Walter Mzembi, Minister for Tourism, Zimbabwe HARDtalk

Welcome to HARDtalk, I'm Sarah Monatague.

Imagine having the job of persuading people to holiday in Zimbabwe.

It is a beautiful country but it's also a basket case.

Doctors, nurses and teachers have all been on strike

because they haven't been paid.

Half the rural population face starvation and the economy

is in the grip of a major currency crisis.

My guest today is Zimbabwe's tourism minister, Walter Mzembi.

He's worked alongside President Mugabe for

the last decade.

A man, who aged 93, plans to stand in elections next year.

Isn't it time for the oldest head of state in the world to go?

Walter Mzembi, welcome to HARDtalk.

Sarah, thank you.

President Mugabe is the oldest head of state in the world, he's 93.

Should he really be the ZANU-PF for candidate

for the elections next year?

Absolutely, as long as the people ask him to carry on,

as is the case now, and they've already indicated in the last

national conference that they want him to stay on and it's not really

about the statistics, but what he's offering.

Do you want him to stay on?

I want him to stay on.

Because he's still capable of doing the job.

Because his faculties are still completely in place.

I just parted ways from him just recently from Ghana.

I was able to watch him in action.

You wouldn't imagine he is 92, 93, it is just a statistics really

because he is completely sound.

He is of sound mental state and completely in charge

of his faculties.

Because he's only just recently back from another trip to Singapore.

Absolutely and immediately he proceeded to Ghana.

Just paying testimony to how physically fit he is.

What about the stories of him falling asleep in meetings,

does he do that?

I've not seen him sleep in meetings.

He presides over Cabinet every Tuesday and he is completely awake

to the task.

You'll know that Botswana's President, a Ian Khama,

has said he should have gone years ago, "It's obvious at his age

and the state Zimbabwe is in, that he's not able to provide

the leadership that could get it out of its predicament."

If he is not able to provide the leadership that is expected,

we are all collectively responsible.

We are his ministers, we work under him.

We work under him.

And I'm quite confident that I have been discharging my functions

as ably as I could,using his mandate as president.

OK, so, because, you'll know that his wife, Grace Mugabe has said

"One day when God decides that Mugabe dies, we'll have his corpse

aware as candidate on the ballot paper."

She was making the point that he would still win.

That's a metaphor.

Absolutely a metaphor.

That he is so popular his corpse would win.

To the extent that dead people - as is currently the case right now -

the ideology is how we function today, with philosophers

like Jesus Christ, Socrates, Hamad and many of them,

they have philosophies that continue to govern us even when they lie

in state, when they lie in their graves.

It is about the philosophy of the leader.

So you are proud of the job your government has done?

I'm proud of what I'm doing, absolutely.

Let me take a look at the situation in Zimbabwe.

The economy halved, the size of the economy halved

after the year 2000.

It's going to contract by another 2.5% next year.

Land reforms - however justified they may or may not have been,

they led to a massive decline in crop yields the way

they were carried out.

Three-quarters of the rural population live on less

than $1.25 a day.

One-fifth are in extreme poverty.

The government can scarcely pay its civil servants,

its doctors, its nurses, its soldiers, it's having to pay

the bonuses in different months because it can't afford to.

You've got debts of nearly $1 trillion still owing.

80% of the workforce is outside the formal economy,

so you can't even take taxes from them.

The list goes on and on, more than half the children under

five and over six months are anaemic and you say you are proud...

Those are the problems you characterise, let me say

to you that there

is a collective understanding in Zimbabwe that we had to get land

back at whatever cost.

And this is the cost that you are counting.

That notwithstanding, the response by the world

through the departure of Zimbabwe and the United Kingdom

was the imposition of sanctions through the European Union.

The sanctions were targeted at a few individuals.

The sanctions are not widely.

Through the United States of America, there is an acknowledged...

A few individuals.

An acknowledged regime for sanctions called the Zimbabwe economic

recovery and democratic act.

It is in place, anyone can Google it.

It speaks to what is prevented from happening in Zimbabwe

by way of support.

It targets those individuals...

Official developmental assistance capital information.

How do you answer, how do you respond to that challenge?

The sanctions in place targets individuals and in the case

of America, those around them?

But you cannot wipe the history, the decade leading up to 2014,

November, the European Union invoked Article 96, which was inflicting

a lot of damage.

The sum total, in article 96, on the Zimbabwe economy

was the equivalent almost to the declaration of conventional

warfare.

The kind of destruction that you see...

It's everybody's fault.

It is exactly what happened to the Zimbabwean economy

after that period.

It is everybody's else's fault, the sanctions.

What about land reform.

You can say that this is something that everybody knew

there was a price but look at the price of land reforms.

Did you honestly expect it to be so great?

No, what has not been spoken to.

Therefore, if you didn't expect it to be so great,

was it handled badly?

What has not been spoken to is exactly what happened

in Europe after World War two, the Marhsall Plan.

When a country is under the kind of character,

in terms of its economy, that the European collective end

after World War Two, the equivalent Zimbabwe end after it

acquired its land back, in the decade leading up to 2000,

you get the same conditions that attract the kind of response

which would require a recovery programme.

What are you suggesting?

I'm suggesting that...

That in the year 2000, the Zimbabwean government brought

the effects of a global war on itself?

Absolutely and the response...

And that was a right thing to do?

Their response is a recovery programme in the same order that

you had the Marshall Plan for Europe post-World War Two.

And that is not what we have not been able to take to the world

to say - $50 billion worth of income and lives was lost on the Zimbabwean

economy in the period leading up to November 2014.

What happened to crop yields as a result of land reform?

There are certain things that you can predict,

if you do not farm the land well enough, your crops are going to go

down and now people are starving.

Those were the unintended consequences, but we are back,

if you see tobacco now.

Unintended consequences, so accept that it was handled badly?

If you see our cash crop, tobacco, it's back to better than before

the land reform programme.

The other crops, cereals and other grain crops,

they've not done as well, because of incessant droughts

but this year the harvest, God had helped, and this year

there's lots of grain in Zimbabwe.

Is it very hard for to you criticise either the government

or the president to say - look, there were things we did

wrong, is it hard to make criticisms?

Like every recovery programme, it is fraught with imperfections.

And I do accept that the process is not smooth but the end justifies

the means and people have their land in their hands,

in their possession.

The next stage is really unleashing productivity out of that land

and there is no country like Zimbabwe.

If you think...

There's no country and most other countries will be glad they are not

in the situation.

If your problems could be wished away.

The land problem could never be wished away.

Wars have been fought in Europe, wars have been fought

in the United States of America, wars have been fought

on the back of land.

It is a problem already solved in our domain.

But you didn't answer my question.

We are going to the next of our recovery.

Are you able to criticise the president?

I do criticise him inside the confines of the theatre

that is designated for critiquing, inside Cabinet.

So you won't criticise publicly but privately you feel confident

saying - it is a mistable.

I do criticise him.

If there are superior ideas to move our country forward.

Let's look at one.

The country has had a terrible problem with inflation.

Sure.

Back in October you were publicly saying what the country should do

is adopt the South African rand.

I still insist that's the way to go.

It is part of a discussion.

What the Government actually did, we should explain, was to launch

a bond note - a bond note which is being called the bollar,

the idea waas the equivalent to the US dollar, and it's

created considerable problems.

Was it a mistake to launch that bond note?

It has alieviated to a limited extent the cash crisis

in our country.

I have always aired my position on the matter, what mischief

are we treating if we equate the bond note value to the US

Dollar, because the US Dollar itself is the mischief that's currently

obtaining in our economy, and our inability to appreciate

its value to the extent where it is driving the US

Dollar for inflation.

But it was your Government...

We should equate the bond note and the rand and I still make this

argument to this day.

Your argument was 70% of exports going to South Africa and 70%

imports and you have a huge disaspora of people leaving.

And in terms of the ideas that have advanced, they work,

the economic ideas that work, and they have been tested.

They didn't listen to you.

They'll listen in the fullness of time and just two weeks ago

the president was actually reciting that he has actually advised

the Finance Minister that perhaps they should fully consider the full

introduction of the rand and he was doing that

on the occasion of the traditional interview.

So you will be proved right and in such a time

that it will happen?

