The Telegraph
By Sebastien Berger, Southern Africa Correspondent, and Peta
Thornycroft
Last Updated: 2:35am BST 20/09/2007
Zimbabwe's opposition have been accused of "co-operating in their own
demise" after they reached agreement with President Robert Mugabe's regime
on major constitutional reforms.
Under the landmark deal, Mr
Mugabe's power to appoint 30 MPs has been
abolished and the number of
parliamentary seats will be raised from 120 to
210.
An
electoral commission consisting entirely of the President's allies
will draw
up these constituencies. They could seize the opportunity to rig
the new
seats in favour of the ruling Zanu-PF party before presidential and
parliamentary polls due in March.
advertisement
Both factions of the divided Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC) have
agreed to this. They have also endorsed a key
amendment of the constitution
which allows parliament - where Mr Mugabe's
allies have a majority - to
choose his successor if he dies or retires.
Previously, this would have
triggered an election.
Securing
this amendment was one of Mr Mugabe's longstanding ambitions.
The MDC has
now agreed to support it in parliament.
Jonathan Moyo, a former
cabinet minister who now sits as an
independent opposition MP, said the
reforms would "give Mugabe a new lease
of life". He added: "We don't need 90
new constituencies as we have a
dramatically declining population with
people leaving the country and deaths
from HIV-Aids."
A
scathing commentary carried on the ZW-News website, which is
normally
aligned with the MDC, said: "By failing to put up even ultimately
futile
arguments against the Bill in parliament, they have done precisely
what the
government desires. They have begun the process - however
unwittingly - of
cooperating in their own demise."
"Glaring by its omission is any
mention of the comprehensively rigged
voters's roll, the totally biased
electoral apparatus and election courts,
and the various Zanu-PF controlled
militias that make any talk of free and
fair elections a sick
joke."
The agreement was reached during talks in South Africa's
capital,
Pretoria, mediated by President Thabo Mbeki. The MDC hopes to
replace
Zimbabwe's current election commission with an independent body.
They also
want to agree an entirely new consitution.
But having
conceded these key changes, the MDC has been left with
minimal bargaining
power.
Critics say the MDC has been co-opted into lending
legitimacy to Mr
Mugabe's regime. The opposition's key negotiators were Prof
Welshman Ncube
and Tendai Biti, who represent both wings of the divided
party. Mr Biti has
difficult relations with his superior, Morgan Tsvangirai,
leader of one MDC
faction.
These divisions mean that Mr Mugabe
has little to fear from the coming
election. Both factions of the MDC may
stand against one another, splitting
the opposition vote.
Independent, UK
Published: 20 September
2007
Reports this week from Zimbabwe have graphically illustrated the
appalling
and tragic situation in which the people of Zimbabwe now find
themselves.
The facts are stark: four million people have fled the
country; 80 per cent
of the population are unemployed; four million will be
on food aid by the
end of the year; and average life expectancy has fallen
to just 37.
There is no easy solution to end this suffering. But I am
determined that
Britain continues to do everything it can to help the
Zimbabwean people.
We are currently the second largest donor in Zimbabwe,
providing up to £40m
a year in humanitarian assistance and for HIV and Aids
care in support of
the most vulnerable. In addition, the British Government
is announcing today
an additional £8m for Zimbabwe this year, to be
delivered through the World
Food Programme.
But this alone will not
be enough. And working with our international
partners we must do more to
press the Zimbabwean government to change.
We will ensure that the EU
maintains sanctions against the 131 individuals
in the ruling elite,
including President Mugabe, who have committed human
rights abuses - and
extend sanctions to other individuals where necessary.
We will suggest to EU
partners the appointment of an EU envoy to help
support the transition to
democracy. We will press the UN Security Council
to review more regularly
the situation on the ground, and to dispatch a
humanitarian mission to
Zimbabwe.
We also need to support the important efforts of presidents
Kikwete
[Tanzania] and Mbeki [South Africa] to negotiate a return to
democracy.
We need to be ready for the day democracy returns to Zimbabwe.
We are
working with African and international partners to prepare a
long-term
recovery package for when conditions exist to allow economic
reconstruction
to begin. This will include measures to help Zimbabwe restart
and stabilise
its economy, restructure and reduce its debt, help skilled
people who have
left the country return home, renovate schools and
hospitals, and very
importantly support fair land reform. And Britain is
ready to contribute our
share to this endeavour.
