DPP must listen to criticisms by opposition

Being at the receiving end of criticisms is not comfortable. It’s even worse when it comes from those who are not in your camp.

Chakwera (L) with Mutharika ar Palriament: Says cashgate wearing a new robe under DPP

Chakwera (L) with Mutharika ar Palriament: Says cashgate wearing a new robe under DPP

This is how the responses of the DDP led government to the oppositionin almost every instance the opposition criticises the government, particularly the President, should be seen.

In this article, I will dwell on the recent criticism which, according to Nyasa Times, the leader of opposition in Parliament, Dr Lazarus Chakwera, criticised the 46th Parliament session’s SONA delivered by President Peter Mutharika, saying it was too short and without substance.

There is an awash of comments to Chakwera’s assessment of the SONA, the majority of them criticising the leader of opposition for making, according to them, such an insensitive criticism whose objective is nothing but to criticise the President, just for the sake of criticising.

As usual, Chakwera’s opinion on the SONA has ruffled feathers in a tough critique of the opposition in general and  Chakwera himself in particular. Most critics of Chakwera seem to base their argument on the fact that some donors have hailedAPM’s “short and sweet” SONA. “Donors have hailed the President’s SONA, so who is Chakwera to come up with a different opinion”, so say most of Chakwera’s critics.

I have read the SONA myself, line by line, and the issue to me is not Mutharika’s record breaking 25mins. I wouldn’t even have a problem if Mutharika had broken the record in 25 seconds.

The issue to me is as to whether the SONA is substantive enough in providingsolutions in addressing the social-economic ills causing indisputable miseries to the majority of Malawians.

A responsible government addresses the problems of its citizenry and in so doing it instils hope in its people. Just telling Malawians that the donor era is gone, which might please donors, without coming up with tangible solutions to Malawi’s social-economic ills (and they are so many), is as good as saying nothing.

The donors who have hailed the SONA have based they opinion on their own point of view. In the same vein Chakwera’s opinion is based on his own point of view. But unlike the donors, Chakwera will respond to the SONA.

It is only when Chakwera has responded to the SONA that his opinion can authoritatively be challenged. Until that time any criticism to Chakwera’s opinion on the SONA is simply premature and in my opinion a criticism just for the sake of criticising.

It is unfortunate that the DPP led government sees such critiquesas attacks and notcaring advice. Those in the opposition who have bemoaned the DPP’s moral decline and the direction in which it is taking Malawi have done so, in my opinion, for the love of the country.

Similarly those who bemoan DPP ethics have done so in the belief that a government that adheres to its ethics is essential to achieving a corrupt-free Malawi. But the hostility with which the opposition’s criticisms have received, particularly MCP, just shows that the DPP led government adamantly just wants to close its ears to any criticism from the opposition.

Considering where Malawi is now, it is high time Malawi’s political landscape firmly refocuses on the mind of our nation. As a collective, we need to regain the dignity, our nation once had.

As a nation we need to leave behind rhetoric and pompous pronouncements including criticisms just for the sake of criticising if we want to really create a fully inclusive and understanding new order in the country.

For this to happen, our political leaders must be out there encouraging unity instead of propagating disunity. The unity should not only be in our distinctive cultural diversity, but also in multiplicity of our needs and aspirations that unite us all, Malawians.

For the sake of our country, the DPP led government must start listening to the opposition and get out of the “election winning” hangover and start delivering. Almost one and half years down the line, there is nothing tangible the DPP lead government has done to uplift Malawian lives.

It has always been fire fighting and finger pointing, which is not good for the country.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :

Please share this Article if you like Email This Post Email This Post

More From Nyasatimes

More From the World

14 thoughts on “DPP must listen to criticisms by opposition”

  1. gilbert says:

    azungu amalangula pang’ono koma zindu zoveka, that is why mzungu anavomera. Ndiye inu mumafuna kuti ayangule ndawi yayitali mundu atapanga zochepa, Zosateka olo pango’no. Koma ziko liyebekeze mwina zindu zamene apanga ndawi ino zizapindulira a Malawi ambiri pasogolo pompano koma ndawi ino zikuoneka ngati zopanda njito