It is soon going to happen.

It is going to happen?

The markets are going to shift to what works.

Markets speak louder than our own wishes.

But it will be the case that Zimbabwe will adopt

the South African rand.

Well we have to fulfil processes.

For example, if we are going to go that route we have to our own

currency, for example, the bond route but it has to have

parity with the rand.

You are a long way from having a currency that could qualify.

That bond note could be put in place to achieve the same objective.

What you require is your own local currency.

Which is the bond note.

Whatever you call it, bollar, dollar.

That equates to the rand but ultimately you are then joining

the rand customs union.

How quickly can that happen?

I think it is already happening by default.

The currency is increasingly gaining usage in a multiple currency basket.

I can see that shift taking place because the US Dollar...

But you have a very small number of bond notes.

Limited to the extent that I think less than 80 million has been put

into circulation, equivalent to the African bank currencies.

When you talk about the fact that you need your own currency in order

to qualify to join the union, are you suggesting that there

is enough in circulation to do that?

No there isn't enough.

In fact a deficit could be up as high as 900 million.

So what, there need to be a lot more bond notes issued?

Not a lot more bond notes.

They have to be bond notes equivalent to the currencies that

have been put in place by the African banks,

200 million dollars and I want to reserve...

So let's talk about it.

They continue through with that programme but the ultimate aim

is for the rand to become Zimbabwe's currency and with that people

will say, what about South Africa?

The markets will lead us to what works.

Is South Africa happy about that?

Is South Africa happy to have them issuing currency,

on behalf of a country with a whole heap of problems?

Is the US happy we are using the US Dollar.

But you are talking about joining a currency union.

The markets will lead you there.

When we dollarised the Zimbabwean currency, we did that well

after the people had already moved and shifted to the US Dollar.

It doesn't matter if South Africa is happy about it or not?

We are talking to South African.

What are they saying?

They are our neighbours.

They are warm to the idea.

Who would not want their currency being used by a neighbour?

Somebody who is worried about what we saw happen in Greece.

Out of our currency we can motivate more production

in the South African economy.

If they extend rand loans to us and they are looking for home

for their capital.

And they will say you are basically just becoming the tenth province

of South Africa.

Well characteristicically and economically, we have always

been, it is nothing new.

So you are surrendering sovereignty to South Africa?

No, there is no sovereignty in a globalised village.

In a global village we are opening markets.

We are opening the European economic markets.

That

That word

That word is

That word is a

That word is a dead

That word is a dead word.

You point out there is a whole basket of what, almost nine

currencies used in your country.

Yes, and people shift...

And what you will find is you will have a shop pricing

things in three different currencies because the bond loan isn't

worth its face value of the US Dollar, it is worth much less

because nobody wants it, everybody wants US Dollars.

Are you suggesting people will actually want to have

South African rand as the economy that will dominate?

Well, they are already using it and in 2009 the ratio of two rands

to the US Dollar was achieved in several areas.

And this is my point, the markets, people always follow what works.

And President Mugabe is happy to become, effectively subservient

to South Africa or at least in a situation where it will be

the South African Central Bank that can control your currency.

That is the argument advanced by those who don't want to see this

situation naturally come out of this current crisis.

There is no submission to anyone in a global economic village.

And President Mugabe is acceptiong that?

The monetary union, you have come out of the European Union.

But not out of the euro.

Using the same logic, you can see the divisions

in your society of that issue of shifting away from a global trend

of openness of...

Is this the only way, because you will know that people

say that there is professor Steve Hanker, at John Hopkins University

in Baltimore, he said the economy is in what could turn into a death

spiral because of the situation currently.

Is he right?

And is that's why you have to adopt of the South African rand?

There are a number of economic pillars that will ultimately drive

the Zimbabwean economy.

One of them is what I lead, the tourism pillar.

It is a $200 million economy when I inherited it to a $1.1

billion by the end of 2015.

There are serious leaps and bounds in that sector.

It is no different from tourism globally.

But analysts say tourism is unlikely to grow this year,

are they right?

No, it will actually grow.

So those analysts are wrong?

Are they signposting a decline in a global village,

in trends, wages are growing in leaps and bounds.

