David Coltart Sounds Alarm: Devolution Failing as Local Authorities Face Collapse
In a stark assessment of Zimbabwe’s governance system, former Education Minister and prominent politician David Coltart has issued a grave warning that the country’s devolution agenda is failing, leaving local authorities in a state of crisis. The outspoken official pointed to deteriorating service delivery, financial insolvency, and inadequate implementation of constitutional provisions as evidence of systemic breakdown at the local government level. This critique from David Coltart comes at a critical juncture for Zimbabwe’s development trajectory, raising fundamental questions about the government’s commitment to decentralized governance. The situation has become a focal point for political analysts and is receiving extensive coverage on platforms like Zimbabwe news outlets.
According to a detailed analysis published by The Zimbabwean, Coltart’s assessment stems from firsthand observations of the deteriorating conditions in urban and rural councils across the country. The former minister, known for his principled stands on governance issues, argued that the promise of devolution outlined in Zimbabwe’s constitution has been systematically undermined, resulting in local authorities that lack both the resources and autonomy to function effectively. This failure has direct consequences for ordinary citizens, who face crumbling infrastructure, inadequate water supplies, and deteriorating public services despite constitutional guarantees of local governance.
The Constitutional Promise Versus Reality: David Coltart’s Assessment
The devolution framework embedded in Zimbabwe’s constitution was envisioned as a transformative approach to governance, designed to distribute power and resources away from the central government and toward provincial and local authorities. According to David Coltart, this vision has been betrayed by implementation failures and deliberate obstruction. He points to Chapter 14 of the Constitution, which explicitly mandates the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities to provincial and metropolitan councils and local authorities. However, in practice, these entities remain heavily dependent on Harare for both policy direction and financial resources, creating a system that mimics decentralization in name only.
David Coltart highlights several specific areas where devolution has faltered. Financially, local authorities continue to struggle with inadequate revenue streams, with the central government maintaining control over significant portions of potential local revenue sources. This financial strangulation has left councils unable to invest in infrastructure maintenance or service expansion, leading to the visible decay witnessed across Zimbabwe’s urban landscapes. The situation is particularly acute in opposition-controlled municipalities, where David Coltart alleges deliberate financial suffocation has become a political tool. This analysis suggests that the failure of devolution is not merely administrative but fundamentally political in nature.
“The vision of devolution outlined in our constitution remains largely unimplemented. What we have witnessed instead is the continued concentration of power and resources in Harare, leaving local authorities without the means to fulfill their constitutional mandates.”
The legal framework for devolution has also been undermined by delayed and inadequate legislation, according to David Coltart. While the constitution provides the foundation, implementing legislation is required to give practical effect to devolution principles. Years after the constitution’s adoption, critical pieces of legislation remain pending or have been drafted in ways that preserve central government control. This legislative vacuum creates uncertainty for local authorities and prevents the establishment of clear frameworks for revenue sharing, service delivery responsibilities, and accountability mechanisms. The result is a patchwork of ad hoc arrangements that vary from locality to locality, undermining the consistency and predictability essential for effective local governance.
David Coltart also points to capacity constraints as a significant barrier to successful devolution. Even where limited autonomy exists, many local authorities lack the technical expertise, institutional strength, and administrative systems to exercise their powers effectively. This capacity deficit is compounded by political interference in local government operations, including the appointment of central government officials to key positions within local authorities. For David Coltart, these patterns demonstrate a fundamental lack of commitment to the devolution principle at the highest levels of government, resulting in a system that appears designed to fail despite constitutional guarantees.
Consequences of Failed Devolution: Service Delivery Collapse and Public Suffering
The failure of devolution documented by David Coltart has direct and severe consequences for ordinary Zimbabweans. Perhaps the most visible manifestation is the collapse of basic service delivery in urban areas across the country. Residents of major cities like Harare, Bulawayo, and Mutare face persistent water shortages, erratic waste collection, deteriorating road networks, and dysfunctional public health systems. These service delivery failures represent the practical outcome of the systemic issues identified by David Coltart, translating abstract governance concepts into daily hardships for millions of citizens.
