it. Does it make sense to split the Ministry and remain with same funding and the same ground staff? We will just end up having more bosses along with immoral and riduclous conditions of service. It was said that the crops department overshadowed the livestock and fisheries sections – What a lame excuse! The suggestions made by the author sound good theoretically but are currently impracticable.

  19. #24 Pompi, According to the Post the magistrate is right now reading through Kafupi’s judgment prior to passing the verdict. Keep updated on the Post online, it’s free.

  20. Remember sometime around 2002 when the Ministry was converted from the Ministry of Agric. Food & Fisheries to Agric. & Cooperatives? Two Deputy Ministers, two Permanent Secretaries – one for Agriculture and the other for Cooperatives were established. The idea was to give more attention to the cooperative movement but what has changed so far? Nothing apart from losing tax payers money to pay the dormant deputys who officiate or represent the main minister at low level functions.

  21. Points to note
    Has anyone taken note that points 1 to 5 have been cancelled by 6? How are those reconciled? In fact 1 to 5 social activities just as in the current agriculture systems – mere cost centres just as is input distribution which should be under ministry of social welfare thru which deserving peasant farmers would be identified even when they do not repay their loans thus maintaining the status quo.
    The other activities like grading of roads & irrigation should be under local authorities just as would be maintenance of storage facilities. So you equally have it wrong in your alternative to MMD’s approach.
    What place do commercial farmers have then? You refer to Zim, it is commercial farmers who made it tick coz peasants have been left with land but cannot produce.

  22. I am in my last year of agricultural economics and it saddens me when i see the vast difference in priorities and issues facing zambia and other countries in the west. Duplicaitng efforts and ministries will just widen the already huge gap between us and our counterparts..so sad indeed!

Comments are closed.

Read more

Local News

Discover more from Lusaka Times-Zambia's Leading Online News Site - LusakaTimes.com

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading