Vision 2030 AND successive national development plans (NDPs) are national blueprints that set out our shared ambitions as a country.
As Namibia prepares for the implementation of NDP6, a question has been occupying my mind: should opposition parties be formally included in national policy planning?
National planning in Namibia is far from abstract paperwork.
The government and the National Planning Commission (NPC) have consistently tied political priorities to five-year plans.
As National Assembly speaker Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila remarked during the launch of NDP6: “We will be strategically placed to calibrate and formulate new long-term and national development frameworks that will continue to put Namibians at the centre of development, leaving no Namibian behind.”
Yet, recent public disputes over service delivery, and threats to withhold or redirect funds where performance is deemed inadequate, reveal how fragile implementation becomes when politics overshadows planning.
MULTIPLE BENEFITS
There are three practical reasons why including opposition parties in the NDP and Agenda 2030 processes would strengthen outcomes.
Firstly, inclusion would reduce the politicisation of service delivery.
Over the years, national funding and local implementation have collided with election politics, holding service delivery hostage.
The electorate has diversified power among various parties but coordination has not evolved to match this new political reality.
Ongoing disputes between national ministries and Windhoek’s municipal leadership over large-scale infrastructure upgrades illustrate how easily accountability breaks down when delivery is seen through a partisan lens.
A structured, cross-party planning process would make it harder for anyone (whether minister or councillor) to use public resources for short-term political gain.
Secondly, inclusion would improve technical quality and increase public buy-in.
Central planners often overlook local priorities that opposition representatives, especially at the regional and municipal levels, are better positioned to understand.
Although opposition presence has grown since 2020, independent governance assessments show that representation in national policy forums has not kept pace.
Meaningful participation and institutionalised roles for opposition technical experts would make planning for NDP targets and the sustainable development goals more grounded, inclusive and responsive to the realities of citizens.
As the NPC states in the Vision 2030 document: “(V)ision 2030 presents a clear view of where we are, where we want to go from here, and over what timeframe. It is designed as a broad, unifying vision…”
If this vision truly seeks to unite all Namibians, then its planning processes should do the same.
A FIRMER FOUNDATION
Thirdly, inclusion strengthens legitimacy and public trust.
When opposition voices are excluded from national planning, it creates an impression that the country’s long-term vision belongs to a single political side rather than to all Namibians.
That perception is what fuels criticism like that of Swanu of Namibia president Evilastus Kaaronda, who dismissed the government’s plans as “empty political rhetoric”.
Whether or not one agrees, such rhetoric shows why legitimacy cannot be taken for granted.
To move in this direction, Namibia could consider several practical reforms:
– Establish cross-party technical working groups within the NDP framework
– Require every major planning document to include a clear stakeholder engagement statement
– Strengthen parliamentary oversight hearings on NDP progress, and
– Link donor coordination forums to evidence of broad consultation, not merely executive approval.
None of these measures remove the executive’s authority to decide policy.
They simply broaden the foundation on which those policies are built.
Countries that institutionalise cross-party input often experience higher public trust, stronger local uptake, and fewer last-minute bureaucratic delays.
Such collaboration would help Namibia translate ambitious policy goals into tangible improvements in people’s lives.
Some may argue that wider participation could slow decision-making or dilute a unified vision.
IT’S UP TO US ALL
In reality, policies crafted in isolation often face resistance once implemented, while those developed through inclusive dialogue tend to stand the test of time.
Where urgency is required, technical groups can operate under strict deadlines.
When consensus is difficult, dissenting views can still be documented and revisited later without stalling progress.
The success of NDP6 and our progress toward Vision 2030 will not depend solely on the competence of any single party.
It will depend on our ability to bring together our best ideas, technical capacity and a shared sense of purpose.
If our national development plans are to be truly national, they must belong to everyone.
The first step toward that vision is to ensure that opposition voices are not just heard, but included in the planning of Namibia’s future.
- Shonena Nathanael is an EU-Namibia Youth Sounding Board gender and good governance thematic lead and a human rights activist; shonenavn@gmail.com
In an age of information overload, Sunrise is The Namibian’s morning briefing, delivered at 6h00 from Monday to Friday. It offers a curated rundown of the most important stories from the past 24 hours – occasionally with a light, witty touch. It’s an essential way to stay informed. Subscribe and join our newsletter community.
The Namibian uses AI tools to assist with improved quality, accuracy and efficiency, while maintaining editorial oversight and journalistic integrity.
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!