The financial dimension of the devolution failure has particularly severe implications. Local authorities lack the resources to maintain existing infrastructure, let alone invest in new projects to keep pace with urban growth. This financial precariousness is exacerbated by the central government’s control over revenue sources that could potentially strengthen local authorities. The situation has created a vicious cycle where deteriorating services lead to reduced revenue collection capacity, further weakening local authorities’ ability to deliver services. According to David Coltart, this cycle can only be broken through genuine fiscal devolution that gives local authorities access to adequate and predictable funding streams.
“When local authorities cannot provide basic services like clean water and waste management, it is not just an inconvenience—it is a public health crisis and a violation of citizens’ constitutional rights.”
The impact of failed devolution extends beyond immediate service delivery to broader developmental concerns. Local authorities play a crucial role in planning and coordinating local economic development, but without adequate resources and autonomy, their ability to stimulate growth is severely constrained. This has implications for job creation, poverty reduction, and overall economic resilience at the local level. David Coltart argues that successful devolution could unlock significant local economic potential by allowing communities to tailor development strategies to their specific contexts and resources. Instead, the current centralized approach imposes a one-size-fits-all model that often fails to address local priorities or leverage local opportunities.
The democratic deficit created by failed devolution is another concern highlighted by David Coltart. When local authorities lack real decision-making power, local elections become less meaningful, as elected councilors have limited ability to influence outcomes that affect their communities. This undermines democratic accountability and citizen engagement in local governance. Residents who vote for local representatives based on specific promises find that those representatives lack the authority to deliver on their commitments, leading to disillusionment with the democratic process itself. For David Coltart, this represents a betrayal of the democratic principles that should underpin local governance.
Pathways to Reform: David Coltart’s Prescriptions for Fixing Devolution
While David Coltart‘s assessment is stark, he does not present the situation as hopeless. Instead, he outlines several pathways for revitalizing Zimbabwe’s devolution agenda. First and foremost, he calls for full implementation of the constitutional provisions on devolution, including the enactment of supporting legislation that genuinely transfers power and resources to local authorities. This legislative framework should clarify the respective roles of different levels of government and establish transparent mechanisms for resource sharing. For David Coltart, returning to the constitutional blueprint is the essential first step toward fixing devolution.
Fiscal devolution represents another critical reform area identified by David Coltart. He advocates for a review of revenue allocation mechanisms to ensure local authorities have access to adequate and predictable funding. This could include granting local authorities greater control over local revenue sources, establishing equitable formula-based transfers from the national treasury, and creating clear frameworks for local borrowing for development projects. Without fiscal autonomy, David Coltart argues, devolution will remain an empty promise regardless of what legislation says about political decentralization.
Capacity building represents a third pillar of David Coltart‘s proposed reform agenda. Even with adequate legal frameworks and financial resources, devolution will fail if local authorities lack the technical and administrative capacity to exercise their powers effectively. He calls for targeted programs to strengthen local government institutions, including training for councilors and officials, improved systems for financial management and service delivery, and mechanisms for knowledge sharing between more and less capable local authorities. This capacity-building effort should be approached systematically rather than as ad hoc interventions.
Finally, David Coltart emphasizes the need for political will at the national level to make devolution work. Without genuine commitment from central government leaders, technical fixes alone will be insufficient. This requires a fundamental shift in mindset from viewing local authorities as administrative extensions of the central government to recognizing them as autonomous spheres of government with their own democratic mandates. Building this political consensus may be challenging, but David Coltart believes it is essential for the success of devolution and, ultimately, for improving governance and service delivery across Zimbabwe.
As the debate over devolution continues, the warnings issued by David Coltart highlight the urgent need for course correction. The failure to implement meaningful devolution has tangible consequences for citizens’ quality of life and undermines constitutional democracy. While the challenges are significant, the constitutional framework provides a solid foundation for reform. The question is whether political leaders will demonstrate the will necessary to translate constitutional principles into practice. The ongoing coverage of this critical issue on platforms dedicated to Zimbabwe news will be essential for maintaining public awareness and pressure for change.
In conclusion, David Coltart’s assessment of Zimbabwe’s devolution experiment presents a sobering picture of constitutional promises unmet and local governance in crisis. His analysis connects abstract governance principles to concrete service delivery failures, making a compelling case for urgent reform. While the path forward is challenging, the constitutional framework provides clear guidance for what needs to be done. The real test will be whether political leaders can overcome their resistance to power sharing and embrace genuine devolution as essential for Zimbabwe’s democratic development and effective service delivery.
