This
site is designed for Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator versions
4 and above and a screen resolution of at least 800x600
|
|
|
NFRA board should go - report
By
Denis Mzembe - 02-06-2003 |
|
|
An external audit of the National Food Reserve Agency (NFRA) and management of national grain stocks has recommended that it does not believe that the current board of the agency should remain in place when its current term of office expires this June.
The recommendation contained in a report compiled by Economic Resources Limited (ERL) and Ernst and Young says the move would facilitate significant change at the NFRA.
“We do not believe they should be reappointed or replaced. A company can easily be promoted well before the 16 June deadline,” the report says.
It also says there is a critical need to clarify the board role and constitution and structure before a new substantive board is put in place.
“We believe the NFRA can operate without a board for a transitional period, if other structures and arrangements are put in place for which the companies act or the high court exercising its powers of inherent jurisdiction provide mechanisms,” the report adds.
The report says people spoken to did not necessarily view the board as the only problem, but as a major contributory factor to the NFRA problems.
According to the report the board, among other things, is being accused of lack of unity within itself and also with management. There was also criticism over the board’s decision making style.
“There is a widely held perception from the public, the ministries, the donors, the management and even from some members of the board of trustees that the board as a whole has become dysfunctional. This is a situation compounded by the development of factions within it, and on occasion in the past, of direct instructions from members to senior members of staff or to the substantive or acting general manager,” the report says.
There was strong criticism of the board’s style of patronage, interference historically in the organisation, and about what was perceived as some conflicts of interest, abuse of position, too much personal interest and failure to comply with principles of business ethics.
“The negative responses were at many levels, and indicated that there was a perception that the board had not been effective, and that they had been part of the problems that led to the food crisis,” it says.
NFRA operations manager Sam Thunde declined to comment on issues related to the board saying they were beyond him while comptroller of statutory corporations Juma said while most boards of statutory corporations are under his ministry, the NFRA board is not.
The minister of agriculture, irrigation and food security, Chakufwa Chihana and his deputy Henry Mussa could not be reached for comment.
In an interview on Thursday, Bob Martin, who works with ERL and a practising member of Socam said “I’m in a literally no comment situation in as far as the exercise and the report is concerned because I have to abide by my professional ethics”.
He said, however, he could not deny the audit exercise and the report all carried out in the past “few” months.
Martin, however, said he hoped Malawi would have a “greatly improved” NFRA including its structures and controls.
Press, public and political affairs officer at the British High Commission, Michael Nevin, said last week; “We are still studying the report. We and other donors will discuss the way forward with government,” he said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