It is also right
that I make clear my position on the forthcoming EU-Africa
Summit. I want
this summit - under the leadership of [Portugal's] Prime
Minister Socrates -
to be a real success. It is a serious opportunity to
forge a stronger
partnership between the EU and Africa in order to fight
poverty, tackle
climate change, and agree new initiatives on education,
health and
peacekeeping.
President Mugabe is the only African leader to face an EU
travel ban. There
is a reason for this - the abuse of his own people. There
is no freedom in
Zimbabwe: no freedom of association; no freedom of the
press. And there is
widespread torture and mass intimidation of the
political opposition.
President Mugabe's attendance would mean lifting
the EU visa ban that we
have collectively imposed. I believe that President
Mugabe's presence would
undermine the summit, diverting attention from the
important issues that
need to be resolved. In those circumstances, my
attendance would not be
appropriate.
Britain will not shirk our
responsibilities to the people of Zimbabwe and I
am determined that we do
all we can to help them forge a better future for
themselves and their
children.
Independent, UK
Basildon Peta:
Published: 20 September 2007
My heart bleeds
when I go to a Johannesburg restaurant these days and find
all the waiters
are my compatriots, Zimbabweans. These menial workers are
nurses, lecturers,
accountants, engineers and other professionals forced to
flee their once
prosperous homeland by Robert Mugabe's political and
economic Pol Potism.
Professionals I used to spot in BMWs in Harare are now
cleaning
lavatories.
Imagine what goes through me seeing a friend who was once a
high flyer in a
bank running a brothel in Hillbrow, a suburb of
Johannesburg. Zimbabwe, my
country, once made me proud of my heritage. It
was the breadbasket of Africa
and an exporter of tobacco, gold and platinum.
Now it is reduced to a being
net exporter of prostitutes.
I speak for
many Zimbabweans when I welcome Gordon Brown's apparent move to
adopt an
energised new stance against Mugabe's fossilised regime.
Sceptics will
not easily embrace the shift. They will say it plays into Mr
Mugabe's claim
that he is a victim of neocolonialism. They will say it plays
into Mugabe's
rhetoric that he is being victimised for empowering his black
countrymen by
redistributing white farmland. They will repeat the same tired
mantra, that
Africans should take the lead in reining in Mr Mugabe.
But the philosophy
that African states should take the lead on Zimbabwe is
bankrupt. Most of
these African countries remain a collection of mismanaged
entities that
would not survive without Western subsidies. What leverage do
Mozambique,
Zambia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and many others, whose
national
budgets are half funded by donors, have over Zimbabwe?
How can one expect
Angola's Jose Dos Santos, who has overseen the economic
stagnation of his
country, despite billions of mismanaged income from oil
revenues, to sit
with Mugabe and discuss good economic governance? How can
Nigeria's Olusegun
Obasanjo, who has relinquished power in a flawed
election, have been
expected to counsel Mugabe on the virtues of democracy
as the Commonwealth
once naively mandated him to do? How can Equatorial
Guinea's Theodoro
Nguema, reputed to have eaten the testicles of opponents
and bankrupted his
oil-rich country, bring counsel on Mugabe?
We Zimbabweans have reconciled
ourselves to the fact that our fellow
Africans will do nothing for us in our
hour of need. In desperation, we have
to look to our former colonisers for
help.
If the EU sanctions imposed on Mugabe's circle of cronies were
extended to
children and relatives, the men and women who make up Mugabe's
edifice would
be forced to rethink. And maybe then, things could start
getting better for
all of us.
Independent, UK
By
Daniel Howden, Deputy Foreign Editor
Published: 20 September
2007
There are two faces that Zimbabweans are used to seeing at election
time.
One is the seemingly ageless visage of their current President, Robert
Mugabe, and the other is that of Tony Blair. The last polls to be held in
the southern African country two years ago were billed as the "anti-Blair"
election. After seeing off rumours of a palace coup from members of his own
ruling party earlier this year, Mugabe launched into a four-hour speech in
which he made no mention of millions of starving Zimbabweans, nor of
astronomical inflation. There were, however, countless references to the
former British prime minister and his sinister plot to recolonise
Zimbabwe.
And so it has been for the past five years. Mr Blair told the
Earth Summit
in Johannesburg that the state of Africa was a "scar on the
conscience of
the world". Mugabe replied: "Blair, keep your England and let
me keep my
Zimbabwe."
