Richclass Connections

MEDIA ADVISORY

UPDATE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PPP PROJECTS, AND OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE

The Ministry of Finance and National Planning wishes to invite members of the media to a Ministerial Update by Finance and National Planning Minister Dr. SITUMBEKO MUSOKOTWANE, MP, on the progress made in the implementation of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) projects from 2021 to date, and the outlook for future infrastructure and strategic investment partnerships.

The briefing will provide an update on key PPP reforms undertaken by the Government, the status of major infrastructure and concession projects currently under implementation, and the broader role of PPPs in supporting Zambia’s economic transformation agenda, fiscal sustainability objectives, and long-term development priorities.

The Minister is also expected to outline Government’s future direction regarding private sector participation in infrastructure financing, transport corridors, digital infrastructure, logistics, energy, and other productivity-enhancing sectors, following continued efforts to strengthen Zambia’s PPP framework and attract long-term investment into the economy.

OTHER DETAILS OF THE EVENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

DATE: Friday, 15th May, 2026

TIME:
11:15 Hrs

VENUE:
Ministry of Finance and National Planning Headquarters, Lusaka

Media houses are encouraged to arrive early to facilitate set-up.

Issued by:

Public Relations Office
Ministry of Finance and National Planning
Republic of Zambia

A CALL TO CONSCIENCE & RESPONSIBLE DISCOURSE:

A COMMENT ON REVEREND GODFRIDAH SUMAILI'S SAD STATEMENT AGAINST THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT

Beloved Citizens,

In the spirit of the Gospel’s call to justice, truth, humility, and mercy, as proclaimed by Our Lord Jesus Christ—who warned against outward piety masking inward disorder (Matthew 23:27–28)—we are reminded that moral discourse must always begin with self-examination before it proceeds to critique.

The Christian conscience demands integrity, but it also demands restraint.

It is within this balanced framework that we reflect on recent public remarks by Reverend GODFRIDAH SUMAILI, former Minister of National Guidance and Religious Affairs in Zambia, who has questioned the moral authority of President HAKAINDE HICHILEMA to speak on national values and principles. To say the least, it is disrespectful.

Public disagreement in a democracy, is legitimate. Indeed, robust debates are pillars of constitutional governance. However, international best practice in public life—reflected in instruments such as the United Nations Code of Conduct for Public Officials, the OECD Principles for Public Integrity, and Commonwealth standards on democratic engagement—emphasize that former Ministers and Government leaders carry an enduring responsibility to model dignity, fairness, and non-judgmental engagement.

Critique must be evidence-based, proportionate, and free from the moral absolutism demonstrated by Reverend SUMAILI.

—The Responsibility of Former Office Holders—

Those who have previously held high public office are not ordinary commentators. They are custodians of institutional memory and beneficiaries of public trust. International conventions on political ethics underscore three guiding expectations for former leaders:

1.
First, avoid imputing moral deficiency to opponents without substantiated evidence.

2.
Second, distinguish between policy disagreement and personal moral judgment.

3.
Third, demonstrate reflective accountability regarding one’s own tenure before casting aspersions on others.

During the tenure of the Government administration in which Reverend Sumaili served, Zambia faced significant multidimensional governance challenges. The period was marked by widely reported allegations of corruption, concerns about cadrerism, and institutional tensions that strained public confidence.

Post 2021, several MP's from her political party, the Patriotic Front, have subsequently faced criminal proceedings. These developments form part of the historical events that mis-shaped national values and principles. Yet here, too, caution is required.

Justice systems operate on individual accountability, not collective condemnation. To ascribe moral failure wholesale to an era or an individual without judicial determination risks replicating the very judgmentalism that public leaders ought to resist.

International standards of public discourse caution against precisely this type of generalized moral indictment.

—Achievements & Context—

Reverend Sumaili’s tenure included initiatives promoting national days of prayer and reconciliation, as well as participation in interfaith and international remembrance events. These efforts reflected a stated commitment to embedding values within the national conversation.

However, effective public ethics requires more than symbolic gestures; it requires measurable institutional strengthening.

When leaders question others’ moral authority, the global norm is that such critique be grounded in demonstrable policy evidence rather than rhetorical posture.

Moral discourse must be disciplined by fact, humility, and proportionality.

—Theological & Civic Restraint—

The Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church observed that “the split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age” (Gaudium et Spes, 43). Yet that same tradition equally warns against self-righteousness.

