Category: Sunday

  • Too much money  chasing too much frivolity

    Too much money chasing too much frivolity

    Between them, three women have partitioned Nigeria into an overbearing and scheming country. It is doubtful whether the three – Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Finance), Stella Oduah(Aviation) and Diezani Alison-Madueke(Petroleum) – do so deliberately. But by their policies, and the vociferous arguments they summon to drive them, the country’s fate seems sealed, at least under President Goodluck Jonathan. The situation was probably not better under Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s presidency, but in those days it was at least difficult to determine where Obasanjo’s overbearingness began and where the conceitedness of his appointees ended. We groped in that fogginess for eight years to 2007 assured that some sort of balance could be conjured by nature itself. Nature, we convinced ourselves, abhorred imbalance. But under Jonathan, there is no fog anywhere, nor is nature keen to intervene.

    For a moment, let us put aside the policy parade of the Finance and Petroleum ministers, and instead concern ourselves with the Aviation minister, who is on some sort of rampage. It is of course mere co-incidence that the three ministers are from the Southeast/South-South. Their power and influence – some say dominance – is probably not due to their states or regions of origin. They are influential partly because of their intellects and mostly because of their personalities. When it comes to the debate over finance and poverty, have you ever tried to convince the highly opinionated Okonjo-Iweala that the square of the longest side hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides? Forget it; it’s a lost cause. No matter how right you are, she is even righter. If you draw the sword of Pythagoras, she will counter with the shield of Euclid. And you would be lucky to get in a word when she is declaiming on any topic.

    Diezani (I mean no disrespect; her first name, which is not common, is simpler to use than her hyphenated surname) is probably the most oratorical of the three, and certainly the most dashing. What degree of persuasiveness she loses by way of conjured or ambiguous facts and figures, especially when she is put to task by the National Assembly and the querulous long-suffering public, she makes up for by way of sheer verbal profundity. It is always an unequal combat when a brilliant but not fluent speaker meets an eloquent exaggerator who can manage to pay occasional homage to logic. Whereas the Finance minister undermines your statistics and makes you doubt the sources of your figures, the Petroleum minister overwhelms you with her rolling words and glacial composure, thawing only sparingly to remind you of her humanity, nay, femininity. Neither of the two ministers is ever able to convince anyone about the fidelity of the facts and figures coming from the two ministries, whether as they concern poverty and the application of fiscal tools to regenerate the economy, or as they concern fuel consumption or the so-called subsidy regime.

    Of the three, however, Oduah, who is the main focus of this piece today, appears to be the most daring and enterprising, and perhaps the most energetic. By dint of her obtrusion, she has managed to raise the status of the Aviation ministry from a sedate, backroom bureaucracy to a frontline and, if we should borrow a phrase from modern analysts, cutting-edge organisation. As her obtrusiveness during electioneering showed, when she made the so-called Neighbour-to-Neighbour unit of the Jonathan campaign organisation a powerful instrument propelled by delicate and indecipherable financial engineering, she has a knack for turning water to wine, and turning a molehill to a mountain. Left alone in the Aviation ministry, as the Jonathan government seems increasingly bent on doing, she could soon begin imagining the prospect of developing a rocketry department in the ministry with the objective of putting a Nigerian on the moon, if not next year, then the year after. Her imagination is so fecund that, like God observed of human beings at the Tower of Babel (Gen 11), whatever she proposes to do she was likely to accomplish. But of course I exaggerate, for Oduah’s fecundity is neither profound nor without a terrible price.

    During the 2011 electioneering, Oduah knew how to get things done. She has transferred that talent and energy to her present assignment. Somehow, she does not seem to be discomfited by lack of funds. She is renovating, modernising, and in some instances, expanding the airports in the country, of course, in phases. And from all evidence, and by frequent fliers’ testimonies, she is doing the renovation to taste. But that exercise, as salutary as it seems, jars against a sensible consideration of the economics of airports. Might the renovation not be an unsupportable elevation of aesthetics over functionality? Ghana’s Kotoka Airport is not as fascinating as Murtala Mohammed International Airport, but it is better maintained, better utilised, friendlier to travellers, and there is always a general sense of sanity and safety in its precincts. I won’t push this point, however, for Nigerians, high and low, are eternally fond of the meretricious.