Ever since Mr Blair's public attack on the
disastrous handling of the
seizure of white-owned farms in Zimbabwe, Mugabe
has used the notion of a
foreign conspiracy to enduring effect. Meanwhile, a
country that was once
Africa's bread basket has lurched into famine and the
British Government has
abandoned its megaphone diplomacy in favour of back
channels and what the
South African government calls "quiet
diplomacy".
In the 27 years since emerging as the first leader of
independent Zimbabwe,
the former Catholic school teacher has proven himself
incredibly adept at
twisting the words of his allies and opponents and
staying a step ahead of
both. While the 83-year-old President is often
portrayed as a cartoon of an
African dictator in the British press, he has
managed to identify himself so
completely with the independence struggle
that white critics are seen as a
neocolonialist and possibly
racist.
The very slim hope of political progress in Zimbabwe now rests
with talks
under way in South Africa. Sources close to the negotiations
involving the
ruling Zanu-PF party and the opposition groups have for the
first time
expressed "guarded optimism" that they might get an agreement.
The
International Crisis Group, an independent think-tank, said this week
that
British attacks on the Mugabe regime had been "counterproductive" and
sanctions "ineffective". In private, many opposition figures inside Zimbabwe
are wary of British leaders posturing and point out that there has been a
significant gap between rhetoric and action. No one close to the talks in
Pretoria seems keen for Britain to pick up the megaphone again.
Business Day
20 September 2007
John
Kaninda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diplomatic
Editor
SENEGALESE President Abdoulaye Wade has reignited his rivalry with
President
Thabo Mbeki by saying that efforts to end the crisis in Zimbabwe
should not
be left to the South African president alone and it needed a
broader
approach involving more than one African head of state.
Mbeki
was mandated by the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) to
secure a
deal on constitutional reform between Mugabe and the opposition
Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC) ahead of presidential and parliamentary
polls in
March next year.
"It's a big mistake to always say that Zimbabwe should
be left to Mbeki,"
Wade said on Tuesday.
"Mbeki is a man who has a
huge amount of goodwill but this is a situation
which just one person cannot
resolve alone, that much is clear."
Wade, who called Mugabe a "bad lawyer
with a good cause" , said more African
heads of state, including himself,
should be involved in the mediation.
Wade's comments echo remarks
made by Nobel prize laureate Archbishop Desmond
Tutu, who said that the
mediation was not enough and Africa must do more to
end the crisis in
Zimbabwe.
But Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad said Mbeki's quiet
diplomacy was
paying off.
He pointed to an agreement on Tuesday by
the MDC for a constitutional
amendment allowing Mugabe to anoint a
successor, in exchange for limiting
his power to appoint MPs.
Pahad
said the agreement was a first step in reforms that would help ensure
credible elections in Zimbabwe next year.
This is not the first
time that Wade has sparred with Mbeki over leadership
on African
issues.
In June, ahead of a summit of the Group of Eight nations in
Germany, he
accused the New Partnership for African Development (Nepad) - a
brainchild
of Mbeki - of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and
achieving nothing
for the world's poorest continent.
Wade
said Nepad had proved no more than a talking shop. "I have decided no
longer
to waste my time at meetings where nothing gets done, " he said at
the
time.
Though no reaction to Wade's comments has been recorded from SADC
leaders,
it seems unlikely they will come out in support of Wade's call for
a
collegial mediation in Zimbabwe.
On Tuesday, Mozambican President
Armando Guebuza came out strongly in
support of Mbeki's mediation in
Zimbabwe, saying that the process was in
"good hands" and that the SADC
"supports him". With Reuters
The Sowetan
Themba
Molefe
20 September 2007
I had intended to vent my anger on the
increasingly incorrigible behaviour
of South Africa's teenagers, their
apathetic parents, a paralysed Education
Department and a misfiring
government.
However, I am inclined instead to focus on an
ill-informed reaction by a
journalist and former colleague to Sowetan's
current series of articles on
Zimbabwe.
"Why do you say there is a
crisis in Zimbabwe and why do you say crossing
the border is fraught with
danger for those fleeing their country," he
charged just the other
day.
I was still mouthing an answer when he continued with his
bombardment:
"There is no danger at the Beit Bridge border post. Actually,
it is not all
that bad in Zimbabwe."
The former colleague was
disgusted by the very idea of running the series.
He detested everything
about it. In the series, readers are invited to vote
"yes" or "no" to
whether the government's strategy on Zimbabwe is right.