The Gospel injunction—“Let the one without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7)—is not a prohibition on accountability; it is a caution against moral arrogance.

In mature democracies, former Ministers and Heads of Government are expected to practice what scholars term “civic moderation”:

– engaging firmly but respectfully;

– critiquing policy without delegitimizing constitutional authority; and,

– acknowledging complexity rather than framing morality in binary terms.

The United Kingdom’s Ministerial Code, Canada’s Conflict of Interest Act, and various Commonwealth governance frameworks all reflect the same principle: political contestation must never degenerate into personal moral denigration.

—A Progressive Call Against Judgmentalism—

As this reflection advances, it becomes clear that the greater danger in public life is NOT disagreement—but the moral absolutism practiced by people like Reverend SUMAILI.

When leaders define themselves as sole custodians of virtue, polarization deepens. When discourse becomes accusatory rather than corrective, national cohesion weakens. We don't need that in Zambia.

The country’s constitutional democracy benefits, when former leaders:

• Offer constructive alternatives instead of moral verdicts;

• Ground critique in data and institutional analysis; and,

• Recognize that governance is complex and morally imperfect across administrations.

Accountability remains essential. But accountability pursued through judgmental rhetoric rather than structured democratic processes undermines both justice and reconciliation.

The statement made by someone whom many Zambian's admired is very very sad. How can she say the President should not fulfill a constitutional obligation?

May the light of Christ guide Zambia’s public life toward integrity without arrogance, conviction without condemnation, and accountability without self-righteousness.

In a nation seeking unity and shared prosperity, moral authority will not be secured by accusing others, but by exemplifying humility, consistency, and disciplined public speech.

Given at Lusaka, in this Year of Our Lord 2026.

HH has no moral right to speak on national values – Sumaili - Zambia: News Diggers! FORMER religious affairs minister Reverend Godfridah Sumaili is wondering why President Hakainde Hichilema will be addressing the nation on national values and principles when there’s no morality in the country. And Chapter One Foundation says recent developments have raised legitimate questions a...

THERE'S NO WIND OF CHANGE in Zambia. The 2.8 will re-vote, the 1.8++ will fragment daily till August.

FACT CHECK ON WAGE RELATED ACTIONS BY THE ZAMBIAN GOVERNMENT FROM 2014-2021.

Hey folks, we have read with alarm, the condemnation of the government's K700 wage increase.

Let's chat about the wage freezes the Zambian government rolled out between 2014 and 2021.

We'll keep it simple and straightforward, like we're grabbing a coffee and talking it through. Based on what we know from reports and records, here's the scoop:

Back in 2014-2015, the government slapped a two-year freeze on public sector wages and hiring.

Then Finance Minister Alexander Chikwanda (blessed memory) announced it in the national budget to tighten up spending. Basically, no raises or new hires (except to fill spots from folks retiring or quitting).

The idea, he explained, was to cut down on wages eating up over half the budget, so more cash could go to essentials like schools, hospitals, and roads.

This didn't sit well with everyone. The Zambia Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) called it illegal and a blow to fair negotiations—they even threatened strikes. Even MPs debated lifting it, pointing out how it hit civil servants hard.

Moving to 2016-2018, the strict freeze eased a bit, but the government kept a tight lid on the wage bill "to keep things stable." They were all about controlling spending amid economic pressures.

By late 2017, after some talks with unions, the government agreed to small raises for 2018—around 7-10%—showing a shift from total lockdown but still playing it safe.

Then in 2019-2020, there wasn't a big official freeze announced, but things stayed pretty tight (presumably due debt service constellation).

Reports from civil society groups and online chatter suggest President Edgar Lungu (blessed memory) and his team only gave bumps, like about 4% in 2020.

It was like an unofficial freeze, driven by DEBT WOES and low revenues, thereby keeping public pay in check.

After 2020, things changed with President Hakainde Hichilema taking over in 2021.

His focus was on fixing the economy and shaking up institutions, and there weren't any major reports of a nationwide wage freeze like before.

Overall, the summary picture from 2014 to 2021, is that:

1. There was a formal two-year lockdown in 2014-2015 to free up budget space;

2. There was ongoing tight control through 2016-2020, with wage raises; and,

3. There was intense pushback from unions and opposition on how wage freezes affected everyday workers.

Tasty lunch, courtesy of .013.