The RBZ and my money

I have read a lot of commentary on the activities of the RBZ for the last five years. Needless to say, every Zimbabwean has been a victim of whatever errors (or failures) that are attributed to 'our governor'. I have also read his response in various articles. I think Gono's major weakness is his overwhelming perception of being a genius of some sort, to the point that he comes across as arrogant. Which is rather unfortunate if you are in the kind of situation he is in. I know that GG may insist on being around for some time but the reality is he is no longer welcome to head the country's central bank and in many respects he should be bypassed. I think all Zimbabweans, including Gono himself, should openly and honestly tell him to go.

There are several pertinent questions that have to be asked whenever we assess his tenure at the helm of the RBZ. Honest answers to these questions may give us an indication of what to do. Under what circumstances did the RBZ come to owe NGOs, universities, companies and farmers? Did the RBZ inform the affected individuals or ask them for their money? These two questions are best answered by the statement that he raided the accounts. Out of interest, is it legal for the central bank governor to simply raid an account? Further, how does a sane, rational individual, acting rationally, expect the affected individual to operate without the raided funds? 

It seems there is a method to this madness after all. The agenda was to save ZANU PF, but one of the most interesting consequences of this theft is that the affected individuals (especially the farmers) became dependent on the reserve bank and began to see it as their saviour against the evil west that had imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe. This is a spectacular case of the Stockholm syndrome where hostages think their captor is right. There are some within Zimbabwe who still think Gono was right. 

I recently read an article in which GG was putting forward the case for subsidies for farmers. I disagreed with him on a lot of points. First, the subsidies that are given to farmers in Europe, US and elsewhere come from national budgets with proper safeguards and accountability not from a single entity that appoints itself the national procurement agency. Second, the RBZ cannot claim to be subsidising farmers when it owes farmers that much money. What would be the point of the subsidies if the farmers are completely deprived of earnings that would improve their capacity in the long term? In addition, the RBZ (or at times the GMB) set the price of the produce. If you do the maths you will realise that the farmers were overall taxed (as opposed to being subsidised) by the institution that at face value seems benevolent. Third, the land reform programme is neither a programme nor a reform exercise. Let's stop lying about the obvious. Farm invasions and a few policies that have been haphazardly put together do not constitute a programme. And, vindictive and racist displacement of farmers is not reform. What we should do is revisit the whole exercise and optimise it so that national resources are used for the benefit of the nation. Meanwhile, no subsidies should be sent in that direction ... afterall all GG's subsidies for the past five years have failed to make the country food self sufficient. Fourth, the subsidies for the past five years (especially fertilisers, diesel etc) were simply sold on the black market. Gono is aware of that. At the relevant time, people who raised their voices against this were labelled as anti-Zimbabwe, unpatriotic etc.

I know one of Gono's main arguments about what he did was the 'sanctions' excuse. I know there are many contested issues pertaining to sanctions but one of the most obvious; (which has been acknowledged even by ZANU PF itself) was the main reason why the restrictive measures were put in place - political violence. While some people may want to yell on the rooftops about a bilateral dispute between Britain and Zimbabwe, the reality is that there are many innocent children of Zimbabwe who were murdered in the course of various electoral campaigns up to 2008. In addition, some of the lunacy is still ongoing (irrational detention of obviously innocent people). It would be irresponsible and outright delusional to expect the whole world to watch this breakdown of the rule of law and reward it by giving the perpertrators line sof credit and IMF funding. Anyway, even if the restrictive measures were there; does their existence justify the bankrupting of institutions by the central bank?

The central bank's wayward behaviour does not stop there. Why would you wait for four years to comply with a supreme court ruling? Who will compensate the affected for the lost business opportunities? While I am not happy with Zimbabwe's banking sector in general, I do not agree with a situation where an individual can ignore court rulings and then comply in his own sweet time. There is no reason why the RBZ faile dto comply sooner.

I read, and laughed long and loud, the comment in the Fingaz of Thursday May 08, 2009. I first thought the editor serious, then realised that it was probably meant to be a joke. Zimbabweans do not have a reason to thank GG at all, except if he quits, then we will thank him for doing the rational. The editor of the Fingaz had just run out of ideas. Further, there are people who still think GG did a good job. It's okay to hol such and opinion but ask yourselves how the dispossessed farmers, NGOs, bankers etc feel about the situation. You may have benefitted from the 'bags' and the whole 'moneychanger industry' but the rest of the country did not benefit and such behaviour has to come to an end.