    Oduah speaks interminably about grandness in the aviation sector without a correspondingly grand and realistic paradigm to support her dreams. She wants at least one International Airport comparable with the best in the world. But in which aspect of Nigerian leadership is there anything comparable with the best in the world? Is it in observance of the constitution? What of the justice system, education, politics, healthcare, and all other human development indicators? This objectionable lack of realism, as personified by Oduah’s approach to aviation matters, is discernible in the attitudes of Nigerian leaders to the construction of State Houses, legislative complexes, official residential quarters, and the headquarters of some powerful ministries, departments and agencies. Oduah’s comparable airport terminal will pander to our outsized ego, and nothing more.

    Perhaps the most disagreeable policy to come from the Aviation minister is the decision to float a new national carrier barely 10 years after the same federal government scrapped the old carrier, the Nigeria Airways. The old carrier was scrapped because the government and its World Bank economists argued that governments were notoriously inefficient in running businesses. With maniacal zeal, the previous government scrapped virtually everything publicly owned. Official residences and cars were monetised. Roads were to be offered to willing concessionaires, and even Federal Government Colleges were scrapped. Virtually nothing was to be left in the hands of the government except the privileges of power. Now, they are gradually reversing themselves – a troubling indication of sloppy thinking, official grandstanding and depressing lack of public debate.

    When the Aviation minister first mooted the idea of a new carrier, a columnist with this newspaper argued along the following lines: “Oduah indicates the new national carrier will welcome private equity and be jointly and professionally managed to make it a successful venture. In addition, she says, if all things go well, the new carrier could hit the skies before many months. But it was not too long ago, however, that the government invited Virgin Atlantic to invest in the airline business in Nigeria over the ashes of Nigeria Airways. It proved an impossible task after just a few years, as the new airline made huge losses estimated at more than $300m between 2005 and 2010. In 2007 alone, Virgin Nigeria Airways lost nearly N10 billion. Moreover, Virgin Atlantic Limited never took more than 49 percent equity in the Virgin Nigeria project. So, what has changed? Oduah says the government has learnt its lessons, and will not repeat the mistakes of the past. She is confident that a new national carrier operated jointly with private capital will fly. Nonsense.

    “If private investors want to come into the airline business either in partnership or alone, the skies are always open. As everyone knows, the skies may be open, but the capital to establish and run airlines here has not always been open or friendly. Airline business has been a difficult one in recent years requiring the help of the government to keep it aloft…It is doubtful whether Oduah can convince anyone of the need for a new national carrier. The idea of a new national carrier is idle and wishful thinking. There is absolutely no basis for it, either financially or managerially…”

    And while we were still trying to come to terms with the new carrier bugaboo, Oduah threw us an even tougher bone to chew. According to an aviation source, the federal government plans to buy 30 new aircraft to be distributed to airlines to help them operate better and to crash air fares. Now, if there is a worse malady than this, we would like to hear it. The crazy venture, we are told, is to be funded by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) – would Sanusi Lamido Sanusi countenance this nonsense? – and the Bank of Industry (BoI). Would the planes be given free? If not, would it not further aggravate the financial distress of the operators and encumber their operating costs? And are the CBN and BoI so loaded with idle money that they can be persuaded to throw it on fantasies?

    It is not enough to absorb the fact that these three ministers are powerful and influential, or that they give the Jonathan cabinet its steely core; we must also recognise that they are in fact symptomatic of the lack of consistent policy framework required to run a disciplined, transformative and progressive government. The ministers and their policies indicate just how besotted to grand fantasies the government has become, and why their successes will be few and far between.

  • Phones for 10 million farmers take public policy to a new low

    The Minister of Agriculture, Dr Akinwumi Adesina, has denied that the federal government planned to spend N40bn or N60bn to buy phones for 10 million farmers. Thank God for the denial. But that is not all, and that certainly is not the whole truth. When the permanent secretary in the Agriculture ministry, Mrs Ibukun Odusote, spoke about the decision to buy the phones in Ogun State a few days ago, she spoke persuasively. Hear her: “We are talking about 10 million handsets; each handset would be costing, maybe N6000 or N4000 because it is in large number. We are not going to buy in pieces like that. We will buy directly from the manufacturing companies. We have agreement with some organisations in China and some in the United States; they are going to provide all these handsets for us because they are also interested in investing in the agricultural sector in Nigeria. So you have the idea and estimate of the cost. And I tell you that the money is available; it’s on ground. We are looking at the first quarter of this year to roll-out the phones, and by the end of the first quarter, we are done, and they will start hearing about the out roll-out.”

