Dear editor,
THE removal of subsidies is a long overdue decision because collosal amounts of tax-payers money was used at the expense of taking education and health services closer to areas the way it is in urban areas.
Honestly speaking, fuel and maize subsidies were not providing equal distribution of resources between the rural and urban population in the sense that it was benefitting the urban population more than the rural folks.
For instance in the social sector, these subsidies were not benefitting the rural population because children have not only continued walking many kilometres to schools but have continued learning from grass-thatched dilapidated structures even under trees in some remote areas.
On the contrary, children in urban areas with the help of fuel subsidies not only use public buses and family cars to travel a few kilometres to schools but also learning is conducted in well-built classrooms with proper learning equipment. Besides women in rural areas have to travel long distance to access health services but that is not the case in urban areas where health services are plenty and nearby.
For me today, the debate should not be about the fuel subsidies but about the transparency and accountability on the use of resources that the government will save to try and make our beloved people in rural areas attain their dreams and aspirations of having modern schools, health centres and other social infrastructure such as decent housing, clean water as it is in urban areas.
RICHARD SILISHEBO MOOTO
Luanshya.
58 total views, 26 views today