Sir APM Lukwesa: Zambia Does Not Need More Ministries; It Needs Better Results

By Sir APM Lukwesa | The Zambian Unemployed Teacher and Social Commentator

As Zambia considers a proposed realignment of government ministries from 24 to 30, the real question is whether the changes will accelerate economic growth, create jobs and improve the lives of ordinary citizens.

The debate over expanding the number of ministries should not begin with the question of whether six additional portfolios are too many or too few. It should begin with a more important question: what national problems are these changes intended to solve, and how will citizens know whether they have been solved?

Zambia does not need a larger government simply for the sake of administrative expansion. It needs a more effective government—one that converts public resources into jobs, productive investment, reliable services and higher household incomes. The proposed increase from 24 to 30 ministries should therefore be judged not by the number of portfolios created, but by whether they deliver measurable results.

The stakes are high. Additional ministries could sharpen attention on industrialisation, energy, housing, fisheries, livestock and skills development. However, they could also increase recurrent expenditure, duplicate responsibilities, slow decision-making and divert scarce resources from classrooms, hospitals, roads, irrigation and job-creating investment.

That is why the proposed realignment must be treated as a development decision, not merely an administrative one.

The Case for Strategic Realignment

Some proposed changes deserve serious consideration. Separating trade from industry, giving electricity greater institutional attention, strengthening fisheries and livestock development, and creating a dedicated focus on housing could address important national priorities.

Zambia has the potential to move beyond exporting raw materials and produce finished and semi-finished goods. Copper, for example, could support cable manufacturing, electrical equipment and metal fabrication. However, industrialisation requires more than a ministry named Industry. It also requires reliable electricity, affordable financing, supportive tax policies, skilled workers, efficient transport and access to markets.

Similarly, stronger attention to fisheries and livestock could diversify agriculture, create rural employment and improve food security. A dedicated housing ministry could improve coordination around affordable housing, serviced land and urban development.

These objectives are worthwhile, but new ministries must have clear responsibilities, adequate technical capacity and measurable targets.

A ministry is an instrument of development, not development itself.

The Cost of Administrative Expansion

Expanding from 24 to 30 ministries could increase spending on offices, personnel, transport and administration. At a time when Zambia must manage public resources carefully, every additional cost requires clear justification.

Every kwacha spent on administration must be weighed against the needs of classrooms, hospitals, roads, irrigation, electricity and job-creating investment. Government should therefore publish a full cost-benefit analysis showing how the realignment will improve services, what it will cost and whether the expected benefits justify the expenditure.

It should also explain why existing institutions cannot perform the proposed functions. Without that explanation, restructuring risks producing a bigger state without producing better outcomes.

The public deserves to know not only what is changing, but also what those changes will achieve.

The Real Priority: A More Productive Economy

The central question is not how many ministries Zambia should have, but how the country can build a productive economy that creates sustainable employment and raises household incomes.

Zambia must strengthen agriculture, expand manufacturing, improve energy security, support local businesses and increase the value of its exports. In mining, this means developing local suppliers, strengthening mineral processing and encouraging manufacturing linked to the sector.

In agriculture, priorities should include irrigation, storage, agro-processing and reliable markets. In energy, the country needs a diversified and dependable electricity supply for households, farms, mines and factories.

These priorities require coordination across government. Whether responsibilities are separated or combined, the objective must be increased productivity and sustainable economic growth.

Education Must Lead to Employment

Separating skills and higher education from general education could give technical and vocational training greater attention. However, restructuring alone will not solve unemployment.

Educational institutions should work with employers to identify skills shortages and prepare young people for opportunities in engineering, electrical installation, agriculture, information technology, construction and manufacturing.

Government should also support apprenticeships and entrepreneurship. Education policy should be judged not only by enrolment, but by whether graduates gain relevant skills, secure employment or build sustainable enterprises.

This is another example of why institutional change must be connected to measurable national outcomes. A new portfolio has value only if it improves the quality and relevance of education and expands opportunities for young people.

Government Must Be Organised Around National Priorities

Zambia should organise public administration around a coordinated national development strategy. Finance, trade, industry, mining and small-business development should support economic transformation. Energy and infrastructure should enable industrialisation, agriculture should connect to agro-processing and export markets, and education should respond to labour-market demand.

Specialisation is justified where it removes bottlenecks and improves performance. Integration is preferable where coordination produces better results.

Before creating a ministry, government should identify the problem it will solve, define its relationship with existing institutions and state how performance will be measured. This would make restructuring a tool for development rather than an end in itself.

Accountability Must Be Built Into the Structure

A major weakness in public administration is the gap between policy announcements and results. Every ministry should have a clear mandate, an approved budget and measurable annual targets.

Economic ministries should report on investment attracted, jobs created, exports expanded and local production increased. Social-service ministries should report on access, quality and efficiency. Quarterly performance reports should be publicly available, while Parliament and independent oversight bodies should scrutinise spending and implementation.

Overlapping responsibilities must be eliminated, and transferred functions must not disrupt essential services. The public service should reward competence, professionalism and results rather than administrative expansion.

This accountability framework should not be added after ministries are created. It should be a condition for creating them in the first place.

A Practical Framework for Testing Reform

Before expanding ministries, government should publish a full cost-benefit analysis, disclose staffing and operating costs, define each ministry’s mandate and explain why existing institutions are insufficient.

Each ministry should then sign a public performance compact containing specific annual targets for service delivery, jobs, investment, productivity and budget execution. These targets should be supported by quarterly public reports, open procurement and spending data, independent audits and regular scrutiny by Parliament and relevant oversight bodies.

Ministers and senior officials should be held accountable for missed targets, unexplained expenditure and duplicated responsibilities. Successful performance should be recognised through transparent, merit-based evaluation.

After two or three years, an independent review should determine whether each ministry has delivered measurable value. Institutions that fail to justify their cost should be merged, restructured or closed.

Such a framework would ensure that realignment is not treated as a permanent entitlement. It would make every ministry answerable for the resources it receives and the results it produces.

The People Must See the Difference

The success of any realignment must ultimately be judged by its impact on citizens.

Will farmers find better markets? Will young people gain productive employment? Will manufacturers receive reliable electricity? Will families access affordable housing? Will public funds produce better schools, hospitals and roads?

A government structure should make it easier to solve national problems, not create additional layers between citizens and services.

Zambia has the human resources, natural resources and economic potential to achieve more. Realising that potential requires competent leadership, disciplined spending, sound policies and institutions that work together towards clear objectives.

Conclusion: Results Matter More Than Numbers

If additional ministries create genuine specialisation, remove bottlenecks and accelerate development, they may be justified. If they increase recurrent expenditure, duplicate responsibilities and complicate decision-making, the arrangement should be reconsidered.

Government must not ask citizens to accept a larger state on the basis of promises alone. It must show, in advance and through verifiable evidence, what each new ministry will cost, what it will deliver and who will be answerable when it fails.

Parliament, civil society, the media and citizens should insist on this information before expansion is approved. The immediate call to action is clear: pause administrative expansion until transparency, measurable performance targets and enforceable accountability mechanisms are in place.

Zambia needs a government that creates jobs, adds value to local resources, supports rural prosperity, equips young people for productive work and accounts for every kwacha entrusted to it.

The ultimate measure of good governance is not the size of government, but the quality of life it delivers to its people.

Sir APM Lukwesa is a Zambian unemployed teacher, digital creator and social commentator known as “The Social Teacher”. He writes on governance, personal development, leadership and national affairs.