There is unfortunately very little debate in our country outside the circles of Parliament apart from impressionist comments by some business people and economists.

The budget affects everyone and should therefore be debated widely.

The debate should not only be confined to general comments but has to get to the nitty-gritty of sectoral performance.

For instance, teachers, students, parents and other stakeholders should debate the vote on education widely.

A responsive government will definitely take into account the views of stakeholders on the current budget and incorporate some ideas into its thinking in the budgeting process of the following financial year.

A budget is a policy instrument and a debate thereon represents a form of policy dialogue.

This year's budget is special in many respects.

It heralds the beginning of a new era with a new President.

One should be able to discern the policy initiatives or the priorities of the new President through the budget.

How does the present administration want to tackle the multitude of challenges facing our nation? Former President Nujoma's approach to nation building was through infrastructure development ranging from an extensive rural roads network to regional highways, railway, ports, heroes acre and the new State House.

Nujoma's dream about some of the infrastructure was not fulfilled during his three terms in office.

Some of the dreams have advanced to the level of plans in the Namibian government, SADC and NEPAD and others may never see the light of day.

Infrastructural development a la Namibia is not simply a straightforward way of doing business that every government or leader would have done.

I submit that these projects were not the result of a carefully considered cost-benefit analysis.

The economic (through facilitation of domestic and international trade and investment flows) and social benefits of these projects are varied.

Some of the projects will have immediate impact; others long term; while some may become white elephants.

In short, Namibia's infrastructure development programme is a political agenda exhibiting the political and economic philosophy of former President Sam Nujoma.

We don't have to wait for five years to understand the political and economic philosophy of President Hifikepunye Pohamba through a retrospective analysis of the ruptures and trajectories of political and economic patterns.

His inaugural statement should have contained those elements and must be clearly reflected in the first budget.

One issue that has been consistent in President Pohamba's statements is the crusade against corruption.

The President has elevated the issue disproportionably in a hierarchy of other problems and challenges.

This is particularly so if one takes into account Namibia's rating on corruption by organisations such as Transparency International.

There is nothing wrong with the President's anti-corruption drive to nip the problem in the bud.

Another issue to which the President has paid considerable attention to is efficient and effective service delivery.

In economic terms, the President has been talking about value for money.

A clean government results in efficient utilisation of resources.

The administration of President Pohamba will, inter alia, be judged by the extent to which it will apply the principle of value for money through clean government and efficient and effective public service.

The Minister of Finance rightly acknowledged the imperatives of the policy of value for money in her budget statement.

The Minister remarked, "alongside the additional monies that have been made available, there is a need to ensure that the nation's resources are spent wisely and that programmes continue to represent value for money."

Value for money is an instrument or a yardstick that the public as beneficiaries of government services can use to audit the performance of specific ministries and government as a whole.

The current budget allocations to ministries can be a starting point for the debate on value for money.

That is, does this year's allocation represent value for money? I leave that question to others to explore and answer.

My preoccupation with this commentary is of a different order.

Value for money is associated with rational allocation of existing or given resources.

That is, it deals with the allocation rather than generation of resources.

Admittedly, allocation can also lead to generation.

Rational allocation of resources can also lead to economic growth if investment is made in growth-stimulating activities.

The pertinent question is one of wealth creation.

How does one increase the income that can be used in an efficient and effective manner? A conscious and deliberate thinking on wealth creation is mandatory and is not evident in the current budget.

Namibia has an environment that is conducive to investments.

Over the last fifteen years, Namibia has invested substantial resources in infrastructure that can facilitate investment.

The economic growth of Namibia has fallen short of a level that would make a dent in poverty and unemployment.

The economic history of Africa has shown that sound macro-economic fundamentals are necessary but not sufficient for investments.

There is a difference between investment-facilitating and investment-generating activities.

It is not enough to have an enabling environment.

This would perhaps be enough if one was dealing with a country that had a strong private sector.

In addition to all the good policies that Namibia has pursued, there are at least three areas that need urgent attention.

There is a need for a deliberate strategy on wealth creation.

Such a strategy should not simply rely on favourable environment brought about by developments beyond our control.

It has to be a way of appropriating that environment.

That is, one has to take advantage of opportunities and at the same time militate against negative trends.

The green scheme, if implemented, is a good example of wealth-creating initiatives.

The aquaculture programme can also create wealth.

There is a need for a critical mass of such initiatives and their successful implementation.

There is a need for a deliberate strategy to enhance competitiveness on the domestic as well as international markets.

The negative balance of payment that Namibia is experiencing is in my view partially attributed to lack of efforts to enhance competitiveness.

Heavy reliance on the export of raw materials and lack of diversification contributes to the current state of affairs.

Namibia needs a job-creation strategy.

Employment opportunities are created through investments and economic growth.

However, a job-creation strategy dictates allocation of resources and incentives resulting in investments.

Several countries have had definite strategies to reduce unemployment to complement what the private sector does in the course of doing business.

It is job creation that will ultimately lead to poverty reduction.

* Dr Kaire Mbuende is a former Swapo Deputy Minister and MP.

Columns Of The Last 48 Hours

•  Swapo Is Not The State
•  Political Perspective
•  Uganda's Smart Protectionism
•  Who Wants Cold War II?
•  An Obama-Biden Foreign Policy
•  Redefining Our Foreign Policy Priorities And Actions Outside
•  From the Sidelines : Govt needs to do more