THE story of rural development, or lack of it, starts in the cities.

The young men hanging around street corners under scorching sun looking for a piece job, the shanty towns and informal settlements and all the squalor and poverty that go with these point to something that has badly gone wrong somewhere - in the countryside.

Historically, the movements of people have been from the countryside to cities because of both push and pull factors.

In England the enclosure movement of the 19th century pushed people to the cities.

And in other countries that were industrialising following the Industrial Revolution in England, pull factors were at work as people were needed to keep the wheels of industry running.

It is a different ball game in a good part of Africa.

Here poverty is the main push factor and the limelight of the cities the magnet, because unlike their counterparts in other parts of the world, African cities don't have much to offer and a number new immigrants end up joining an army of job seekers.

Are the rural areas in Namibia then in varying stages of neglect and decay and thus centres of out-migration? Not so, according to President Hifikupunye Pohamba.

Recently he spoke in glowing terms about the centrality of rural development saying "rural development remains the top priority on the development agenda of the Government".

But is it? I think the President's foot-soldiers have not been briefing him properly on this and he thus seems to have lost touch with the reality on the ground.

Because a quick dash to the Ministry of Local Government where the Directorate of Rural Development is now housed yielded no official plan, policy, blueprint or a framework document on rural development.

So whatever development is taking place there must have on an ad hoc basis - in a policy vacuum.

If the President is serious about what he preaches, then he must set up an independent team to audit the functions, role, staffing and direction of this very important directorate.

This must also include a comprehensive inventory of what programmes and projects have been implemented and where, during the past 18 years.

Two issues that need ironing out are first: where this directorate should belong because it has been moving from one ministry to the other perhaps pointing to the confusion among policy makers.

The other is the quality of people, especially at the permanent secretary, director and deputy director levels, who are supposed to drive the rural development agenda - itself a complex and multifaceted process.

So, quo vadis rural development? This is a moot question.

But let's be clear on some issues.

First, decentralisation is not rural development - just one of the ingredients.

Government simply delegates minor functions to regions and carried out by junior officers who in many instances still have to consult a boss before taking a decision.

Secondly, the land question which is put forward as contributing to rural underdevelopment and thus poverty is not quite true.

We could have done a lot with the available land - drawing that fine distinction between land distribution and agrarian reform.

This is not openly admitted in political circles or mainstream academia.

Recently, however, Agriculture Minister John Mutorwa said that both the Okavango and Caprivi regions have the potential to become the breadbasket of Namibia.

A rather odd statement coming as it does from someone who has been a Minister for years and hails from those regions.

He should instead tell us how Government and his Ministry intend to tap into that potential after years of neglect.

What is to be done? At the rhetorical level Government recognises the need to integrate the communal areas into mainstream space-economy to provide jobs and economic opportunities to rural people who after-all constitute a large proportion of the population.

To underscore the importance of the rural development portfolio, and short of setting up a separate ministry, I would suggest setting up an independent rural development council or commission to be chaired, say, by the Deputy Prime Minister who would coordinate rural affairs and development but also incorporating key ministries like agriculture, local government, works, environment and tourism, national planning, finance etc.

and also traditional leaders and set up development committees in each locality.

This is one way to radicalise rural planning and policy implementation in order to effect a meaningful change in communal lands.

Otherwise the countryside will remain a reservoir of cheap labour and burial site for the dead.