CSOs/Govt Partnership
Home Contents Introduction Opening Remarks Objectives Introduction to NPMS CSOs/Govt Partnership Poverty Assesment Day One Recap Research Methodologies Monitoring Technique Cross-cutting isssues S E Database Role of CSOs in PRSP Lobbying & Advocacy Monitoring Strategy Lesson Learned Closing Remarks

 

Home-Page

            Presentation on Government/Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) Partnerships in Monitoring Poverty/PRSP

Rev. Dr. Fidon Mwombeki TCDD Chairperson.

wpe1.jpg (30780 bytes)

The presentation began by defining the role of the Government. The Government is the leading organ of the state with powers, mandate and legitimacy to set policies and formulate laws, ensure law and order is maintained and followed, peace, security, justice and human rights are observed and prevail throughout the country. Clearly, the Government has some strengths as well as some deficiencies and weakness, which manifest themselves in the course of implementing its mandate. These areas of comparative weaknesses provide the basis for the emergence of civil society organisations to complement Government efforts, which involve the provision of basic social services and development in general. In essence, CSOs exist in order to fill up the gap left by the Government because of its limited resources and broad priorities and mandate. CSOs also have an advocacy role in pressurising the Government to adopt good and drop bad policies and practices, which affect the people, economy, development and the nation as a whole. In order for CSOs to successfully perform their advocacy function, there is the need to promote, build and strengthen partnership with the government at the national, regional and distinct levels. CSOs/Government partnerships is possible because:

bullet

They share similarities, as they all have the same goals i.e. to promote sustainable development and improve the standard of living of the people.

bullet

They all serve the same people.

It is however critical for one to note that there are key differences between the Government and CSOs. These differences arise from their relative and comparative strengths/weaknesses. Government/CSOs partnerships are strengthened and made more relevant precisely because of their differences. These differences include:

bullet

CSOs

bullet

Cover small areas

bullet

Focus on specialized areas/fields (e.g. health provision, primary education, HIV/AIDS etc.)

bullet

Involved in humanitarian service delivery

bullet

Work directly with the beneficiaries/affected people

bullet

Non-bureaucratic

bullet

Accountable to the people

bullet

Efficient, effective in service delivery Government

bullet

Cover whole country

bullet

Does something in all sectors

bullet

Government invests in sectors which NGOs and the private sector are less likely to invest-in e.g. roads, bridges, railways, universities

bullet

Government's role limited to monitoring law and order, and other regulatory functions

bullet

Have the mandate over police and army and other law enforcement agents

There are certain things that the Government cannot do as well as CSOs. CSOs have proved to be more effective in mobilising communities for poverty reduction because CSOs have the will of the people, involve the people, and have the technical ability to mobilise ideas and actions (even with other non grassroot Key Actors, through lobbying and advocacy). Also NGOs persuade and influence people at the grassroots level and work directly with the people. Because of these differences and similaries of work and goals for promoting development and fighting poverty, Government-CSO partnership is inevitable. However, caution needs to be taken so that this relationship remains a distant relationship in order to maintain the autonomy of CSOs and remain as purely non-governmental as possible. Partnerships with the government have often generated some problems, one of which is the "arrogance" of the Government. A Government can choose to treat recommendations from CSOs with arrogance claiming that it is a Government that draws its legitimacy from being popularly elected and therefore representing people, whereas CSOs are organisation with a narrow constituency base. They can therefore not claim to speak on behalf of the people. CSOs also generate a problem known as the "naivity" of CSOs. CSOs are na´ve enough to think that everything that CSOs do is good, non-bureaucratic, non-corrupt and efficient. What makes CSOs think so?! These qualities showed he earned through demonstration of evidence. Since CSO partnership with the Government (at all levels) is inevitable CSOs must wake up and adopt strategies, through affective lobbying and advocacy mechanisms to promote, build and sustain collaboration with the Government especially with the district councils at the district level and use that relationship a basis to advocate for more pro-poor expenditure budgets.'

5.1    Plenary discussion

bullet

The role of the Government should be limited to a lean Government that performs functions which are confined to areas of its comparative advantage. The Government should focus on laying down regulatory procedures, maintain law and order, collect tax and use the tax collected to invest in areas where the private sector does not have the resources to invest-in (e.g. roads, airports, bridges, etc.)

bullet

We should be careful with the concept of a "lean" Government. This is a modal advocated by the World Bank and IMF who tell us to privatise everything! as if privatisation is an answer to everything!! They tell us to privatise but they do not privatise critical sectors in their own countries (i.e. developed countries).

bullet

We should be careful with IMF/World Bank advice. The World Bank are business people. I was surprised to read on their website that the World Bank is striving for a world that is free from poverty. We question why they call their country programme document a CAS (Country Assistance Strategy), it should be called a CLES (Country Lending Strategy)!!

bullet

Civil society participation in what the Government is doing is guaranteed by the constitution. There should not be the question of Government "arrogance". If we do not claim to exercise our rights to represent the concerns of ordinary people, then we will end up being GONGO's (Government's-Non Governmental NGOs!!)

bullet

The question of Government's "arrogance" is critical. The Government may ask us whom do you represent to make the claims that you are making. The only way to strengthen our position versus those claims is to network, and be close with one another. To promote a collective civil society bargaining position. In the north CSOs are powerful, have a collective position on certain issues. When the Government formulates policies in those sectors they have to consult them. Then the Government cannot say that this is an agenda of a single NGO/person as was the case for the Women Umbrella NGO - BAWATA, but a collective position of civil society organisations, or de facto a mirror of the position of the very civil society that elected the Government of the day.

bullet

Although the role of the Government has changed into a "lean" more focused Government, the people have not been made aware of these changes. They still see the Government as a big service provider. Even civil servants at the district level do not know that the new modal assumes that CSOs will complement the Government in a number of key functions. As a result, when CSOs approach the Local Authorities for partnerships, they are sometimes turned back. We need to network together so that we may co-ordinate the process of presenting our views to the Government on a number of critical issues.

bullet

There is a general consensus that there is power in networking. TCDD is a loose network of CSOs. It is an informal democratic forum. All CSOs are free to join and leave the coalition as they want. Up to about 20 days ago, there was no employee of TCDD. We are now grateful that we have secured funding for one Programme Coordinator, who is a full time employee of TCDD. TCDD does not aim to take over the activities of individual NGOs. If there is a specific task, it is given to a member NGO with the comparative advantage to perform that task, and then the results of that assignment are shared to all of us.

International NGOs have also been invited to join the Coalition as observers.

5.2    Recommendations

bullet

CSOs should start lobbying the district councils so that they get involved in decision making and work with them through representation in District Council's Select Committees, utilising the 1982 Local Government Act whereby a provision allows other stakeholders to participate in the business of the Councils as observers.

bullet

CSOs must show credibility of work and efficiency in order to be accepted and recognized by the Government and to be transparent in whatever they do.

bullet

Ways should be sought to find out solutions to problems which constrain relationships and partnerships between Government and CSOs.

 

Back Home Next