WHY POWER RATIONING IS NEEDLESS SUFFERING
Just when will the electricity crisis end? This is a question that Tanzanians should be asking themselves after Tanesco announced on Wednesday yet another round of power rationing which will see electricity being switched off for 12 hours daily.
Actually, the rationing began in mid-May, and Tanesco’s announcement hardly caught anyone by surprise.
It is worth noting that Tanesco last month announced that power would be rationed from May 19 to 26 as a result of a deficit in the national grid caused by the switching off of the Songas gas generators for routine maintenance.
However, May 26 came and went, but the rationing continued, and it was only on Wednesday that Tanesco announced a “new” load shedding schedule, this time blaming the cuts on a low water level at Tanzania’s biggest hydro power station in Iringa Region.
What is particularly worrying is the fact that a permanent solution to recurrent power shortages that date back from the early 1990s seems to be nowhere in sight. No lesser an authority has admitted this hopelessness than Tanesco itself.
A lot has been said about the power woes, but it is the chairman of Parliament’s Energy and Minerals Committee, Mr January Makamba, who was on the mark after stating that the crisis is the result of Tanzania having not invested enough in the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. It is as simple as that.
It has been the norm for the government and Tanesco to take emergency measures to address power crises such as the one Tanzanians are currently enduring. These short-term solutions explain why electricity has been a rare commodity in Tanzania for two decades now.
It is laughable that we expect to develop as a nation without electricity. Our dream of having an export-driven economy and become a middle-income nation in a few decades is bound to remain just that – a dream. We are going out of our way to promote Tanzania as a desirable investment destination, but it is unlikely that these efforts will bear the desired results if we cannot assure prospective investors of reliable electricity.
Actually, the rationing began in mid-May, and Tanesco’s announcement hardly caught anyone by surprise.
It is worth noting that Tanesco last month announced that power would be rationed from May 19 to 26 as a result of a deficit in the national grid caused by the switching off of the Songas gas generators for routine maintenance.
However, May 26 came and went, but the rationing continued, and it was only on Wednesday that Tanesco announced a “new” load shedding schedule, this time blaming the cuts on a low water level at Tanzania’s biggest hydro power station in Iringa Region.
What is particularly worrying is the fact that a permanent solution to recurrent power shortages that date back from the early 1990s seems to be nowhere in sight. No lesser an authority has admitted this hopelessness than Tanesco itself.
A lot has been said about the power woes, but it is the chairman of Parliament’s Energy and Minerals Committee, Mr January Makamba, who was on the mark after stating that the crisis is the result of Tanzania having not invested enough in the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. It is as simple as that.
It has been the norm for the government and Tanesco to take emergency measures to address power crises such as the one Tanzanians are currently enduring. These short-term solutions explain why electricity has been a rare commodity in Tanzania for two decades now.
It is laughable that we expect to develop as a nation without electricity. Our dream of having an export-driven economy and become a middle-income nation in a few decades is bound to remain just that – a dream. We are going out of our way to promote Tanzania as a desirable investment destination, but it is unlikely that these efforts will bear the desired results if we cannot assure prospective investors of reliable electricity.
BAE CASH NOT A REFUND
The tug-of-war between the government and Britain’s BAE Systems is still going on six months after a UK court ordered the firm to pay Tanzania £29.5 million (Sh73.8 billion) reparations for fraudulently selling the country an overpriced air traffic control system a decade ago.
BAE has decided to grant the cash directly to charities in Tanzania, but the government insists that the money be paid directly to it. The government may seem to have a point, but its position is undermined by the plea bargain reached last December by Britain’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and BAE.
What the court ordered BAE to pay is not a refund, as some mistakenly believe, but reparations to “the people of Tanzania.” This means that it is BAE which has the final say on how the money should be disbursed.
BAE had three choices. Firstly that the money is handed over to the government of Tanzania, a route thought to have been preferred by the SFO; secondly that BAE grants the money directly to charities in Tanzania; thirdly that an independent party, possibly the World Bank, is used as an intermediary to distribute the money.
The firm settled for the second option, and it is not difficult to see why it chose not to hand over the money to Treasury. The government was party to the shady deal in which a staggering $12.4 million (Sh19.8 billion) in kickbacks was paid to middlemen, and the sensible thing is to hold talks with BAE on how best the reparations can benefit Tanzania.
BAE has decided to grant the cash directly to charities in Tanzania, but the government insists that the money be paid directly to it. The government may seem to have a point, but its position is undermined by the plea bargain reached last December by Britain’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and BAE.
What the court ordered BAE to pay is not a refund, as some mistakenly believe, but reparations to “the people of Tanzania.” This means that it is BAE which has the final say on how the money should be disbursed.
BAE had three choices. Firstly that the money is handed over to the government of Tanzania, a route thought to have been preferred by the SFO; secondly that BAE grants the money directly to charities in Tanzania; thirdly that an independent party, possibly the World Bank, is used as an intermediary to distribute the money.
The firm settled for the second option, and it is not difficult to see why it chose not to hand over the money to Treasury. The government was party to the shady deal in which a staggering $12.4 million (Sh19.8 billion) in kickbacks was paid to middlemen, and the sensible thing is to hold talks with BAE on how best the reparations can benefit Tanzania.
0 comments:
Post a Comment