Select Page

If you keep turning around, after a while you don’t know where you are

If you keep turning around, after a while you don’t know where you are

Turn-around strategies seem to be the new flavour of the moment. It has become the norm for government-owned entities and government agencies to announce a new turn-around strategy every few years. In extreme cases, there is a turn-around strategy almost every year.

Now I am just wondering – if you have to turn around a large organisation every so often, where was it going in the first place? And if you have to turn it around again and again, is there any responsible person in that organisation who actually knows where they are going?

Of course, the same question applies to the new budget. Here there are two relevant questions. First, has the Minister of Finance finally succeeding in turning the economy around, and second, what does this turn-around hold for our future.

After a week of digesting a myriad of budget opinions, a few notions have managed to separate themselves from the usual post-budget noise. Throwing in my own analysis on top of that, I think I can safely say 2017 was a watershed year albeit a somewhat distorted one.

Despite a contracting economy, I do not get the impression that the government’s finances went haywire. On the contrary, the figures tell me that for the government at least, 2017 has already been a turnaround point in many respects, and that what we see going forward, will most likely be positive although fairly static.

Take for instance the expectations over the Medium Term Expenditure Framework for both revenue and expenditure. Both are rather flat and uninspiring. It is only in 2020 that some sort of slight revival is pencilled in, but then still very subdued. It also shows that projections are more or less in line with the awful 2016 revised budget, and that these base values have most probably served for this year’s estimates, and for the 2019 and 2020 projections.

Personally I believe the economy will rebound much sooner and faster than anyone expects at this point. In earlier commentaries I have stated my views why I think the turning point was already in May last year, but I have to admit that it was hard to substantiate my view in the glaring absence of supportive data.

This is where the minister became a shining beacon last week. When he indicated that the contraction for 2017 is estimated at only 0.4%, I immediately knew that he had access to the 4th quarter GDP figures and to the preliminary outcomes for the full year. That he has access and privilege to data that we ordinary folks only see later, I can live with but only grudgingly. For six months I have been drooling over the quarterly GDP estimates and adjustments, only to be disappointed time and again.

Making running calculations as the statistics became available, is not hard. So the fact that the recessionary year will probably see only a 0.4% contraction showed me the fourth quarter must have been convincingly positive. I wish I were the minister, if only for the access to the data. What he said last week, the rest of us will only know for sure at the end of this month.

Overall, the budget is extremely disappointing simply because it is so static. The minor adjustments are cosmetic, erring on the conservative side, while the underlying fundamental problems remain unaddressed. For as long as we do not tackle the factors that have brought us close to the precipice in the first place, for so long the budget will be uninspiring and not a tool of growth.

The budget is the single most powerful tool for the government to effect and achieve our noble development strategies. Policy-wise we do not need any turn-around. What is set before us in Vision 2030, in the national development plans, and lately in the fresh flavour of Harambee, are all attainable provided we stop wasting money to prop up inefficient parastatals and agencies, and provided we address the real issues.

On these my views are clear, having been stated numerous times in public. The number one killer is the government’s wagebill closely followed by its enormous direct participation in the economy. Both these metrices are totally out of line with most other countries on a similar development curve as us. Unless, of course, if you compare us to Russia or China, where it is worse. The question is, how far communist do you want to go with the state’s resources?

Until we fix those two underlying causes, we will have no room to manoeuvre and future budgets will continue to be static and flat. By implication, the deficit will remain a headache, ushering in all sorts of secondary troubles like more downgrades.

I hope that this year turns out much better than we expect. If we have to carry on another three years on this dreary plateau, eventually all confidence in the budget as a development tool will be destroyed.


 

 

About The Author

Daniel Steinmann

Brief CV of Daniel Steinmann. Born 24 February 1961, Johannesburg. Educated at the University of Pretoria: BA, BA(hons), BD. Postgraduate degrees are in Philosophy and Divinity. Editor of the Namibia Economist since 1991. Daniel Steinmann has steered the Economist as editor for the past 29 years. The Economist started as a monthly free-sheet, then moved to a weekly paper edition (1996 to 2016), and on 01 December 2016 to a daily digital newspaper at www.economist.com.na. It is the first Namibian newspaper to go fully digital. Daniel Steinmann is an authority on macro-economics having established a sound record of budget analysis, strategic planning and assessing the impact of policy formulation. For eight years, he hosted a weekly talk-show on NBC Radio, explaining complex economic concepts to a lay audience in a relaxed, conversational manner. He was a founding member of the Editors' Forum of Namibia. Over the years, he has mentored hundreds of journalism students as interns and as young professional jourlists. He regularly helps economics students, both graduate and post-graduate, to prepare for examinations and moderator reviews. He is the Namibian respondent for the World Economic Survey conducted every quarter for the Ifo Center for Business Cycle Analysis and Surveys at the University of Munich in Germany. He is frequently consulted by NGOs and international analysts on local economic trends and developments. Send comments to daniel@economist.com.na

Following reverse listing, public can now acquire shareholding in Paratus Namibia

Promotion

20 February 2020, Windhoek, Namibia: Paratus Namibia Holdings (PNH) was founded as Nimbus Infrastructure Limited (“Nimbus”), Namibia’s first Capital Pool Company listed on the Namibian Stock Exchange (“NSX”).

Although targeting an initial capital raising of N$300 million, Nimbus nonetheless managed to secure funding to the value of N$98 million through its CPC listing. With a mandate to invest in ICT infrastructure in sub-Sahara Africa, it concluded management agreements with financial partner Cirrus and technology partner, Paratus Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd (“Paratus Namibia”).

Paratus Namibia Managing Director, Andrew Hall

Its first investment was placed in Paratus Namibia, a fully licensed communications operator in Namibia under regulation of the Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN). Nimbus has since been able to increase its capital asset base to close to N$500 million over the past two years.

In order to streamline further investment and to avoid duplicating potential ICT projects in the market between Nimbus and Paratus Namibia, it was decided to consolidate the operations.

Publishing various circulars to shareholders, Nimbus took up a 100% shareholding stake in Paratus Namibia in 2019 and proceeded to apply to have its name changed to Paratus Namibia Holdings with a consolidated board structure to ensure streamlined operations between the capital holdings and the operational arm of the business.

This transaction was approved by the Competitions Commission as well as CRAN, following all the relevant regulatory approvals as well as the necessary requirements in terms of corporate governance structures.

Paratus Namibia has evolved as a fully comprehensive communications operator in Namibia and operates as the head office of the Paratus Group in Africa. Paratus has established a pan-African footprint with operations in six African countries, being: Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zambia.

The group has achieved many successes over the years of which more recently includes the building of the Trans-Kalahari Fibre (TKF) project, which connects from the West Africa Cable System (WACS) eastward through Namibia to Botswana and onward to Johannesburg. The TKF also extends northward through Zambia to connect to Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, which made Paratus the first operator to connect the west and east coast of Africa under one Autonomous System Number (ASN).

This means that Paratus is now “exporting” internet capacity to landlocked countries such as Zambia, Botswana, the DRC with more countries to be targeted, and through its extensive African network, Paratus is well-positioned to expand the network even further into emerging ICT territories.

PNH as a fully-listed entity on the NSX, is therefore now the 100% shareholder of Paratus Namibia thereby becoming a public company. PNH is ready to invest in the future of the ICT environment in Namibia. The public is therefore invited and welcome to acquire shares in Paratus Namibia Holdings by speaking to a local stockbroker registered with the NSX. The future is bright, and the opportunities are endless.