Upon ascending to power, President Mutharika has recently issued an executive order that some public institutions should be relocated from Lilongwe back to Blantyre thereby reversing former president Chakwera’s decree. This serves as a reminder that the more things change, they more they become the same.
The Malawi Electoral Commission is among the impacted public organizations. Its staff, who moved from Blantyre to Lilongwe five years ago, are now required to return to Blantyre.
However, pertinent questions arise, who really benefits from this tug of war? What are the recuperations of relocating government offices?
For starters, centrally locating public institutions can reduce travel times for employees, stakeholders, and the public, making it easier for people from different regions to access the institution.
For example, during elections, it is quicker to transport elections results from Chitipa to the Malawi Electoral Commission in Lilongwe than if it were located in Blantyre.
It is argued that a central location can facilitate better collaboration among various public institutions, agencies, and organizations, fostering partnerships and joint initiatives.
Being centrally located can make it easier for citizens to engage with public institutions, attend meetings, and participate in decision-making processes.
Relocating major government institutions to Lilongwe has a potential to promote a more inclusive environment that reflects the diverse cultures and communities of the entire country, enhancing the institution’s relevance and responsiveness.
However, relocating public institutions from one district to another has several negative implications too.
In the first place, the relocation process can disrupt ongoing operations, leading to temporary inefficiencies and a loss of productivity as staff adjust to new environments and processes.
Additionally, employees may face difficulties in relocating, including the need to sell homes, find new housing, and adjust to a new community, which can lead to dissatisfaction and turnover.
Moreover, the costs associated with moving, including logistics, new office space, and potential severance for employees who do not relocate, can be significant and strain budgets.
For instance, when the ex-president ordered the relocation of certain offices from Blantyre to Lilongwe, it was revealed that their own buildings in Blantyre were left vacant while they moved into rented buildings in Lilongwe. This proved to be a costly decision.
Furthermore, stakeholders, including local communities, businesses, and service providers in the original location, may be negatively affected, leading to potential backlash and loss of support.
Moving to a new location can result in a cultural shift within the organization, which may not align with the values and practices of the original headquarters, leading to internal conflict.
In conclusion, although moving public institutions was a key pledge of APM’s campaign, it is wise to carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages of such a relocation.
The post A tug of war between APM, Chakwera regime on relocation of public institutions: Who really benefits? appeared first on The Maravi Post.