    The minister, however, justifies the decision to buy phones for farmers, but denies the sum involved. Perhaps it will be cheaper than what the permanent secretary mentioned. But whether cheap or not, the decision is still a bad one. In any case, what of the “agreement” the permanent secretary spoke about, and the “money on ground” she alluded to? Indeed, the minister’s denial could be an afterthought prompted by the outrage that has greeted the announcement. It is doubtful whether there is a farmer who can’t afford a N4000 phone, that is, assuming we have 10 million of them. Does the ministry have a register of farmers in the country, and has he confirmed their needs to the extent of willing to spend a huge sum on communicating with them? Can’t the ministry communicate with their cooperatives?

    Sometimes, it is hard to resist the temptation to think that too much money is chasing too much folly in Nigeria, often in the pursuit of one newfangled agenda or the other. From the Aviation ministry where their fecundity is costing us so dearly, and we take the pain in our strides, to the Finance ministry where obduracy and experimentalism are mixing in lethal quantities, and to the Petroleum ministry where arcanum has become the watchword, it is not clear how much policy malfeasance would be enough to bankrupt us or irreparably damage the republic.

  • Nigeria now and beyond

    Nigeria now and beyond

    How to build a better nation

    As New Year resolutions go, those of President Goodluck Jonathan were not bad. On January 1, at an Anglican Church service in Abuja, he pledged to “provide employment for our people and encourage entrepreneurship”. Again, the President promised that 2013 will be better than last year.

    The year 2012 indeed left us brokenhearted, in the main. Better endowed writers and analysts have captured the grief of the floods, which devastated a substantial part of the country, forcing many from their homes and leaving them helpless and moody in the Yuletide, with questions as to what to eat. Space has also been given to the Boko Haram onslaught, which continues to leave blood and tears in its wake in spite of the best efforts of our security community. Our tragedies were not limited to the ground or waters, though; there were also fatalities in the air, throwing the nation into mourning. Thankfully, there was some relief amid the grief. In a year in which we lost former National Security Adviser General Andrew Azazi in an air crash, Governor Danbaba Suntai of Taraba State survived an ill-fated flight. He has been discharged from hospital, with two new bundles of joy in his wife’s arms. Suntai’s counterpart in Kogi, Idris Wada, has also left hospital after a crash in his SUV left him with a fractured leg.

    2012 was largely a year many prayed would not repeat itself. It would have been proper for the President, in an end of year or January 1 speeches, to touch on these issues if only to seek lifting the people from their grief and get them to look forward to a better year. Still, Jonathan’s January efforts in the church did some good. He said the new year will be better. As president, that should boost morale. He also said our uniformed personnel were making some progress and that his administration will strengthen the security architecture, a favourite phrase of his. All of that is good.

    Yet there was something else the President said in Abuja on New Year’s Day that got me thinking. He spoke about worsening violence and a descent into shocking depths of criminality, of which Nigerians had a huge dose last year.

    He said: “It is the ambition to get rich overnight that leads to robbery, kidnapping and all sorts of crime…We have moved to another phase of terror, kidnapping and armed robbery but these are momentary challenges.”

    Clearly, Jonathan is as worried about our worsening crime record as he is about the motive: ambition to get rich overnight. The officiating priest of the day, Most Rev Nicholas Okoh was just as concerned and wasted no time to call for a change of heart. The clergy admonished every Nigerian, from the unscrupulous market woman to the greedy politician, to change their ways in the new year.

    Both Jonathan and the priest want a new and better Nigeria now and beyond. So do I and a substantial part of our 160m people. Most Nigerians desire a country of clean values, one where life and integrity count. But a tiny percentage of the population has negated our cravings, seeking to first satisfy their own lusts and imaginations. In this bracket are such people as armed robbers, kidnappers and those who commit “all sorts of crime” to which the President referred in the Anglican Church service.

    Still, one question remains: how do we evolve such a country? How do we kick out the get-rich-overnight ambition of which Jonathan has spoken? Our experience in these parts has shown that appeals and sermons have very little effect on criminals or even potential ones. If this were so, crime would be declining rather than increasing, given the number of people’s appeals or the frequency of clerics’ sermons.

