Public money, public questions

Public money belongs to the people, and every kwacha must be spent carefully.

At a time when many Malawians are struggling with the high cost of living, public institutions must demonstrate that they are using the country’s limited resources responsibly.

Two recent developments have raised important questions about public spending and service delivery.

These are Admarc’s proposed purchase of 100 tarpaulins worth nearly K3 billion and delays in distributing fertiliser under the 2026-27 Farm Inputs Subsidy Programme (Fisp).

Although these issues are different, they point to a common concern about proper planning, transparency and accountability in the use of public resources.

Reports indicate that Admarc planned to purchase 100 tarpaulins at a total cost of K2,966,980,045. This translates to approximately K29.67 million per tarpaulin.

On October 9, the Anti- Corruption Bureau (ACB) stopped the procurement process pending an audit.

The Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets Authority also raised questions about the cost and quality of the tarpaulins.

The obvious question is why one tarpaulin should cost almost K30 million.

There is nothing wrong with Admarc buying tarpaulins. The corporation needs them to protect maize and other agricultural produce from rain and damage.

However, the public deserves a convincing explanation of how the proposed price was reached.

Admarc should explain the size, quality and specifications of the tarpaulins, how the price was determined, how many companies competed for the contract and how the successful bidder was selected.

These details would help establish whether the proposed expenditure represents value for money.

The audit must determine whether the correct procurement procedures were followed and whether any wrongdoing occurred.

Admarc should be given an opportunity to explain its decisions, while the relevant authorities must be allowed to carry out their work without interference.

Meanwhile, farmers across Malawi are facing another challenge as they wait for fertiliser under the 2026-27 Fisp.

Reports indicate that the Smallholder Farmers Fertiliser Revolving Fund of Malawi had 62,000 metric tonnes of fertiliser in stock. These figures need independent verification.

The Parliamentary Committee on Agriculture could establish how much fertiliser is available and whether it is reaching the intended beneficiaries.

For farmers, however, the immediate concern is when and where they can access their allocated inputs.

Farming depends heavily on seasonal timing. Farmers must prepare their fields, obtain seed and fertiliser, and plant at the right time.

Delays in accessing fertiliser can affect crop growth and reduce yields, particularly among smallholder farmers with limited resources.

The high cost of fertiliser outside the subsidy programme makes the situation even more difficult.

Many farmers cannot afford to buy enough at market prices, making Fisp an important opportunity to improve their harvests.

But a subsidy programme is only useful when beneficiaries receive their inputs in good time. Distributing coupons is not enough if fertiliser is unavailable at designated selling points.

Farmers need clear information about delivery dates, distribution centres and what to do when their allocated inputs cannot be found.

If there are challenges, the authorities must explain them instead of leaving farmers uncertain about their next steps.

The two cases raise different but related questions. In the Admarc case, the public wants to know whether a proposed expenditure of nearly K3 billion represents good value for money.

Under Fisp, farmers want to know why they are still waiting for fertiliser despite reports of substantial stocks.

Both concerns demand clear answers.

Malawi has limited public resources and many competing needs. Every major expenditure must be justified, and every government programme must be properly planned and implemented.

Public accountability is not only about preventing the misuse of money. It is also about ensuring that resources serve the people they are intended to benefit.