HON. GONESE: The Hon. Minister is always harping about this surplus. My question to the Hon. Minister is that of any real benefit to us as Zimbabweans. We look at the standard or cost of living for everyone which is deteriorating on a daily basis and we look at the spending capacity of all the Zimbabweans; it has been adversely affected. We look at the real wages in real terms, they have actually declined and my question to the Hon. Minister is – is that of any real benefit to us or is it something which is just meaningless and not of any meaning to us? Can he clarify how the people of Zimbabwe are benefiting from this surplus which he is always harping about?
HON. PROF. M. NCUBE: The benefits for the surplus are as follows; having a surplus stops growth in money supply which in the long run will contribute towards a stabilisation of inflation. Secondly, the surplus is being used to cushion civil servants in terms of higher wages. In January, we gave them a cushioning of $63 million from 1st April to December $400 million. Thirdly, we are using the surplus for social protection programmes starting with Cyclone Idai. We have allocated $100 million towards that process but also, we are using the surplus for the usual social protection programmes such as the food programmes in both rural and urban areas. We are also supporting other social services such as BEAM in the education and also, the health sector. In addition to that, we are going to use the surplus for importing food. We have already issued out a tender through GMB to import additional food to deal with the impact of the drought. So it is being used in these areas Mr. Speaker. I thank you.
HON. MARKHAM: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister on the economy is – in his quarterly address to us, he mentioned that he had received income of 8, 2%. In the very next breath, he mentioned that there was 66% inflation. How can he claim to have a surplus when all those were figures of collection, 8% versus 66%? What I asked is very simple and I would like the Minister to answer in a simple way like I asked. If you are receiving a salary of $2 000 and you have got the exchange rate moving by 8, that means your salary is now $250.
Secondly, if you are on the lowest scale and you are getting $300 and you divide by 8, it is less than $40. Now, if you have got a surplus, why have you not given the civil servants a very meangful increase, $29 is what the average civil servant got not the millions he is talking about. It is $29. Can the Minister answer in simple language for us?
HON. PROF. M. NCUBE; First of all, when you think of salary adjustments, we never benchmark to an exchange rate to the USD in which case he has used a parallel market rate of 1:8. We do not do that. We try to bench mark salaries to the inflation level and that is how it is ought to be done.
Secondly, should we give civil servants an increase in line with the exchange rate which the Hon. Member mentioned – the answer is no. We will continue to engage them, it is an increase that begins to ameliorate against the current levels of inflation and we will continue to engage them so that we can adjust their emoluments both in monetary and in non-monetary terms. I thank you.
(876 VIEWS)