    So if the word of mouth hardly deters criminals, what can be done? That’s tricky, but we can mount a more vigorous and transparent campaign against ostentatious tastes and such vanities, especially in high places. Our leaders have not been the most frugal people you hear about. People tend to learn more from what they see than what they hear. That is why it will be difficult to exorcise the spirit of SUVs, for instance, in this country. The rich and powerful flaunt them, leading humble folks to sell their modest cars to acquire Jeeps, even creaky ones. The lifestyles of our leaders have done little to curb criminal tendencies.

    In the run-up to the Yuletide, the cost of VP Namadi Sambo’s house caused not a little stir. The house valued at N7b in 2009 was now said to have attracted an extra N9b, making a total of N16b. What for? The N9b was needed, it was said, to incorporate the culture and religion of the Vice President into the building. Such behaviour hurts our finances and does little to discourage ostentation. Even the culture and religion argument falls flat. The house of the VP is supposed to be a national monument, not designed and built with a Christian, Muslim, atheist or freethinker in mind. If any of them should live there, surely, worship places should not be such a challenge warranting a huge appropriation of cash.

    Sambo’s tastes are not unique, though. Our leaders’ awkward preferences have caused quite a problem. If we want to see Nigeria of our dreams, we must clip such fancies. It is one way to check get-rich-overnight ambitions and build a country for today and the future.

  • Is journalism  worth dying for?

    Is journalism worth dying for?

    Last week, I wrote about the death of late Tayo Awotunsin of Champion Newspapers who was killed along with his Guardian Newspaper colleague, Krees Imodibie, in 1991 while covering the Liberian crisis. Their death is an example of one of the major hazards journalists face while on duty.

    Every profession has its hazards known to the professionals. What is required of their employers is that necessary steps should be taken to protect them against the hazards and where it is impossible, they or their families should be adequately compensated.

    Unfortunately, this is not the case in Nigeria where journalists don’t generally get adequately remunerated despite the risky nature of their job. Some journalists don’t even get paid for months and can’t even expect any form of compensation if they get injured or killed on the job. Only few media houses have insurance policies for their staff.

    Some staff of a defunct newspaper were shocked when they learnt that apart from being owed by their former employers, the company did not remit their tax or pension to the appropriate authorities for the months they were paid.

    How are journalists expected to perform their duties as watch dogs in circumstances like this when they are not sure of what becomes of them if they lose their jobs, get injured or killed in a worst case scenario?

    I am forced to return to the issue of condition of service for journalists this week following the report that 13 Nigerian journalists were killed last year in Nigeria while covering various assignments.

    The figure said to be the highest in the history of the country since Independence, according to the President of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Mohammed Garba, is worrisome.

    As Garba rightly reiterated, there is an urgent need to intensify the provision of security and safety for journalists. Comprehensive insurance policies should be provided for journalists to encourage them to take necessary risks even when their life is at risk on the job.

    Many journalists have told me that the profession is not worth dying for and I quite agree with them. Why should anyone risk getting killed on duty when employers are unable to meet their obligations to employees?

    With increasing cases of killing by the Boko Haram and other terrorists groups in the Northern parts of the country, I really pity journalists who are based in particularly some of the volatile states like Borno, Kano, Yobe and others. When I speak with some of them, they tell me how worried they are about their safety and that of their families.

    If the journalists have their way, they would have relocated to other safer locations like other residents who have fled for their safety. Media managers should not only be concerned about getting stories from the crisis states, they should be very interested in the safety of their staff.

    I am aware that some of the worst-hit states before now were not priority states for many national media organisations in terms of editorial coverage. Now that the states are in focus due to the endless killings by the terrorists, journalists who have to remain there as a matter of duty have to be protected from becoming victims of the attacks.

    They should be well-paid to justify their working in the states, insured and provided necessary gadgets to ease their work. This is one sure way to ensure that the figure of journalists killed in the country does not increase next year when the figure for 2013 will be released.

  • The life and times of Omo Ekun

    The life and times of Omo Ekun

    Snooper this morning mourns the death late last week of our older friend, elderly sparring partner and progressive provocateur par excellence, Chief Wumi Adegbonmire, a.k.a Omo Ekun, the Asiwaju of Akureland and immaculate disciple of Obafemi Awolowo. He did not suffer political fools lightly, and neither was he interested in the Geneva Convention of political warfare. He took no hostages or political prisoners. In his younger days, when all else failed, he reached for the fistic sledgehammer in rousing encounters which reminded one of Chinua Achebe’s famous Amalinze the cat.