  2. Julius says:

    Aren’t these very same donors who showed their thumbs up towards privatisation Of govt resources during Atcheya’s regime? We all thought the programme would bringforth effective results but to no avail. why do we always believe that everythn approved by by them is 100% outstanding as if they live in here? So u cant take opposition’s criticism even if it is rucrative & helpful to the nation when the Mzungu has said otherwise. why cant we surrender it all to him then. Let him recolonise Malawi if u want to please him to the fullest. mmmmmmmmmmnmnmm

  3. mngoni says:

    Bravo Chakwera…, one does not criticize by siding with anyone! Whether the donors are on the side of APM why shouldn’t we accuse him? Can someone answer me….?
    Bwana Chakwera you are doing the job malawians intended to do…am behind you. You and Me we are bona fide malawians. …donors are not malawians. They come and go but this is our nation and it’s our duty to make all the checks and balances…..
    Leave Chakwera alone…..you unpatriotic critics. ….malawians you worry me sometimes it’s as if you are from outside this country….
    Big shame on you my fellow country men…!

  4. zaro says:

    mufuna chani a chakwera.

  5. zaro says:

    Peter’s speech was
    evidence-based. Nde mufuna chani a chakwera.

  6. Prince Edward rsa says:

    ACB directors are being killed others are threatened you wait wat Viola reveal,defend a killer who is muthalika to the nation kunali anthu kuno Ada Banda Aleke.muthalika anali kuti all these years fuck

  7. Prince Edward rsa says:

    Agalu enanutu mukasowa koment plz dont write shit just remain quite!!Do you think it is proper for the president who loves its pipo and its country in a situation malawi is in, pipo are
    dying like rats in hospitals,water
    is athing of past in ndirande,electricity is history in malawi then you say ee.. ee chakwela has no point do you just say for sake of saying nosense nomater those few donors say is rite.Pitala muthalika is accountable to the nation and small flies making noise you see wat L chakwela can articulate

  8. kumangoni says:

    Eish!!! Uyaqasula

  9. malawi says:

    chakwera is obscessed with his title; opposition leader. he criticises everything from gov..does he mean muthalika gov is wrong in every aspect? no gov is 100% bad mr MCP, criticise where its due and give thanks where gov scores

  10. Malawian!!! says:

    Leave DPP alone MCP!!! What do you want from these people, their blood or what?

  11. Malawian says:

    I remember a long time ago, a lecture of mine pointed out if you want to debate about an issue you need to define it first. The issue is the fact that Chakwera has called Peter’s speech lacking substance. The first point is to look at the concept “having substance”. Someone pointed out that a substanceless statement is the one which is not evidence-based or scientifically based or without facts/trends/percentages of situations. If you agree with this definition then if you look at Peter’s speech you will discover that it was evidence-based. That is why I think that some people including me are surprised with Chakwera’s analysis of this speech.
    What surprises me most is that the writer of this article is in Chakwera’s camp yet when you look at the last four paragraphs of this article is a verbatim copy of parts o f Peter’s speech. The mark of civilization is to give credit and criticism where it is due and not the other way round only.

  12. chilipaine says:

    It is completely shameful, that as a nation, we still are thinking more about these whites than our own people. The criticism that Chakwera is at fault because some white female diplomat who lives in her well air conditioned house and similarly works from such opulent settings should define to us what is acceptable or not.

    This nonsense is what has ruined Malawi, I personally hail Mutharika and Goodall or Badall Gondwe, for warning us that the time for donors is over, and we should brace ourselves to be weaned forcefully and/or otherwise from donor dependence. The arrogance of these imperialists boggles the mind! Do we have to catalogue the disasters they have cause the world over for sanity to come into Malawians that these are are NOT our friends…they are NOT even our partners…they are here simply to promote their imperialist agendas. Go home yankees…we do not need you to tell us what is and isn’t good for us. Go and play fair to our black brothers who fill up your jails before you come here with such hogwash…

  13. Nyachikadzi says:

    Dear Mr or Mrs writer. Is it that every person who critiques Chakwera is DPP or government? Are you not caught in the same boxed mind where you think that every one who apposed Chakwera is DPP and everyone who opposes government is from the opposition?
    How do you draw you conclusion that all of us who wrote against Chakwera’s reasoning are part of or are government?

  14. Che Bakali says:

    What is the point here, honestly this is another trush. Does tis offfer any economical solutions. Or just listening to another preaching. Musawathere nthawi anthu. Let people plan for them to be productive.

Comments are closed.