A senator has warned that Zimbabwe’s proposed Climate Change Bill could increase the cost of living unless the government puts safeguards in place to protect low-income and rural households from the effects of a proposed Climate Levy and carbon pricing system.
Contributing to the second reading of the Bill in the Senate, Matabeleland South Senator Solani Moyo said measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions should not place a disproportionate burden on vulnerable communities.
The Climate Change Bill seeks to establish a legal framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, promoting low-carbon development and strengthening the country’s resilience to climate change.
Gazetted in 2025, the Bill sets a target of reducing per capita carbon emissions by 40% by 2030, in line with Zimbabwe’s commitments under the Paris Agreement.
On this topic
Moyo said the proposed Climate Levy, which would apply to polluting activities, could have far-reaching economic consequences.
“The Bill creates a new fee called the Climate Levy. It is like a tax on people or companies that pollute. If coal or fuel costs more, our power bill will rise. If fuel is taxed for carbon, bus travel will rise and food will cost more. Farmers who use fertiliser or diesel may pay more too,” he said.
He urged the government to clearly define how the levy would operate and ensure poorer households were protected.
“We must protect the poor and the rural families from this. The Government must promise us clearly that the poor will not carry this weight.”
Moyo pointed to South Africa’s carbon tax as an example of a system that includes exemptions for some sectors.
“South Africa’s carbon tax accounts for about 90 percent of its pollution, but it is applied with care and some are excused. We ask for some care here to define the levy clearly in law and protect the most vulnerable people.”
The senator also questioned the financial implications of establishing a new climate change department under the Bill, saying the creation of five new units would require substantial funding.
“This may help, but it also costs money. We must know who will pay for it; our taxes or money from donors.”
He also expressed concern that the Bill gives extensive powers to the responsible minister.
“The Bill also puts one person, the minister, in charge of almost everything. Too much power in one office is a risk,” Moyo said.
He called for stronger parliamentary oversight of climate-related spending, including regular audits of the proposed Climate Fund.
“We need checks, perhaps a Parliamentary Committee to watch over this work and a rule that all climate spending is checked by our auditors.”
Moyo argued that allowing the executive to spend money from the Climate Fund without parliamentary approval could conflict with constitutional provisions governing public finances.
“As it stands, the government can spend climate fund money by its own decision. This may clash with our constitutional rules on public money. We will ask for an amendment.”
He said all expenditure from the fund should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and oversight by the Auditor-General.
“This fund’s accounts and spending must pass through Parliament and the Auditor-General must review them. That is why every coin is accounted for and our people can trust the fund.”
Leave a Reply