"What do you mean
by that? Why do you ask such a question," he pressed.
I have said before
in this column that I am the kind of fellow who looks at
you very closely if
you perplex me.
Only this time I could hear him but not see him. He was
on the other end of
the line, you see. But I know him and he is my friend,
though it is a while
since we last met.
So, I let him go on with his
tirade. I have heard many like him before. I
realised that he is one of the
cynics who say that anyone who dares to opine
on the suffering of the
African people of Zimbabwe either has an agenda, is
a hypocrite, or an
apologist for Morgan Tsvangirai and whites, and is a
President Robert Mugabe
hater.
And as my former colleague went on, only one question he had asked
earlie r
kept dancing inside my head. "Why do you say there is a crisis in
Zimbabwe?"
It conjured up the image of a road-weary woman trying to cross
illegally
into the country caught by South African soldiers armed with R1
rifles. So
did the face flashing before my eyes of a man who walked more
than 500km,
leaving behind a young wife and two little sons to escape
hunger.
More images jumped in my mind of men and women braving the
Limpopo River and
its crocodiles only to be arrested and deported.
I
pondered the former colleague's anger at me, at Sowetan. I tried to fathom
why and came to a sad conclusion.
What is happening in Zimbabwe ought
not to be.
Zimbabwe is a proud nation that gallantly fought for its
liberation from
British colonialists. President Mugabe is a hero, not only
in his country
but across the continent.
Now, to answer my former
colleague: Yes, the great Zimbabwe is in a crisis.
If a man runs away
from his country to another because he is hungry, that is
a
crisis.
It is a crisis when a free country cannot feed its people.
The Herald (Harare) Published by the
government of Zimbabwe
20 September 2007
Posted to the web 20
September 2007
Harare
AN average family of five in Zimbabwe
required close to $12 million in
August if it was not to be classified as
poor, latest statistics show.
For food items only, the same family needed
$4,5 million, up 11,3 percent on
the July figure of $4 million, the Central
Statistical Office reported on
Tuesday.
"The August 2007 Food
Poverty Line for an average of five persons in
Zimbabwe stood at $4 528
000," said the CSO in a statement. "This represents
a gain of 11,3 percent
relative to the June 2007 figure of $4 067 200."
The FPL represents the
minimum consumption expenditure necessary to ensure
that each household
member can (if all expenditures were devoted to food)
consume a minimum
basket representing 2 100 kilo calories.
An individual whose total
expenditure does not exceed the Food Poverty Line
in deemed to be very poor,
according to the CSO.
On the other hand, the Total Consumption Poverty
Line (TCPL), which is
naturally higher than the FPL, was derived by
computing the non-food
consumption expenditures of poor households whose
consumption was just equal
to the FPL.
The amount was then added to
the FPL and if an individual does not consume
more than the TCPL, he or she
is also deemed poor.
The Consumer Council of Zimbabwe last reported in
June that an urban family
of six in Zimbabwe required $8,2
million.
The CCZ family basket is confined to urban areas while the CSO
poverty lines
cover both rural and urban areas.
The poverty line
figures also vary by province as prices vary from place to
place. The August
TCPL for an average household ranged from $9,2 million in
Mashonaland East
Province to $15,6 million in Bulawayo Province.
According to research,
most Zimbabwean employers do not prioritise inflation
in wage negotiations.
A salary survey released by Lorimark in late 2006
revealed that only 15
percent of the companies took into account inflation
when reviewing
salaries.
Furthermore, workers have repeatedly urged Government to
constantly review
the income tax brackets, a point Government has always
taken into account in
its national and supplementary budgets.
The tax
brackets and tax-free thresholds have been revised twice so far this
year,
with those earning below $4 million no longer liable to paying tax.
The Herald (Harare)
Published by the government of Zimbabwe
20 September 2007
Posted to
the web 20 September 2007
Bindura Bureau
Harare
The latest wave
of power cuts that has hit Mashonaland Central is delaying
tobacco
transplanting in the province with a mere 2 percent of the targeted
18 000
hectares of land having been transplanted so far.
To avert such
disruptions Government is buying generators to mitigate the
effects of power
cuts in tobacco, milk and horticultural production.
It has already
bought 150 generators and more are being imported with funds
provided by the
Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.
Provincial tobacco specialist Mr Tinomuonga
Hove said transplanting began
two weeks ago and is expected to be completed
by the beginning of November
for the early planted irrigated crop.
