By Takura Zhangazha
The resignation of the Governor of the Reserve Bank of
Zimbabwe has been a rather muted affair. Not for lack of media coverage. But
more for lack of analysis of the complex and controversial nature of Mr. Gono’s
tenure in office as governor of our central bank. No doubt, he has been a larger than life
character in our country’s political economy.
Whether one begins by remembering his meteoric rise to
influence in our country’s banking sector as the head of the Commercial Bank of
Zimbabwe (CBZ) or alternatively his ascendancy to the Chairpersonship of the
University of Zimbabwe Council.
The latter position was his prelude to the post of topmost
financial advisor to the central government as Reserve Bank Governor. An
appointment that saw him begin to have a profound and controversial influence
on our national economy.
And it is a correct thing to analyse his track record,
primarily as Governor of the Reserve Bank
in order to understand the influence he has had on Zimbabwe’s economic
fortunes.
Whatever assumptions that can be made of his individual
character, his departure from the central bank has been rather muted or
alternatively under-analysed.
The truth be told, our former Reserve Bank governor had a
profound impact on Zimbabwe’s national political economy. Whether one recalls
the acronyms such as Foliwars, or even the Bearer Cheques, his elaborate
quarterly monetary policy announcements and his somewhat forgotten book,
‘Zimbabwe’s Casino Economy’ he was never intended to go out with a whimper.
Hence it has been reported in some sections of the main
stream media that he has been earmarked to replace the late national hero, Kumbirai
Kangai, as a proportional representation Senator in Manicaland province.
In writing about the outgoing governor, I am aware that
there will be a lot of eyebrows raised on the veracity of my personal opinions.
But what cannot be skirted is the fact that he has been an important political
and economic player in Zimbabwe’s last
decade. Therefore I would not be remiss
to analyse the full import of his legacy.
I first knew him in his capacity as Chairperson of the
University of Zimbabwe Council which he administered with the not so able
assistance of an Australian expatriate veterinarian Professor, Graham Hill. It
was under his tutelage that the 50% fees policy was implemented by central
government and by default paving the way for the now existent privatization of the
University of Zimbabwe (which has eventually and by default, again, become a model for all new universities to be
established by government)
What was evident during that time was that he was viewed as
a rising star, together with the likes of Enock Kamushinda who also sat on the
UZ Council. They were viewed as the sort of entrepreneurs the country required
because they were apparently world-wise, savvy and probably knew how to do good
by government. Especially if they could talk big economics and business related
ideas that government was desperate for at a time of austerity and Economic
Structural Adjustment in the mid to late
1990s.
They were a competitive lot these
youngish entrepreneurs, and were very ambitious in a free market economy way. Unfortunately in
Zimbabwe at that time (probably in present day) ambition and ideas could only
be recognized by proximity to the state, hence the early flirtations with state
institutions.
As they say, the rest can be considered history but for now,
Dr Gono’s primary legacy as Reserve Bank Governor will always remain that of having presided
over the iconic fall in value of the Zimbabwe dollar. Even if he was supposed
to be ‘Mr. Fix It’.
This, together with the infamous bearer cheques that signaled the
certain demise of the local currency and aided a parallel market in foreign
currency exchange. It also led to the expansion of informal employment via
foreign currency exchange dealers who relied on a network of mafia style local money barons rumored to be
closely linked to the Reserve Bank. These informal traders were to live fairly
affluent lives for a while until the introduction of the multi-currency policy
by central government.
The central bank also began to act more Prime Ministerial through
dealing with matters beyond its ideal fiscal mandate. Hence it rolled out what in all our local languages
has come to mean slang for ‘plenty of goods for free’. This was the national
programme titled Bacossi (Basic Commodity Supply Side Interventions). The jury
is still out on the impact of the latteron people’s lives during
those bleak economic years, but the reality of the matter is that it, like with
other RBZ projects, created a complex system of patronage accompanied by
rumours of cronyism in how it was being implemented countrywide.
With the advent of the inclusive government in 2009, the governor was to become both an ‘outstanding
issue’ for the opposition MDC-T and a less influential policy maker. He however has outlasted the inclusive government
as well as those that passionately sought his ouster from office since 2009. (It
has been rumoured that he has since become good friends with most of those in
the opposition that sought his ouster.)
His influence on Zimbabwean society was however limited
largely to the monetary policy and only as a bit part player focused largely on
the banking sector as well as assisting in preventing the latter’s immediate
indigenization.
In the final analysis, the former Governor of the Reserve
Bank served at the pleasure of President Mugabe (as he would often say) and his
mistakes or achievements cannot be his alone. It was broad government economic
policy that failed the people of Zimbabwe. The outgoing governor however played
a key part in the architecture of the economic crisis. Whether history absolves
him is not for me to judge.
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment