Dowans: Another Richmond in making?

[Mwiba]

Kwa hiyo tunaweza sema ile misimamao yake ya awali ni kwasababu alikuwa hajajua system inavyofanya kazi.

Ndio maana yake halafu hawa Chadema inasemekana wamo kwenye system si umeona kila sehemu wanataka waachiwe wao kule Tarime waliachiwa mbeya ikawa zamu yao kuachia wakaweka ngumu ,ndio hivyo system inavyowachanganya halafu wamekuwa wagumu wanapoalikwa alikwa na wenzao wanatoa sababu hizi na zile ,WaTanzania tuwe nao macho na tuendelee kuwatazama tu huku tukiandika zambi zao siku ikiamuliwa kutolewa nje basi watajiona wapo uchi ,Chadema ni watu hatari sana they are with them just wamevaa ngozi ya kondoo wasufu.

 

[Ndivyo Ilivyo]

ima tujifunze kujenga taifa ambalo linafanya mambo yake kwa mipango kamilifu na sio kuamua kwa misingi ya dharura ile hali Taifa haliko vitani.

Na ikibidi tukae gizani. Jee una lugha ya kuwaridhisha wadau wa Taifa hili kwa nini wake gizani au wapanguse vumbi vibatari vyao?

 

[Kamundu]

Lazima tukubaliane hapa kwamba Watanzania kwa wakati mwingine tunajiweka chini.
1.Je kama Gire asingekuwa na asili ya Kitanzania na kampuni ya richmond ingekuwa ya Mzungu wa marekani je Watanzania tunge isema Richmond hivi?
2. Je hakuna kampuni nyingine kama richmond ambazo hatujazigundua kwasababu wahusika si waasili ambao tunawafahamu?

 

[jmushi1]

Maamuzi ya kamati hizo huwa ni lazima yawashirikishe watendaji,sasa kama TANESCO wakisema wanaitaka mitombo hiyo mtabisha tu? Ama kina Zitto watabisha tu? Hadi lini na wakati mipini wanayo kina Rostam? Hawa watu wanafanya kazi ngumu jamani...Mmeshaona Rostama anaguswa? Nie mnamlalamikia Zitto kukubali...DOWANS ni nani? Mkitumia nguvu zenu kupambana na ccm badala ya kuwaponda wapinzani mtakuwa mnafanya la maana. Zitto yeye binafsi peke yake hawezi kufanya kila kitu na maneno maneno tu yasiyo na vitendo hayasaidii zaidi zaidi wenzenu watakumbwa na matatizo na nyie mtabaki na politics na RIP'S...Na wauliza nyie Rostam na Zitto nani mwenye nguvu?

 

[Dark City]

Ndio maana yake halafu hawa Chadema inasemekana wamo kwenye system si umeona kila sehemu wanataka waachiwe wao kule Tarime waliachiwa mbeya ikawa zamu yao kuachia wakaweka ngumu ,ndio hivyo system inavyowachanganya halafu wamekuwa wagumu wanapoalikwa alikwa na wenzao wanatoa sababu hizi na zile ,WaTanzania tuwe nao macho na tuendelee kuwatazama tu huku tukiandika zambi zao siku ikiamuliwa kutolewa nje basi watajiona wapo uchi ,Chadema ni watu hatari sana they are with them just wamevaa ngozi ya kondoo wasufu.

Mkuu Mwiba, naona unaanza kupotosha mjadala kwa kuingiza habari za CHADEMA na uaminifu wao. Unaweza kuanzisha thread nyingine ili hii indelee kutafuta majibu kutoka kwa Zitto kuhusu hili suala la DOWANS.

 

[Kiranja]

Kamati hii ya Zitto kwa mujibu wa kanuni za Bunge toleo la 2007 ina majukumu yafuatayo,

1.kushughulikia taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika ya umma .

2.kushughulikia maeneo yenye matatizo sugu ya matumizi mabaya ya fedha za Mashirika ya Umma yaliyoainishwa katika taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika hayo na kutoa mapendekezo na ushauri wa namna ya kuyaondoa matatizo hayo.
3.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa mapendekezo yaliyokwishatolewa na kamati hiyo ili kuondoa matatizo hayo.

4.kutathimini ufanisi wa mashirika ya umma .

5.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa sera ya ubinafsishaji wa mashirika ya umma .

Nakumbushia tena kazi za Kamati ya Zitto kwa mujibu wa kanuni za kudumu za Bunge toleo la mwaka 2007 chini ya kanuni ya 114 na 115, kifungu 13.

 

[Dr. Willibrod Slaa]

Kwa muda sasa wa zaidi ya majuma mawili kumetokea maneno mengi sana ambayo Kamati mbili za Kudumu za Bunge zimekuwa zikisema kuhusiana na ununuzi wa mitambo chakavu ya Dowans , ambayo ni masalia ya Richmond.

Kamati ya Nishati na madini inayoongozwa na Mh. Shelukindo ambaye ni miongoni mwa wabunge wakongwe na wasiokuwa na madoa ya ufisadi yanayoonekana wazi wakipinga TANESCO kununua mitambo hiyo chakavu kwani ni kinyume na sheria za manunuzi ya umma .

Na sababu ya pili wakitoa kuwa mitambo hiyo bei yake imeongezwa maradufu na wamiliki wa Dowans yaani price imekuwa infleted.

Kamati hii ambayo ndio yenye wajibu wa kusimamia masuala ya kisera kuhusiana na mambo ya Nishati na madini , ikiwa na msimamo huo ambao kwangu nauona kuwa ni sdahihi na unalinda masilahi ya Taifa letu ili kutokuendelea kuangamizwa na wezi hawa ambao tunakumbuka jinsi walivyoliingiza Taifa kwenye matatizo makubwa na hata kufikia mahali Taifa letu likakaa siku nne bila kuwepo kwa Serikali.

Kamati nyingine ya Hesabu za Mashirika ya Umma inayoongozwa na mbunge kijana wa Kigoma Kasikazini Zitto imejitokeza na kuwa kama wasemaji wa Dowans na kuitaka serikali inunue mitambo hiyo chakavu na kwa bei ambayo inasemekana kuwa imeongezwa makusudi na wamiliki wa Dowans .

