Views
5 years ago

Chapter Five 1999 Post-Elections Period - Leicester Research ...

Chapter Five 1999 Post-Elections Period - Leicester Research ...

123 Table 4.16: Failed

123 Table 4.16: Failed Government Frame‟s problem definitions and causal interpretations Prob. Definitions/Causal Interpret. Presenters Paragraphs Articles The MCP failed UDF 6 (35.3%) 6 The MCP did not care for the people‟s needs UDF/AFORD 5 (29.4%) 5 The MCP development agenda favoured one region UDF/AFORD 6 (35.3%) 6 Total 17 (100%) 17 The narrative made a simple declaration that the MCP government had failed to develop the country in all areas of life (See Table 4.16). Joseph Kubwalo (1994, p.190) of the UDF argued: “The people have been neglected for 30 years . . . People have suffered enough.” The AFORD MP Shawa (1994) noted: “. . . I have not seen any development all the time when the MCP government was in power.” The UDF MP Kamangadazi Chambalo (1994, p.155) declared: We have no accessible roads, no health centres, no sufficient food, no water supplies, no plots allocation to people, recreation centres are not there, no markets and many other facilities are lacking. In short, the MCP regime was viewed as lacking in any form of positive achievement that could have bettered the lives of the citizens. In contrast, the UDF committed itself to working for the betterment of the people. As will be noted by examining Table 4.18 below, the UDF‟s moral evaluations were simple extensions of the problem definitions in Table 4.16. In this respect it serves no purpose to explain them again. 4.4.2.2 MCP‟s Response to the Failed Government Frame By its very nature parliamentary debate permitted the MCP to offer counter-arguments to the UDF onslaught. The MCP MPs, supported by some of their AFORD colleagues

124 advanced the argument that the MCP government had notable successes in some aspects of national development, and had failed in some as governments all over the world are prone (See Table 4.17). In this respect, the MPs listed infrastructure developments that had taken place during the party‟s rule. The MCP MP, Kalolo (1994) argued: In this regard, I find it hard to believe that for all the 31 years that the MCP was in power, it did nothing in terms of development. This is what can be termed as terminological inexactitude. (Laughter) Because, Mr. First Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are many projects which the former government did and fulfilled to the envy of the donor community. The AFORD MP Melvin Moyo (1994) noted: . . . I would like to say the MCP had a share of its failures and successes. Therefore, our colleagues in the government must remember that they too will have a share of failures and successes (Interjection: Hear! Hear! Hear!). Table 4.17: Failed Government Frame moral evaluations Moral Evaluations Presenters Paragraphs Articles The MCP was selfish and cared to develop one region UDF/AFORD 8 (61.5%) 8 The MCP had successes and failures AFORD/MCP 5 (38.5%) 5 Total 13 (100%) 13 Surprisingly, for a frame that dealt with failures of the previous regime in the past 31 years, there were no treatment recommendation paragraphs. National development has to do with the deployment of national resources. It is surprising that the UDF MPs failed to provide an explanation of how they would deploy these resources now that they were in power. It is even more surprising that the MCP/AFORD alliance did not

Chapter 4 Sexual Content in Soap Operas - Leicester Research ...
iieiiei1eWrkers - Leicester Research Archive - University of Leicester
t he display of archaeology - Leicester Research Archive - University ...
NOVEL RESVERATROL ANALOGUES - Leicester Research ...