So
far the province has managed to plant 475,5 hectares.
It is targeting to
put 18 000 hectares of land under tobacco.
Mr Hove said the power cuts,
coupled with delays by the National Oil Company
of Zimbabwe in releasing
fuel to tobacco farmers, has further delayed the
transplanting
process.
"Tobacco requires a lot of water during transplanting and the
constant power
cuts have really affected the transplanting process hence
farmers are
finding it difficult to irrigate the transplanted
crop.
"Sometimes farmers spend the whole day without electricity which is
sometimes only reconnected late at night," Mr Hove said.
From: Trudy Stevenson
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Sent: Thursday,
September 20, 2007 3:18 AM
Subject: Hansard - Ncube and Sibanda on
Constitution Amendment 18
Attached and below extract from Hansard
yesterday Prof Ncube and Leader of
the Opposition Gibson Sibanda on
Constitution Amendment 18
Bill.
..................................................................................................
Zimbabwe
Parliamentary Debates
House of Assembly Tuesday 18 September,
2007
..
SECOND READING
CONSTITUTION OF ZIMBABWE AMENDMENT (No. 18)
BILL
...
PROF. Welshman NCUBE:
I rise to make a contribution to the
debate on the Constitution of Zimbabwe
Amendment No. 18 Bill. I begin by
fully and unconditionally endorsing the
remarks of my colleague Hon Khupe
and wish to add the following.
I confirm what the Minister of Justice,
Leal and Parliamentary Affairs, has
said in his statement in respect of the
process and content of the
negotiations which are taking place between the
Government of Zimbabwe and
ZANU PF on one hand and the MDC in its collective
sense - (Laughter!) -
For the avoidance of doubt, particularly for those
in the media fraternity
who keep speaking the language of MDC negotiating as
two formations - that
is not the case. At the negotiating table there is
one MDC.
For those of our compatriots who love our beautiful country,
some might be
alarmed and say those of us in the MDC might appear on the
face of it to be
abandoning the principles we have fully enunciated over the
last 8 years on
how we believe a new Constitution for Zimbabwe must be
made. Let me take
the opportunity to explain and enunciate those principles
and how they fit
in with what we are trying to do in order to resolve the
national crisis.
I can speak authoritatively on these principles because
I can say I was
there at the beginning of the NCA and the crafting of its
principles. For
those who are not aware, the very first meeting which
conceptualized and
began the process of constituting the NCA took place in
Belgravia, and was
convened by Tawanda Mutasah, attended by Brian Kagoro,
Everjoice Win,
Priscilla Misihairabwi-Mushonga and myself. Thereafter, the
NCA as we know
it was constituted and formed.
In the process of its
birth and in trying to define its mission and its
guiding principles, it
hired as a consultant and retained the services of
Justice Ben Hlatshwayo,
who was not a judge then, to come and document the
same - the foundation of
the NCA issues. In the interest of time, that
document was then debated and
adopted by the task force of the NCA. At that
time I was the spokesperson
of the NCA and President Tsvangirai was the
Chairperson. The NCA agreed
that we needed a new constitution for Zimbabwe
which would be crafted or
written in an open, transparent and participatory
manner. In that regard,
we as members of the NCA were there to oppose two
things. One: the
piecemeal amendments to the Constitution of Zimbabwe, Two:
the unilateral
manner of setting such piecemeal amendments.
Mr. Speaker, it is important
to understand those two principles. Let me say
that these two principles
were conceptualized, conceived and adopted, not to
be verses in a bible.
They were strategic and tactical principles which
were intended to forge the
making of a people-driven constitution. I
despair today when I read and
hear the attempt to transform these principles
into some fundamentalist
decrees which, we are told, are to be regarded as
completely sacrosanct. As
far as we understood them, they were supposed to
be means to an
end.
Zimbabwe today, as Hon. Khupe has said, is faced with a national
crisis
which all of us acknowledge. We might differ as to the causes and
sources
of that crisis, but I think we all, across the political divide,
agree that
we are in a crisis. Consequently those of us who love this
country are
saying that somewhere along the line as a people we lost each
other.
Notwithstanding the intolerance Hon. Khupe talked about,
notwithstanding the
anger and emotion, if we are to move forward, Mr.
