There is an ongoing programme, paid for by suitably optimistic cooperating partners, to “modernise” our National Assembly.

As I have said before, much of Zambian institutional life and attitudes are fossilised in the 1950s (OK let us be generous and say 1960s) and it is a brave reformer who seeks to modernize anything about us. Amongst the obvious areas in which the Zambian Parliament needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st Century (I withdraw that phrase if it is unparliamentary, Mr. Speaker) is that of Information Technology, specifically the various uses of the Internet. As reported last week I was in the process of trawling the electronic version of “Hansard” (the verbatim record of parliamentary proceedings) for information about attitudes towards education. Alas, the absence of indexing and of a sufficiently powerful search engine has left me with slim pickings.

What has so far emerged is that certain members of the ruling party, well-known for their cadre-like aggression in debate, are prone to use allegations of being under-educated as an insult. For example, quite recently, I asked the Minister of Finance and (what is optimistically known as) Planning, a question relating to interest rates. He prefaced his answer with “As every undergraduate knows….” I sent him a note asking whether he intended to insult the 99 per cent of the Zambian population that would give an arm and a leg for a chance to be an undergraduate. He did not reply…

Generally, though, I am not a victim of slights against my education (if only because most interlocutors are not quite sure what it is). A common target, by contrast, is my party president Michael Sata. He is assumed by the MMD debating A-team (there is no B-team), not to have been to school at all, or at least to have failed to finish his primary education.

I would say, without revealing any confidential information, that it is very dangerous to make assumptions about the education level of somebody whose political persona is that of a common man and who would therefore downplay any of his educational achievements deliberately. But in the House a sense of danger is not always in evidence. Last Thursday, for example, I listened to a debater extolling the economic achievements of Dubai and lamenting that we in Zambia could not match these; I drove home with the BBC telling me that the same Dubai, with its palm tree shaped fantasy islands and corresponding fantasy property boom, was going the way of Iceland. (More of Dubai as the crisis develops.)

The late Benny Tetamashimba was an emblematically aggressive debater and perhaps it is appropriate, as a kind of memorial, to let him set the tone. Speaking in January on the subject of the Presidential speech to Parliament, and clearly keen to react to Sata’s assertion that it was “hollow”, he proceeded as follows:

Mr Tetamashimba:…Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Zambia Episcopal Conference, presidents of political parties, non-governmental organisations and trade unions who have stood up to congratulate His Excellency the President Mr Rupiah Bwezani Banda on his good speech to Parliament. We have had situations where we have been told that this speech is hollow …
Mr Mukanga PF Whip: Skeleton!
Mr Tetamashimba: … or even skeleton by some opposition political leaders.

Interruptions
Mr Tetamashimba: Mr Speaker, I agree that this speech cannot be understood by a Grade 4.
Laughter
Mr Tetamashimba: It cannot be understood by a Grade 4, and so when you give this speech to a Grade 4, that Grade 4 will not know anything and, therefore, say it is hollow.

Interruptions
Mr Tetamashimba: Mr Speaker, I appeal to those who are above Standard 4 to go and explain the contents of this speech to their leaders.

Laughter
Another MMD verbal pugilist is a medical doctor:
Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, it is further sad to note that whilst other countries in Africa are being led by highly educated people like Professor John Atta Mills, some Zambians are advocating for people of an unknown educational background to occupy leadership positions.

Laughter
Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, in fact, one of the presidential candidates in the last elections is reported to only have a grade 4 level of education.

Laughter
Dr Puma: It is further sad to note that even the highly educated people like Dr Machungwa, Dr Scott and Dr Mwansa are rallying behind a Grade 4…
Laughter
Dr Puma: … instead of …

Laughter
Mr Speaker: Order! The Deputy Minister will move away from that subject.
No Parliamentary sketch hoping to capture the sheer abusiveness of which some debaters are capable would be complete without a quote from Mike Mulongoti, currently Minister of Works and Supply, but at one point Minister of Information and popularly known as “Gobbles” after the Nazi propaganda minister of nearly that name. Unfortunately the following extract does not really do him justice:

Mr Mulongoti: That is the way any clever or educated person must behave. You must go for consultancy. If consultancy is provided for you, here, without being solicited for, surely, we will happily take it.

Laughter
Mr Mulongoti: Hon. Members, this group you see, here, to which I belong, is happy to be with you and interact with you. We are happy that together…
Mr Kambwili: Aah!

Mr Mulongoti: … we are developing this country.
Hon. Government Members: Yes!

Mr Mulongoti: However, some of you are so jealous …
Laughter
Mr Mulongoti: … that even the projects we do are not seen or mentioned.

The educational gambit is not likely to go away. The temptation to use an educational “filter” to exclude certain people from running for the national presidency has obviously appealed to some of the members of the NCC (National Constitutional Conference). Alas I cannot report on this in any detail since PF MPs “in good standing” are boycotting it as a sort of expensive book club, devoted to reading a document that already exists (the draft constitution) and consisting overwhelmingly of tax money consuming bogus churches and NGOs, as well as “captive” delegates such as civil servants who cannot go astray from the party line. This is a pity since the NCC is well deserving of an insider’s account to readers of The Post. Perhaps we can get Kalaki belated appointed to the circus.

The history of constitutional change in Zambia revolves around deciding who is allowed, and who is not, to be the President, the boss of bosses, the most excellent of all the Honourables. The first, Independence, constitution actually names Kenneth Kaunda as the first President of Zambia. When KK’s monopoly was challenged in the 1970s by the (now both late) Simon Kapwepwe and Harry Nkumbula, the One Party constitution was created to exclude these fathers of nationalism from any possibility of taking over. Kaunda thenceforth stood alone (symbolised pictorially by an eagle) for the Presidency against a “No” represented by a frog. Unsurprisingly he always won, although there are claims that there was heavy rigging against the frog.

The 1996 amendment to the constitution that represented the finest example of Frederick Chiluba’s self-proclaimed abilities as a political engineer, excluded Kaunda from contention by creating the condition that both parents of a candidate must have been born in Zambia to Zambian parents. Kaunda’s parents were Church of Scotland missionaries from Malawi. This condition has incidentally excluded many absolutely bona fide Zambians from the Presidency, for example those whose mothers are not technically Zambian even if they are from a tribe that is overwhelmingly Zambian.

That may sound complicated so let me give an example: the Lozi kingdom has extensions into the territory of Namibia (thanks to some 19th Century colonial finagling by Count Caprivi at the Congress of Berlin); it is completely unremarkable for two Lozis, one of them from the Caprivi Strip, to marry. Their offspring, however, would be excluded by the 1996 amendment, which is not receiving any corrective attention at the NCC so far as I know. Of course, I am excluded via both parents, who were born in the UK. This should be reassuring to Chief Chitimukulu, who has publicly expressed concerns that Zambia might inadvertently return to de facto colonial rule if Michael Sata becomes President, appoints me as his vice, and then kicks the bucket, leaving me in charge. Call me bwana.

Hopefully, the move to manipulate the new constitution to contain an educational filter will be stillborn. It would be both shameful and stupid to introduce such a measure. Shameful because it is blatant “rigging” aimed at one person; shameful because it would deprive many Zambians of their right to vote for someone who understands their problems. Stupid because it encompasses a vision of academia as somehow endowing its denizens with superiority and fitting them out to deal with the cut and thrust of real life, African style.

Surely, only someone who has never been to university would take it as a good place to find national leaders for third world countries. Perhaps it should be those who have spent too much time at university who should be excluded from presidential contention.