There is something about novelty that excites the masses and suspends reason every time it is mentioned. Populist politicians always popularise their ambitions in novelty terms. They call it change and this, in most instances, assures them some following.
People, generally, admire something they do not have, something new. It matters not if what is being promised is better. It only needs to be different.
And that seems to be the euphoria that has greeted the push by Third way Alliance Party to amend the constitution. Other than the catch slogan of Punguza Mzigo, the majority of Kenyans cannot tell you what is contained in the bill.
Few are even asking which part of their mzigo the proponents of the bill seek to reduce. But the excitement that comes with a promise of change has caught up with so many people one looks suspicious when one shows any resistance. And there lies the problem.
The initiative by Third way is not necessarily a bad idea. It has some points that, tactfully, gel well with the afflictions of the country and her people. The main principle behind the bill is the burden of governance which it seeks to reduce. It intends to infuse fiscal discipline in the management of public resources, which is a good thing.
It also seeks to reduce the number of representatives at the National Assembly which, for now, sounds very desirable. I say for now because the crop of members of the current Parliament does not inspire any admiration from the average Kenyan owing to their gluttonous tendencies and any Kenyan you ask on the street would easily tell you that the country would do well without them. Third way proposes to reduce the number of the leeches and that goes well with Wanjiku. The danger is we might be throwing away the good baby with the dirty bathwater by adopting a proposal that limits MPs to only 47.
The other good thing about Punguza mzigo is its attempt to achieve gender parity at the National Assembly. This however might be met with challenges at the implementation stage just like the current constitutional requirement of the same that has not been able to see the light of day nine years down the line.
Then there’s the attempt to drive devolution deeper by making the ward, rather than the county, the focal point of resource dispersal which also sounds okay.
But that is just about it.
There’s little, if no mention, of the form of government the country should adopt knowing as we do that what we have now is not serving our national interests well. There’s also no attempt at making our clearly fragmented country more united neither is there a clear formula of dealing with corruption, the single most vicious enemy of our national wellbeing.
Our problems as a country cannot be solved by just reducing the number of representatives. In fact, studies have shown that the number of MPs is not the issue, it is their nature. The 47 that Punguza seeks might be so calculatingly greedy that they may swallow the country in so little time that we may not tell what hit us!
So, instead of hurrying to amend the constitution and introduce clauses that will not make life easier and create room for further amendments, why don’t we put Punguza on hold, seek more ideas and initiate a more comprehensive process?
Mr Mugwang’a is a communications consultant based in Nairobi. @mykeysoul
Credit: Source link