Speaker, we need to find
each other. (Mr Zwizwai: Murima imomo) Laughter-
What we are attempting to
sow within the dialogue that we are engaged in is
to find each other. Our
contribution to supporting the Amendment Number 18,
as to be amended at the
Committee Stage as explained by the hon. Minister,
is our attempt to say"
let us reach out to each other, let us find each
other, let us give
confidence among ourselves." If what it takes to find
each other is for us
to support these amendments, we are prepared and we are
supporting these
amendments in that context, with the hope that as
negotiating teams move on
with the rest of the agenda of the dialogue, which
the Minister has
explained includes the question of a new constitution for
Zimbabwe - how to
come up with that new constitution; the question of a new
Electoral Act -
how to come up with it (Mr Mutasa: and the question of
sanctions) - the
question of how to deal with contentious provisions in POSA
and AIPPA, and
indeed the question of sanctions. They are on the agenda and
we will deal
with them. We hope that we will find each other around all
these issues.
When we come back to this house, we will come back with a
package which
includes resolutions of all the issues which have divided us
over the last
eight or so years. That is our hope, Mr. Speaker, and it is
in that context
that we stand before this august house today, taking that
step into the
dark. I had the privilege, Mr. Speaker, to spend the whole of
Saturday in a
meeting discussing these issues with President Mutambara and
President
Tsvangirai - (Laughter) - Mr. Speaker, I was impressed by their
commitment
to the dialogue process. I was impressed by their deep concern
for the
suffering of ordinary people of this country (Hon Members: Hear,
hear!) - As
President Tsvangirai said at that meeting: "There is no such
thing as a
risk-free political decision", and therefore when we take this
decision, we
are fully cognizant of the political risk inherent in it. But
we take it
with our eyes open in the hope of serving our people. We believe
that we
cannot continue to conduct politics for the sake of politics. We
believe
that we must begin to conduct our politics in the service of the
people,
otherwise it is meaningless.
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I want to
comment very briefly on the aspect relating
to the composition of the Senate
which has worried some of my colleagues, in
terms of what they perceive to
be the disproportionate number of unelected
people in the Senate. Unelected
in the sense of direct election, in that
you have 18 chiefs elected by other
chiefs, you have 10 Governors or is it 8
Governors plus 5 appointed by the
President. Let me just explain, Mr.
Speaker, that when elections were not
synchronized, these numbers would have
been very problematic, but when you
have synchronized elections, you elect
your Councilor, you elect your MP,
you elect your President. The person who
wins the Presidential race then
has the right to constitute the government
of the day from the day of his or
her election. Whereas when the elections
were not synchronized, you could
have a scenario where one political party
could win a Parliamentary election
whilst the Presidency is in the hands of
another party. So the potential of
subverting the government will not
happen in the proposal before you.
Whoever has been elected President has a
mandate for the next 5 years to
form a government. So it becomes irrelevant
as to whether or not you have
these disproportionate numbers of unelected
people. I thought I should end
by making that explanation.
Mr Gibson SIBANDA:
I stand to add my voice
to the debate on the Constitutional Amendment Numebr
18 which is before this
House. Indeed today is the beginning of a historic
moment in this House.
The speakers who have spoken before me on this debate
have stated very
clearly, the Leader of the House Hon. Chinamasa has already
spelt out how
the SADC resolution led to the dialogue that has come to a
phase where we
begin to resolve the issue before this House.
We have seen the Berlin
Wall fall, the Cold War between the West and the
East come to an end, and
indeed we have seen 27 years of one man imprisoned
on an island becoming a
Head of State after 27 years, because there was the
will and the
commitment. I bfind today that, between the two parties who
are represented
here in this august House, we can find the solution to the
crisis in
Zimbabwe. The Amendment is a landmark, in that it has started to
put in
place solutions to some of the issues that have bedeviled our nation
of
Zimbabwe.
We are in the process of making history and finding a solution
to our
crisis. Despite the divisions that occur between the parties, I
think
maturity has come to be realized in this House. It is my honour that
I
support and add my voice to the smooth passage and the continued dialogue
between ZANU PF and MDC. Yes, as the Professor and Hon Khupe have stated,
we are one formation when it comes to resolving the issues that are facing
this country, and indeed we are united as Zimbabweans who are sitting here,
who have been elected from all the constituencies here represented, and it
is a duty upon us as elected representatives to find the solutions to the
political, economic and social crisis we are facing.
Indeed, I
support the smooth passage of this Amendment 18 to the
Constitution of
Zimbabwe.
..