That's interesting, you are saying something that is counter

to what many people would say about your sector, which is not

least that it's expensive, partly because of the introduction

of VAT at 15% on tourists to Zimbabwe.

Which you didn't want.

I didn't want it.

It raised prices.

I didn't want it.

I look where I sit from.

I have to canvass on behalf of my sector, to the extent

that we grow it and tax it incrementally.

I'm not an advocate of unintelligent succession.

I think we should grow it sufficiently enough to where we tax

it on smaller numbers but we tax a bigger portion.

And it did have an effect, didn't it?

It did.

So although you are saying tourism is doing fabulously

it was knocked by that?

There were other actions taking place elsewhere

which are motivating growth.

For example, we've just commissioned the new Victoria Falls airport

and we are signing up airlines.

In the past we have suffered from accessibility programmes

and challenges, where people were at sixes and sevens about how

to reach one of the wonders of the world like Victoria Falls.

Now they will be able to land there.

You have a wonder of the world in your country, so you would think

people might like to fly into Harare and drive through beautiful

Zimbabwe.

...

No, to land there actually.

But you need to do, that not least because of the many roadblocks that

- if you do that drive you are stopped countless times

by police or asking money off you.

And that's not surprisingly put people off.

It has had its impact to a limited extent.

I commissioned myself, not anybody else, a study over

the last year where, we are getting feedback

from tourists on their own experiences in Zimbabwe,

as a tourist destination.

One of the issues that they clearly pointed out that it was completely

undesirable, was the inordinate instance of roadblocks

and their frequency on our highways and on roads leading

to tourists destinations.

Roadblocks, police basically wanting to tap them for cash.

We are taking corrective action and if you look at my public

statements I've been advocating for digital signing of highways.

And more importantly where they cannot collect cash

on those checkpoints and the rebranding of the whole

concept of roadblocks, I actually don't like the word.

It doesn't speak to what we seek to achieve in tourism.

OK, but on tourism there is another - something else that

has been happening.

You are obviously known for your wildlife.

Is it true that you are so cash strapped, that's the reason you have

sold 35 elephants to China and you are advertising for American

dentists to come and hunt your lions?

Well, the approach to conservation is based on world

tested conservation practices.

You are selling off the family silver.

So we do sell excess from time to time, in line with CITES

provisions and it is all done above board.

We don't have to sell to China, as it weres.

For their zoos.

The Zimbabwe parks and wildlife are selling to friendly countries

to extract value out of our wildlife.

You wouldn't be doing this if you didn't need the money.

If you go to the United States, you see our animals.

In the past people have attempted to use China as a point

against our conservation practices.

But the markets are taking our products across the borders.

And you will sell to whomever because you need the cash?

We sell because we have excess capacity and excess population.

Let's turn to the future of both the country and yourself.

Because you have been tourism minister for quite a few years

Nearly a decade now.

You want to leave, you want to go, you put yourself forward

as the Secretary-General of the UN world tourism...

Only this afternoon, I had acknowledgment that the papers

were received and that I comply with provisions in place

for the job.

I'm waiting now to compete with whoever is going to be

in the fray.

The elections will be in April.

They will be in May.

So elections in May.

May 12th.

If you don't get that job, will you leave anyway?

Well, I'm still minister of tourism.

I'm on professional leave of absence right now,

competing for this post on the back of Zimbabwe's nomination,

so their endorsement, the African Union.

You have an awful lot of support, there is a good chance you will get

that job, judging by the support, but many people are saying

you are doing what another 2 million Zimbabwean's have done,

abandon the sinking ship?

I'm going on deployment.

I'm not just being deployed by Zimbabwe but by Africa.

At some point when you come back.

When President Mugabe has gone, is it a job you would ever consider?

Well, if the people in the future decide that I should be place there,

I will respond.

So you do, you would stand as president?

Who wouldn't stand as president?

If I offered you the opportunity to be Prime Minister of Britain

today, would you say no?

It doesn't matter what I would say...

Yeah.

I think most people would probably say no.

You answer the papers and calling.

I'm a politician.

The ultimate end in this journey is the way it

ends, isn't it?

Walter Mzembi, thank you for coming on HARDtalk.

Thank you.