Kamati hii ya Zitto kwa mujibu wa kanuni za Bunge toleo la 2007 ina majukumu yafuatayo,

1.kushughulikia taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika ya umma .

2.kushughulikia maeneo yenye matatizo sugu ya matumizi mabaya ya fedha za Mashirika ya Umma yaliyoainishwa katika taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika hayo na kutoa mapendekezo na ushauri wa namna ya kuyaondoa matatizo hayo.3.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa mapendekezo yaliyokwishatolewa na kamati hiyo ili kuondoa matatizo hayo.

4.kutathimini ufanisi wa mashirika ya umma .

5.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa sera ya ubinafsishaji wa mashirika ya umma .

Nimeona ninukuu vifungu vya kanuni za Bunge ili kuweka hoja yangu iweze kueleweka kwa wengi .

Wakati kamati ya Zitto ikitakiwa kushughulikia mashirika yenye matatizo sugu ya matumizi mabaya ya fedha kama lilivyo shirika letu la Tanesco na kutafutia ufumbuzi , Kamati hiyo sasa imegeuka na kusahau majukumu yake na kuanza kuwa wasemaji wa Dowans na sasa wanataka kuliingiza shirika hilo kwenye matumizi mabaya ya fedha za umma na hata kununua mitambo chakavu kwa bei iliyoongezwa.

Kamati hii ya Zitto imepewa nini?
Nini kinamsukuma Zitto hata kufikia mahali pa kusahau majukumu ya kamati yake ?
Je?kinachomsukuma ni sawa na kile walichofanya wakina Karamagi na Msabaha badala ya kuwa wasemaji wa serikali wakawa wasemaji wa Richmond?
Nini kinaendelea kwenye suala hili?
Zitto ana masilahi binafsi kwenye suala hili?
Je?ni kweli kuwa anasimamia masilahi ya Taifa kwenye hili hata kama ni kwa kununua mitambo chakavu?

Nimeuliza maswali haya ili kuweza kumrudisha mbunge huyu kijana kwenye mstari kwani ununuzi wa mitambo hii ni mkakati maalum wa kujipatia fedha za kampeni kwa wanamtandao hapo mwakani 2010.

Nitaweka mengine hapa hapo baadae.

Kiranja,
Asante kwa maswali yako mazuri sana. Nadhani hoja yako inakosa kwa misingi kadhaa:-
i) Hoja yako na maswali yamejikita katika Kifungu cha 2 cha Majukumu ya Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kwa mujibu wa Kanuni ya Bunge ambayo umeinukuu. Kwa bahati mbaya hapa nilipo sina Kanuni hivyo ninategemea umeinukuu vizuri hadi ukatuwekea hapa. Lakini-
a) hukugusia kabisa majukumu ya Kanuni kama yalivyo kwenye kipengele cha 3, 4, na 5.Vipengele hivyo vyote vinatoa nafasi kwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kushughulikia utekelezaji wa Maelekezo ya Kamati ( ingelikuwa busara ungelianzia kwa utafati kama Kamati hiyo iliwahi wakati wowote ilipokuwa inapitia mahesabu imewahi kutoa Mapendekezo yeyote ili kuinusuru hali waliyoikuta wakati wa utekelezaji wa jukumu lao. Ni jukumu lao sasa kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa maagizo yao". Generalization ni hatari sana. Hivyo vyema, kama unazo taarifa kuhusu mapendekezo hayo ungelituwekea hapa ili tufahamu hisia inayoanza kujengeka. Ni vyema Tanzania tusiruhusu "hisia" katika mambo makubwa kama haya.
b)Kifungu cha 2 cha Kanuni uliyoinukuu hapo juu kinazungumzia "tathmini ufanisi". Ni mpaka utakaponiambia kuwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma haijafanya "tathmini" na au haina mamlaka ya kufanya tathmini ya ufanisi wa Tanesco, ndipo nitakapoona kuwa hoja yako ina msingi. Lakini iwapo Kamati katika taratibu zake za kawaida imefanya Tathmini ya shirika la Tanesco, basi ni vizuri "tathmini" hiyo ikafanyiwa mjadala kwa hoja zake bila kuunganishwa na chochote kinachohusiana na maswala ya Richmond/Dowans. Iwapo Kuna mambo ambayo Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma imeyagundua ambayo ni kwa maslahi ya Taifa, sidhani ni vyema kuyakataa kwa vile tu Kamati nyingine imekwisha kufanya uamuzi. Ndiyo msingi wa hoja ya Kamati mbili kukutana ili mambo mapya yaliyojitokeza yafanyiwe kazi. Mimi nafikiri this is where our system becomes healthy, and with checks and balances. Hatuwezi kuyakataa mambo ambayo Kamati imegundua kwa kuwa tu tumefanya uamuzi, hata katika system ya Mahakama, kuna flexibility katika mazingira fulani fulani. Kama nimesoma sahihi ni kuwa Kamati ya Nishati na Madini ilikuwa haijawahi kuisikiliza TANESCO kama TANESCO . Hatuwezi kuadhibu Taifa kutokana na Technicalities na grounds ambazo hazina tija kwa maoni yangu. Iwapo Kamati mbili zitakaa kwa manufaa ya Taifa, mimi ninaamini kabisa mawazo ya watu wengi yana tija zaidi daima.
c) Kanuni ya 5 uliyonukuu inazungumzia Kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa Sera..." hivyo sioni kabisa mantiki ya hoja yako kwani huwezi kufuatilia utekelezaji wa Sera bila pia kutazama maswala yanayohusu capacity ya Taasisi husika.
2)Kiranja, Wakati nakubaliana nawe kuwa ununuzi wa mitambo hii inaweza kuwa mbinu mmoja ya Wanamtandao kupata fedha za uchaguzi kwa 2010, lakini hoja hii bado ni dhaifu sana, kwani huwezi kuadhibu Taifa zima likakosa umeme kwa sababu za kisiasa. Kuna njia nyingi zaidi za kudhibiti wanamtandao kuliko hii. Hivyo, objective debate na kupata definitive solution kwa maswala ya athari ya ukosefu wa umeme yasichanganywe na maswala ambayo kwangu yanahitaji majibu na hatua za aina tofauti kabisa. Let us sit down and think, and think aloud for the good of our country and avoid simplistic answers to complicated issues as this one.
4) Hoja ya kuwa TANESCO ilizembea kuagiza mtambo unaostahili tangu azimio la Bunge, kwangu pia is non issue. Uzembe wa uongozi wa TANESCO uwe dealt with squarely, bila kuhusisha na maswala ya msingi.
5) What I dont like is having double standards in our country. Tumeruhusu Serikali ijadiliane na IPTL kununua mitambo ya IPTL ambayo imetusumbua kwa zaidi ya miaka 15 sasa, na ni chakavu zaidi kuliko mitambo ya Richmond /Dowans at least one kama ilivyoripotiwa kwenye vyombo vya Habari. I have no problem kama issue ni kufanya independent assesment ya Wataalamu, hata kama inamaanisha kuingia gharama ya kuwapata wataalamu hao, iwapo tu tutathibitishiwa kuwa mitambo hiyo ni cheaper kuliko ku import mitambo ya aina hiyo hiyo au mipya kabisa. Wakati huo huo tunakataa kununua mitambo ya Richomond/ Dowans.
6) Maswala ya kijinai ya Richmond/Dowans yashughulikiwe kwa utaratibu wa Kawaida, na tunaweza kabisa kutenganisha maswala haya.
7) Swali la kwamba Serikali iliisha kulipa Richmond Dowans advance ya US$ 35 Million appears to me as a new revelation. But this is a separate issue and I think at this stage we need the Government to tell us the full story about its relations na watu hawa.Hata Bunge halikupewa Taarifa hii, and if this is true, this is very serious in my opinion. Hatujaambiwa pia kwanini Dowans hawajalipa hadi leo US $ 10 million ambazo wanatakiwa kutulipa kwa kila siku waliyochelewesha kuingiza umeme kwenye National Grid. Let us discuss the matter soberly na tutafikia ukweli na solution kuliko kujenga hisia.

 

[Dr. Willibrod Slaa]

Kwa muda sasa wa zaidi ya majuma mawili kumetokea maneno mengi sana ambayo Kamati mbili za Kudumu za Bunge zimekuwa zikisema kuhusiana na ununuzi wa mitambo chakavu ya Dowans , ambayo ni masalia ya Richmond.

Kamati ya Nishati na madini inayoongozwa na Mh. Shelukindo ambaye ni miongoni mwa wabunge wakongwe na wasiokuwa na madoa ya ufisadi yanayoonekana wazi wakipinga TANESCO kununua mitambo hiyo chakavu kwani ni kinyume na sheria za manunuzi ya umma .

Na sababu ya pili wakitoa kuwa mitambo hiyo bei yake imeongezwa maradufu na wamiliki wa Dowans yaani price imekuwa infleted.

Kamati hii ambayo ndio yenye wajibu wa kusimamia masuala ya kisera kuhusiana na mambo ya Nishati na madini , ikiwa na msimamo huo ambao kwangu nauona kuwa ni sdahihi na unalinda masilahi ya Taifa letu ili kutokuendelea kuangamizwa na wezi hawa ambao tunakumbuka jinsi walivyoliingiza Taifa kwenye matatizo makubwa na hata kufikia mahali Taifa letu likakaa siku nne bila kuwepo kwa Serikali.

Kamati nyingine ya Hesabu za Mashirika ya Umma inayoongozwa na mbunge kijana wa Kigoma Kasikazini Zitto imejitokeza na kuwa kama wasemaji wa Dowans na kuitaka serikali inunue mitambo hiyo chakavu na kwa bei ambayo inasemekana kuwa imeongezwa makusudi na wamiliki wa Dowans .

Kamati hii ya Zitto kwa mujibu wa kanuni za Bunge toleo la 2007 ina majukumu yafuatayo,

1.kushughulikia taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika ya umma .

2.kushughulikia maeneo yenye matatizo sugu ya matumizi mabaya ya fedha za Mashirika ya Umma yaliyoainishwa katika taarifa za kila mwaka za hesabu zilizokaguliwa za mashirika hayo na kutoa mapendekezo na ushauri wa namna ya kuyaondoa matatizo hayo.3.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa mapendekezo yaliyokwishatolewa na kamati hiyo ili kuondoa matatizo hayo.

4.kutathimini ufanisi wa mashirika ya umma .

5.kufuatilia utekelezaji wa sera ya ubinafsishaji wa mashirika ya umma .

Nimeona ninukuu vifungu vya kanuni za Bunge ili kuweka hoja yangu iweze kueleweka kwa wengi .

Wakati kamati ya Zitto ikitakiwa kushughulikia mashirika yenye matatizo sugu ya matumizi mabaya ya fedha kama lilivyo shirika letu la Tanesco na kutafutia ufumbuzi , Kamati hiyo sasa imegeuka na kusahau majukumu yake na kuanza kuwa wasemaji wa Dowans na sasa wanataka kuliingiza shirika hilo kwenye matumizi mabaya ya fedha za umma na hata kununua mitambo chakavu kwa bei iliyoongezwa.

Kamati hii ya Zitto imepewa nini?
Nini kinamsukuma Zitto hata kufikia mahali pa kusahau majukumu ya kamati yake ?
Je?kinachomsukuma ni sawa na kile walichofanya wakina Karamagi na Msabaha badala ya kuwa wasemaji wa serikali wakawa wasemaji wa Richmond?
Nini kinaendelea kwenye suala hili?
Zitto ana masilahi binafsi kwenye suala hili?
Je?ni kweli kuwa anasimamia masilahi ya Taifa kwenye hili hata kama ni kwa kununua mitambo chakavu?

Nimeuliza maswali haya ili kuweza kumrudisha mbunge huyu kijana kwenye mstari kwani ununuzi wa mitambo hii ni mkakati maalum wa kujipatia fedha za kampeni kwa wanamtandao hapo mwakani 2010.

Nitaweka mengine hapa hapo baadae.

Kiranja,
Asante kwa maswali yako mazuri sana. Nadhani hoja yako inakosa kwa misingi kadhaa:-
i) Hoja yako na maswali yamejikita katika Kifungu cha 2 cha Majukumu ya Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kwa mujibu wa Kanuni ya Bunge ambayo umeinukuu. Kwa bahati mbaya hapa nilipo sina Kanuni hivyo ninategemea umeinukuu vizuri hadi ukatuwekea hapa. Lakini-
a) hukugusia kabisa majukumu ya Kanuni kama yalivyo kwenye kipengele cha 3, 4, na 5.Vipengele hivyo vyote vinatoa nafasi kwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kushughulikia utekelezaji wa Maelekezo ya Kamati ( ingelikuwa busara ungelianzia kwa utafati kama Kamati hiyo iliwahi wakati wowote ilipokuwa inapitia mahesabu imewahi kutoa Mapendekezo yeyote ili kuinusuru hali waliyoikuta wakati wa utekelezaji wa jukumu lao. Ni jukumu lao sasa kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa maagizo yao". Generalization ni hatari sana. Hivyo vyema, kama unazo taarifa kuhusu mapendekezo hayo ungelituwekea hapa ili tufahamu hisia inayoanza kujengeka. Ni vyema Tanzania tusiruhusu "hisia" katika mambo makubwa kama haya.
b)Kifungu cha 2 cha Kanuni uliyoinukuu hapo juu kinazungumzia "tathmini ufanisi". Ni mpaka utakaponiambia kuwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma haijafanya "tathmini" na au haina mamlaka ya kufanya tathmini ya ufanisi wa Tanesco, ndipo nitakapoona kuwa hoja yako ina msingi. Lakini iwapo Kamati katika taratibu zake za kawaida imefanya Tathmini ya shirika la Tanesco, basi ni vizuri "tathmini" hiyo ikafanyiwa mjadala kwa hoja zake bila kuunganishwa na chochote kinachohusiana na maswala ya Richmond/Dowans. Iwapo Kuna mambo ambayo Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma imeyagundua ambayo ni kwa maslahi ya Taifa, sidhani ni vyema kuyakataa kwa vile tu Kamati nyingine imekwisha kufanya uamuzi. Ndiyo msingi wa hoja ya Kamati mbili kukutana ili mambo mapya yaliyojitokeza yafanyiwe kazi. Mimi nafikiri this is where our system becomes healthy, and with checks and balances. Hatuwezi kuyakataa mambo ambayo Kamati imegundua kwa kuwa tu tumefanya uamuzi, hata katika system ya Mahakama, kuna flexibility katika mazingira fulani fulani. Kama nimesoma sahihi ni kuwa Kamati ya Nishati na Madini ilikuwa haijawahi kuisikiliza TANESCO kama TANESCO . Hatuwezi kuadhibu Taifa kutokana na Technicalities na grounds ambazo hazina tija kwa maoni yangu. Iwapo Kamati mbili zitakaa kwa manufaa ya Taifa, mimi ninaamini kabisa mawazo ya watu wengi yana tija zaidi daima.
c) Kanuni ya 5 uliyonukuu inazungumzia Kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa Sera..." hivyo sioni kabisa mantiki ya hoja yako kwani huwezi kufuatilia utekelezaji wa Sera bila pia kutazama maswala yanayohusu capacity ya Taasisi husika.
2)Kiranja, Wakati nakubaliana nawe kuwa ununuzi wa mitambo hii inaweza kuwa mbinu mmoja ya Wanamtandao kupata fedha za uchaguzi kwa 2010, lakini hoja hii bado ni dhaifu sana, kwani huwezi kuadhibu Taifa zima likakosa umeme kwa sababu za kisiasa. Kuna njia nyingi zaidi za kudhibiti wanamtandao kuliko hii. Hivyo, objective debate na kupata definitive solution kwa maswala ya athari ya ukosefu wa umeme yasichanganywe na maswala ambayo kwangu yanahitaji majibu na hatua za aina tofauti kabisa. Let us sit down and think, and think aloud for the good of our country and avoid simplistic answers to complicated issues as this one.
4) Hoja ya kuwa TANESCO ilizembea kuagiza mtambo unaostahili tangu azimio la Bunge, kwangu pia is non issue. Uzembe wa uongozi wa TANESCO uwe dealt with squarely, bila kuhusisha na maswala ya msingi.
5) What I dont like is having double standards in our country. Tumeruhusu Serikali ijadiliane na IPTL kununua mitambo ya IPTL ambayo imetusumbua kwa zaidi ya miaka 15 sasa, na ni chakavu zaidi kuliko mitambo ya Richmond /Dowans at least one kama ilivyoripotiwa kwenye vyombo vya Habari. I have no problem kama issue ni kufanya independent assesment ya Wataalamu, hata kama inamaanisha kuingia gharama ya kuwapata wataalamu hao, iwapo tu tutathibitishiwa kuwa mitambo hiyo ni cheaper kuliko ku import mitambo ya aina hiyo hiyo au mipya kabisa. Wakati huo huo tunakataa kununua mitambo ya Richomond/ Dowans.
6) Maswala ya kijinai ya Richmond/Dowans yashughulikiwe kwa utaratibu wa Kawaida, na tunaweza kabisa kutenganisha maswala haya.
7) Swali la kwamba Serikali iliisha kulipa Richmond Dowans advance ya US$ 35 Million appears to me as a new revelation. But this is a separate issue and I think at this stage we need the Government to tell us the full story about its relations na watu hawa.Hata Bunge halikupewa Taarifa hii, and if this is true, this is very serious in my opinion. Hatujaambiwa pia kwanini Dowans hawajalipa hadi leo US $ 10 million ambazo wanatakiwa kutulipa kwa kila siku waliyochelewesha kuingiza umeme kwenye National Grid. Let us discuss the matter soberly na tutafikia ukweli na solution kuliko kujenga hisia.

 

[omarilyas]

Hapo naanza kuogopa! Hivi maamuzi magumu ni kununua vyuma chakavu (scrapers)? Ingekuwa pesa yako ya mfukoni ungenunua scraper badala ya gari na wakati huo ukiwa na uwezo wa kwenda kuchukua brand new pale Toyota Motors? Shida kubwa kwa watanzania ni kuiona pesa ya serikali kama mtoto wa kambo!

Hapo juu.... kama Mwakyembe ni fisadi RA nani? Malaika Gabriel au Mjukuu wa Mtume Mohamad?

First, mitambo yaweza na ni kweli haikuwa mipya but suala la uchakavu linahitaji uchunguzi na mjadala zaidi. Naamini Zitto asingefikia uamuzi wa hata kulizungumzia hili kama taarifa zake zinamthibitishia kuwa ni MITAMBO CHAKAVU.


Sijawahi kusema kuwa Mwakyembe ni FISADI kwani hadi sasa naamini kuwa hayupo katika kundi la MAFISADI. Lakini umamluki wa kisiasa kulinda uhalali wa MFUMO FISADI hilo nalisimamia kwa nguvu zote.....

Vilevile tukumbuke taarifa ile ya kina Mwakyembe ilikuwa na vimbwanga vingi na zaidi iligubikwa na utashi wa siasa za kimakundi. Ni wazi ilitufanyia mazuri watanzania kwa kutudungulia VINARA wa UFISADI WA ARI MPYA na kufungua mlango kwa VIGOGO wa UFISADI WA ENZI ZA MKAPA kuanza kuonja joto ya jiwe lakini inapokuja katika suala la utaalamu hapo inabidi tuwe makini katika kuchukulia RIPOTI ile kama maneno ya mungu yasiyo na makosa.

Hata hivyo ningependa kusema kuwa msimamo wangu ni kuona kama serikali inaweza kutumia nguvu za kisheria kutaifisha mitambo hiyo kwa kigezo cha madeni na mapungufu mengineyo ya kimkataba ambayo RICHMOND/DOWANS/ROSTAM wameyafanya.....

omarilyas

 

[Kwame Nkrumah]

Mimi naona wengi hatuna vielelezo kamili katika suala zima. Je mitambo mipya ni bei gani, na hii "chakavu" ni bei gani? mitambo hii inaweza kufanya kazi kwa muda gani ? Serikali itapunguza kiasi gani kwa kununua mitambo hii ya Dowans ? Je ni sawa kununua mitambo mipya wakati huu serikali inajiandaa zaidi kutumia gesi yetu, makaa ya mawe na wind power kule Singida? Ni kweli mitambo hii ipo inflated ? ni kweli Mamvi yupo katika kulazimisha serikali kununua mitambo hii? Je ni kweli licha ya wananchi kuamka serikali bado inataka kufanya KAGODA nyingine kupitia manunuzi haya ?
Sasa kwa sababu sina facts, na mh. Zitto hana kashfa yoyote ya ufisadi , basi ninamuunga mkono !!!

 

[Dark City]

Kiranja,
Asante kwa maswali yako mazuri sana. Nadhani hoja yako inakosa kwa misingi kadhaa:-
i) Hoja yako na maswali yamejikita katika Kifungu cha 2 cha Majukumu ya Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kwa mujibu wa Kanuni ya Bunge ambayo umeinukuu. Kwa bahati mbaya hapa nilipo sina Kanuni hivyo ninategemea umeinukuu vizuri hadi ukatuwekea hapa. Lakini-
a) hukugusia kabisa majukumu ya Kanuni kama yalivyo kwenye kipengele cha 3, 4, na 5.Vipengele hivyo vyote vinatoa nafasi kwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma kushughulikia utekelezaji wa Maelekezo ya Kamati ( ingelikuwa busara ungelianzia kwa utafati kama Kamati hiyo iliwahi wakati wowote ilipokuwa inapitia mahesabu imewahi kutoa Mapendekezo yeyote ili kuinusuru hali waliyoikuta wakati wa utekelezaji wa jukumu lao. Ni jukumu lao sasa kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa maagizo yao". Generalization ni hatari sana. Hivyo vyema, kama unazo taarifa kuhusu mapendekezo hayo ungelituwekea hapa ili tufahamu hisia inayoanza kujengeka. Ni vyema Tanzania tusiruhusu "hisia" katika mambo makubwa kama haya.
b)Kifungu cha 2 cha Kanuni uliyoinukuu hapo juu kinazungumzia "tathmini ufanisi". Ni mpaka utakaponiambia kuwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma haijafanya "tathmini" na au haina mamlaka ya kufanya tathmini ya ufanisi wa Tanesco, ndipo nitakapoona kuwa hoja yako ina msingi. Lakini iwapo Kamati katika taratibu zake za kawaida imefanya Tathmini ya shirika la Tanesco, basi ni vizuri "tathmini" hiyo ikafanyiwa mjadala kwa hoja zake bila kuunganishwa na chochote kinachohusiana na maswala ya Richmond/Dowans. Iwapo Kuna mambo ambayo Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma imeyagundua ambayo ni kwa maslahi ya Taifa, sidhani ni vyema kuyakataa kwa vile tu Kamati nyingine imekwisha kufanya uamuzi. Ndiyo msingi wa hoja ya Kamati mbili kukutana ili mambo mapya yaliyojitokeza yafanyiwe kazi. Mimi nafikiri this is where our system becomes healthy, and with checks and balances. Hatuwezi kuyakataa mambo ambayo Kamati imegundua kwa kuwa tu tumefanya uamuzi, hata katika system ya Mahakama, kuna flexibility katika mazingira fulani fulani. Kama nimesoma sahihi ni kuwa Kamati ya Nishati na Madini ilikuwa haijawahi kuisikiliza TANESCO kama TANESCO . Hatuwezi kuadhibu Taifa kutokana na Technicalities na grounds ambazo hazina tija kwa maoni yangu. Iwapo Kamati mbili zitakaa kwa manufaa ya Taifa, mimi ninaamini kabisa mawazo ya watu wengi yana tija zaidi daima.
c) Kanuni ya 5 uliyonukuu inazungumzia Kufuatilia "utekelezaji wa Sera..." hivyo sioni kabisa mantiki ya hoja yako kwani huwezi kufuatilia utekelezaji wa Sera bila pia kutazama maswala yanayohusu capacity ya Taasisi husika.
2)Kiranja, Wakati nakubaliana nawe kuwa ununuzi wa mitambo hii inaweza kuwa mbinu mmoja ya Wanamtandao kupata fedha za uchaguzi kwa 2010, lakini hoja hii bado ni dhaifu sana, kwani huwezi kuadhibu Taifa zima likakosa umeme kwa sababu za kisiasa. Kuna njia nyingi zaidi za kudhibiti wanamtandao kuliko hii. Hivyo, objective debate na kupata definitive solution kwa maswala ya athari ya ukosefu wa umeme yasichanganywe na maswala ambayo kwangu yanahitaji majibu na hatua za aina tofauti kabisa. Let us sit down and think, and think aloud for the good of our country and avoid simplistic answers to complicated issues as this one.
4) Hoja ya kuwa TANESCO ilizembea kuagiza mtambo unaostahili tangu azimio la Bunge, kwangu pia is non issue. Uzembe wa uongozi wa TANESCO uwe dealt with squarely, bila kuhusisha na maswala ya msingi.
5) What I dont like is having double standards in our country. Tumeruhusu Serikali ijadiliane na IPTL kununua mitambo ya IPTL ambayo imetusumbua kwa zaidi ya miaka 15 sasa, na ni chakavu zaidi kuliko mitambo ya Richmond /Dowans at least one kama ilivyoripotiwa kwenye vyombo vya Habari. I have no problem kama issue ni kufanya independent assesment ya Wataalamu, hata kama inamaanisha kuingia gharama ya kuwapata wataalamu hao, iwapo tu tutathibitishiwa kuwa mitambo hiyo ni cheaper kuliko ku import mitambo ya aina hiyo hiyo au mipya kabisa. Wakati huo huo tunakataa kununua mitambo ya Richomond/ Dowans.
6) Maswala ya kijinai ya Richmond/Dowans yashughulikiwe kwa utaratibu wa Kawaida, na tunaweza kabisa kutenganisha maswala haya.
7) Swali la kwamba Serikali iliisha kulipa Richmond Dowans advance ya US$ 35 Million appears to me as a new revelation. But this is a separate issue and I think at this stage we need the Government to tell us the full story about its relations na watu hawa.Hata Bunge halikupewa Taarifa hii, and if this is true, this is very serious in my opinion. Hatujaambiwa pia kwanini Dowans hawajalipa hadi leo US $ 10 million ambazo wanatakiwa kutulipa kwa kila siku waliyochelewesha kuingiza umeme kwenye National Grid. Let us discuss the matter soberly na tutafikia ukweli na solution kuliko kujenga hisia.

Dr Slaa, please clear me with this confusion. Just give me one statement about this crazy drama (in my opinion). Is it fine for our government to buy these stuff (mitambo) from DOWANS? Hiyo tu itanitosha.

 

[Dark City]

Mimi naona wengi hatuna vielelezo kamili katika suala zima. Je mitambo mipya ni bei gani, na hii "chakavu" ni bei gani? mitambo hii inaweza kufanya kazi kwa muda gani ? Serikali itapunguza kiasi gani kwa kununua mitambo hii ya Dowans ? Je ni sawa kununua mitambo mipya wakati huu serikali inajiandaa zaidi kutumia gesi yetu, makaa ya mawe na wind power kule Singida? Ni kweli mitambo hii ipo inflated ? ni kweli Mamvi yupo katika kulazimisha serikali kununua mitambo hii? Je ni kweli licha ya wananchi kuamka serikali bado inataka kufanya KAGODA nyingine kupitia manunuzi haya ?
Sasa kwa sababu sina facts, na mh. Zitto hana kashfa yoyote ya ufisadi , basi ninamuunga mkono !!!

Lakini kama wamiliki wa hiyo mitambo tulishawaita wezi (mafisadi wakubwa tu) leo tunaanzia wapi kutengeneza dili nao? Kwanza ni akina nani (from genesis point of view i.e from Richmond to Dowans)??

 

[Shadow]

mzee mkataba wa Richmond upo hapa mahali fulani!!!

Mzee, Asante,

Ngoja niutafute huo mkataba humu barazani.

 

[mohammedzahor]

we need to be more polite and patient so that we get much more to learn from this , as this might be the show game politically.
but too my party comrades this is very good time to prove before the world that we are here for the people. we run the goverment elected by the people for the people.

 

[Kiranja]

Dr.Slaa, with due respect.

Hoja kuwa Serikali ilihalalisha kununuliwa kwa mitambo ya IPTL haiwezi kuhalalisha kununua mitambo mingine chakavu tena eti tuu kwa sababu kuna maamuzi yaliyofanywa ya kipuuzi hapo awali ya kununua mitambo ya IPTL.

Hoja kuwa tusiingize hisia, kwenye siasa ninyi wanasiasa huwa mnasema kuwa politics is about perceptions, sasa kwanini kwenye hili hutaki pawepo na hizo perceptions?

Katika kuutafuta ukweli huwa unaanza na kuangalia tatizo lilipo na wakati unaendelea ndio unaweza kuupata ukweli wote , ila huwezi ukaanza na ukweli wote wakati lengo ni kufikia majibu yenye usahihi , hivyo kukubaliana nami kuwa wanamtandao wanaweza wakawa na mbinu hii kwa ajili ya kwenda 2010 ....unaelekea kuupata ukweli so go on searching.

Nasisitiza kuwa hatuwezi kununua mitambo chakavu kwa Bilioni 60,halafu tunasema kuwa ni kwa masilahi ya Taifa.

Dowans , kama leo tunawatambua basi kesi ya Gire kama alivyosema Mwanakijiji basi ni bora ikafutwa kwani kama tumemshitaki kwa kuingiza taifa hasara halafu wakatiu huo huo tunanunua mitambo aliyoleta sasa ni hasara gani?

Hivi ni kazi ya wabunge kuionyesha serikali inatakiwa kununua mitambo kwa mtu fulani?

TANESCO kama wanataka Mitambo watangaze tender na watu watajitokeza na tutaweza kupata mitambo mipya kwa masilahi ya Taifa hili.

 

[S.M.P2503]

Kiranja!!

Nadhani Zito hajui pia kwamba Tanesco wanaweza ku-claim Title ya mitambi hiyo for free kama tukiangalia Jus cogens au general principles of laws under
Fraud, Misrepresentation, Good Faith, and Fair Dealing....

Hizi zinasemaje basi!!

Kiranja Kwanza kabisa Naomba wewe na wengineo mtakao soma hili mniwie radhi kwa kuandika Kiswa-glish katika kuchangia kwangu ili Mradi niweze kusema bila kupoteza maana ya maneno ya sheria au kwa nia ya mpate picha ya nini kifanyike kuhusu Tanesco kununua au kutoinunua mitambo hiyo ya Richmond na sio Dowans kama Dowans wanavyosema kwamba mitambo hiyo ni yao maana wao eti ndo walilithishwa na Richmonds.

Nafikiri inafikirika kwamba na pia ijulikane au inajulikana pia kwamba Dowans walijua au wali-ought kujua kwamba Richmond moja haikuwa na uwezo wa kuzalisha umeme wakati wa kuomba tenda na hii pekee ni Fraud by representation ya Richmond ambayo Richmond can be prosecuted by itself .

Hivyo kisheria sioni kama Dowans ni legal owner wa Richmond maana kulikuwa na fraudulent misrepresentation of facts tangu mwanzo au ab nitio kwa lugha za wenyewe.

Kwa kuwa most of Tanzanian Law is codified meaning taken or adopted from various legal entities/system including UK, then the English common law which is also part of Tanzanian legal system through codification and through Privy Council decisions then the implications for enforceability of restrictive covenants (Fraudulent activitiest) or contract arising from the Privy Council decision as in the case of Half Moon Bay Limited and Crown Eagle Hotels Limited is as follows. First of all why why restrictive contract? Means the onus of proof for non performances remain with the one who wishes to rely on them. This is Tanesco who has this onus of proof in showing fraudulent activities of Richmond-the primary assignee of the contract between the two.

The above underlined case has implications not only for restrictive covenants E.g. fraudelent contact or misrepresentation of fact and for any other encumbrances which maybe affected by the root of registered title say Dowans kwa mfano. Kwa maneno mafupi hii yahusu mkataba wa kubadilishana ownership kati ya Richmond na Dowans ambapo inavyoonekana Dowans wanataka ku-enforce kitu ambacho walikipata defectively.

Richomd (a sham company) walikuwa ni shady company na kwa hiyo defects in the chain of events on a root of title(to own or disown Richmond by Dowans) could result in a person/ Company say TANESCO for example having a title which looks perfect on the face of it but is defective because of some irregularity in a previous transaction such as fraud or improper payment of stamp and transfer tax. Hata malipo ya kati ya Richmond and Tanesco nasikia hayakufanywa ipasavyo i.e tendering process. Hii tendering process pia ilikuwa fraudulently and misrepresentation in nature maana Richmond alidanganya kuhusu uwezo wake wa ku-produce umeme.

If Tanesco had a contract with Richmond and suffered loss due to Richmond’s breaching or violating a contract, Tanesco will have a lawsuit based on contract law against the Richmond. I say if because the contract between Dowans and Richmond seems to me to be non existed if carefully examined under fraudulently acquiring of properties including money and title from Tanesco . However, if Dowans suffers a loss after entering into a business relationship on the basis of the other party's false statements, they may have a lawsuit based on personal injury law (tort law) for fraudulent misrepresentation. Also, if they suffered a loss due to Richmond’s violation of the implied duties of good faith and fair dealing in a contract, they may have a lawsuit based on personal injury law for bad faith breach of contract.
It is the matter for Dowans to pursue Richmond themselves and if Richmond does not exist anymore then they the Dowans should accept loss which they can also claim from their business insurance if they have one and not from Tanesco.
For Fraudulent Misrepresentation, also called common-law fraud or deceit, this is done intentionally by the offending party (the defendant au Richmond kwa maneno mengine, there mere fact that they don’t exist is a nonsense because their directors who have directing mind of the then Richmond still exist). In order to prove fraudulent misrepresentation, Tanesco must show the following:
• The defendant (Richmond or Dowans) made a false representation or statement of fact that they were competent to produce, supply or sell electricity to Tanesco which they didn’t.
• The false representation was of a material or important fact
• The defendant either knew that the statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth
• The defendant intended the representation to reach you
• The defendant intended the representation to induce you to act upon it
• You acted in justifiable reliance on the misrepresentation
• You suffered losses as a result
Fraudulent misrepresentation requires the defendant to have made a representation about a fact that was untrue when made. The fact misrepresented must have been material, which means that a reasonable person would attach importance to that fact in determining a future course of conduct.
Tanesco or the government through DPP must also prove that the defendant made the misrepresentation knowingly or recklessly. The knowledge requirement may be satisfied if the person making the representation ought to have known of its falsity, even if he or she did not actually know.
Tanesco’s reliance on a defendant's (Richmond’s) material misrepresentation must have been a substantial factor in determining the course of conduct that resulted in financial loss of Tanesco. Moreover, it is not sufficient for Tanesco to show mere reliance; the reliance must have been reasonable to be considered justified.
Also, Tanesco must have suffered a financial loss while acting in reliance on the defendant's misrepresentation.
Kwa njia nyingine , Tanesco pia wanaweza ku-apply Tortious Breach of Contract by either Richmond or Dowans.
Generally speaking, a breach of contract cannot constitute a tort or personal injury; personal injuries including financial loss of a company (but not pure financial loss which I will discuss next time here), a "tortious breach of contract" it is a tort or personal injury by a company which is treated as a personal with a legal entity or capacity . Since the law implies into every contract obligations of good faith and fair dealing, breaches of these obligations may amount to a tort under certain circumstances. This is true when the contract includes certain financially dependent relationships or when one party is in a superior bargaining position and is able to impose unfair contracts on the other party, such as in the case of a contract of insurance.
In fact, most lawsuits for tortuous breach of contract involve insurance contracts. However, they can involve other contracts as well. In order to prove a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Tanesco, as the plaintiff, must show that the Richmond and subsequently Dowans acted in bad faith.
The tort of bad faith breach of contract requires that:
• A contract existed between the parties (usually an insurance contract to produce power/ electricity)
• The defendant breached the contract
• The defendant breached the contract through an intentional act (such as the refusal to perform his obligations)
• The defendant did not have a debatable reason for the refusal
• The defendant had actual knowledge of the absence of a debatable reason for refusing and
• The defendant was recklessly negligent in failing to determine whether or not there existed a debatable reason for the refusal

Whatever angle you look at it, Tanesco could claim title to Dowans Mitambos, sasa sijui hicho kigugumizi wanakitoa wapi mpaka akina Zito ambao fani yao si sheria waingilie kati na kusema Giza tununue mitambo.. Kauli kama hizo zinaonesha mawazo mgando ya kusema kitu Zito asicho kijua ili Mradi tu apate sifa…
If One company bought a piece of equipment for their business because the seller assured them that it was the most technologically advanced equipment available in the market and then they found out a more advanced piece of equipment, then they (seller –Richmond ) can be sued for fraudulent misrepresentation. This is what Tanesco can also do!!!!!!! Ushauri wa Bure jamani au mpaka Mungu awamwagie magunia ya chawa au kunguni wajikune mpaka Ukurutu ndio Waamuke .

Sasa tuangalie aina za Fraud under English law which is codified in Tanzania.

Fraud by misrepresentation, fraud by failing to disclose information and fraud by abuse of position…


Under section 1 of Misrepresentations Act 1967, a person is guilty of fraud if they are in breach of any offences in sections 2,3,4.

Under Section 2 representation must be made dishonestly which is established under the two-stage test as set out in R v Gosh (1982) QB 1053, 75 Cr App R 154 in which the defendant was dishonest by the standards of ordinary people

Subsection (1) (b) requires that the representation is made with the intention of making a gain for himself or causing a loss or risk of loss to another. Loss and gain are defined in section 5 as being money or property

This section is very wide ranging & could criminalise a lie. e.g; if the defendant suggested facts or reasons that were not true in obtaining the contract to perform certain obligations like Dowans knows or is ought to know activities of Richmond then that could be an offence as the victim (Tanesco, Tanzanians or The government itself) would have suffered a loss or gain based on the lie of the defendant. Please note there is no need to show that the victim was even aware of the lie for there to have been a crime committed. The victimless crime

Fraud by failing to disclose information

Section 3 provides that where a person dishonestly fails to disclose to another information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, & intends to make a gain or cause a loss or the risk of a loss an offence has been committed.This is the matters for Dowans and Richmond, I don’t know why Tanesco or Kamati ya hesabu za serilali wants to get involved kununua mitambo…
Tanesco can legitimately claim Mitambo ya Richmonds Kwa maana Dowans has no legitimate titles ya hiyo mitambo toka dowans and Tanesco would therefore be entitled to be a legal owner of the Fraudulently obtained activities of Richmonds Dowans.

Fraud by abuse of position

Section 4 makes it an offence for a person who occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not act against the financial interest of another person, to abuse that position dishonestly and intend, by means of the abuse, to make gain or cause a loss or risk of a loss to another. This creates a very broad offence which may catch the any company including Dowans .

There is more…much more but I have (I think) chosen the highlights for discussion.

Tanesco Wasiinunue mitambo bali waseme kwamba ni yao na ngoma iende kwa Dowans ili wa-proove kwamba wana title katika mitambo hiyo… Kitu ambacho hawataweza kwa sababu Dowans itabidi wawasue Richmond ambao they are non existed na kama Richmonds waakiibuka Tanesco watasema wameichua mitambo hiyo kama variable compensation (Bonus) ya non performance ya contact which was void ab nitio kwa kuwa Richmond made misrepresentation of Facts under Jus cogens or general principles of laws accepted by everyone including ICC Paris…

 

[mohammedzahor]

could some one please send me zitto's email address as for sure we have to clarify something from him.

 

[Dr. Willibrod Slaa]

Dr Slaa, please clear me with this confusion. Just give me one statement about this crazy drama (in my opinion). Is it fine for our government to buy these stuff (mitambo) from DOWANS? Hiyo tu itanitosha.

Dark City,
Nisingelipenda kuingia kwenye mjadala ina a very simplistic way kama unavyoiweka. Ninachohofu mimi ni kuwa Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma imekaa na TANESCO na Kamati ya Nishati na Madini ilikaa na Waziri. There is definitely vital information that is missing. Mimi ninapenda tu exhaust arguments zote, ndiyo maana sitaki kuondoka na haja ya Kamati ya Nishati na Madini wala ya Mashirika ya Umma. Tukisikiliza hoja zote tutakuwa na argument yenye nguvu. Ninachopenda ni kuondoa jazba ya maswala ya Richomond/Dowans kutoka kwenye hoja ya msingi inayojadiliwa na Kamati ya Mashirika ya Umma. Any persona thinking logically atapenda kuona hiyo tofauti, na kutoa maamuzi yake on the basis of the strength of ensuing argument na siyo hisia. That is what I am saying.
Technically, kama Mkataba ni batili, my preference would be to find out why mkataba kati ya Serikai na Richmond siyo NULL AND VOID AB INITIO, in which case, badala ya kununua mitambo hiyo, the likely option, ni kwa Serikali kutaifisha mitambo hiyo badala ya kuinunua. This is where we want the Government to come forth and tell this Nation the truth. But this is a completely different argument. We must be able to separate the issues and argue them on the basis of their strength.

 

[Omr]

huyu rostam mbona anasumbua watanzania sana,yani serekali ina uhusiano gani na huyu jamaa kiasi kwamba anaogopwa hata kutajwa kua ni muhusika mkuu kwenye hizi skendo? Je hizi hela anazoiba wanagawana na JK au kuna nchi inamkingia kifua? Huyu lazima auwawe haraka sana lasivyo ataimaliza nchi, nadhani wengi tu wajua wapi anaishi,mi naona tuifanyie kazi serekali, tumchome moto kama vibaka wengine.

 

[jmushi1]

Lakini kama wamiliki wa hiyo mitambo tulishawaita wezi (mafisadi wakubwa tu) leo tunaanzia wapi kutengeneza dili nao? Kwanza ni akina nani (from genesis point of view i.e from Richmond to Dowans)??

Dark City hapo ndipo kwenye mgogoro. Najiuliza kwanini chadema na wao wanajiona kama wako responsible na maamuzi ya ccm? Ni lini chadema wakawa washauri wa chama tawala? Maybe thats the case na tulikuwa hatujui. Nadhani ndio maana halisi ya mambo kama wizara vivuli,kamati nk. Ni mfumo usio rasmi.
Hata hivyo mbali na uchumi kuyumba,wananchi kukaa gizani si ndio sababu nzuri za kuindoa ccm madarakani kwa kushindwa utekelezaji? Ama kuna muungano wa kisisiri kati ya vyama hivyo?
Naona once again ni "Maslahi ya Taifa"
Lets wait and see...