    The cat this time was of the tiger sub-species in all its feline ferocity. Truly enough, this cat did not proclaim its tigritude. It pounced. An unwavering apostle of the Awolowo school of politics and a fanatical foot soldier of the Action Group modernization project, the late chief had no time for political shenanigans or sanctimonious equivocation. He talked straight and shot straight and with him you knew where you stood. This illustrious descendant of illustrious Oyemekun warriors loved the joyous din of political commotion and volcanic affrays. He was a happy warrior.

    With the passing of Chief Wumi Adegbonmire, the progressive camp has lost three illustrious avatars in quick succession towards the end of last year. They are: Adegbonmire, Lam Adesina and Professor Stephen Oladipo Arifalo who came to late and deserving prominence with an outstanding and meticulous history of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa. While Adegbonmire and Lam Adesina came to prominence through their political journalism, Arifalo, also from Akure, remained the quiet scholar supplying intellectual ammunition to the cause. The big, burly, amiable and eternally unflappable Arifalo was in many respects a perfect foil to Omo Ekun, his childhood friend and political soul mate.

    My generation owes a lot to both Lam Adesina and Omo Ekun for helping to define and refine the progressive cause, and for arriving at the political barricades against the feudal establishment very early in the day. Like their illustrious colonial era forbears who gave Lord Lugard and the Whitehall the roasting of their life, the duo were among those who turned journalism into a weapon of political combat against the Nigerian post-colonial state. Their popular columns in the old Nigerian Tribune speak volumes for their courage, tenacity of purpose and unflinching loyalty to a cause.

    No two individual temperaments could be more dissimilar. While Lam was calm and imperturbable, often masking his inner strengths with an inscrutable visage, Adegbonmire was as defiant and daring as they came. Like a supremely confident prizefighter, he often arrived in the ring ahead of the referee, that is if he could abide any. Like the famed Mississippi Mauler, he was not afraid of being hurt as long as he was able to deliver his own explosive packages. It was a classic instance of a dialectical synthesis of opposites. But in the subsequent political sweepstakes, it was the inscrutable Lam who leveraged his gnome-like reticence into a devastating weapon of mob mastery.

    It can be said that out of nobility or sheer indifference, Omo Ekun was more interested in policy formulation and the enunciation of general principles than in the politics of self-advancement so rampart these days. The typical Omo Ekun column was not a stuff for the faint-hearted or the lily-livered. It was brimming with venom and vitriol. But the masses loved this John Wayne journalism. Some unforgettable samplers are “Softly, Softly Gani” which virtually put an end to the iconic lawyer’s early romance with the UPN and “Rimi is a Snake” which tore into the late Kano maverick.

    The most unforgettable memory of Omo Ekun etched forever in snooper’s consciousness was at the eighty six posthumous memorial service for Chief Obafemi Awolowo held at Ikenne 1995. A bemused Chief Abraham Adesanya had accosted him with a beguiling smile. “Omo Ekun, o ma ye ki ire na ti di ekun bayi?” the late Afenifere leader quipped. (The cub of the tiger isn’t it time for you have become a tiger yourself?) Everybody within earshot laughed.

    The jovial atmosphere masked more serious matters. Anybody familiar with the deep and often ambiguous nuances of the Yoruba language and Chief Adesanya’s great mastery of these would know that this statement is both an expression of admiration and a subtle admonition in equal parts. A master of political hostilities himself, the great Afenifere leader would have noticed that a fretting and prancing Omo Ekun was stalking a big game in the political jungle. In this case, it was the arrival of a leading Yoruba traditional ruler at the occasion that had drawn the implacable ire of Omo Ekun. The great tiger got his leader’s gnomic message and all became quiet on the western front.

    But if Chief Adesanya was right in one respect, he was merely quibbling in another. There is as yet no genetic accident apart from early death that could prevent a tiger cub from transforming into a full-blown tiger. These things are set with iron certitude. At that point in time, Omo Ekun had become a full blown tiger who was not afraid of any beast in the political jungle. Yet as a tiger grows into full manhood, it is not its prowess that is in question but its wisdom and judgement.

    The transformation had been steady and relentless and they must form part of the Yoruba contemporary political folklore. In 1965 when the then government of Western Region of Nigeria banned and proscribed The Nigerian Tribune, a bearded and bearish Omo ekun, then an undergraduate of the University of Ibadan, could be seen on the streets of Ibadan openly hawking the banned newspaper with his right hand firmly gripping a glistening machete. It was a daring thing to do, but such was the heroic stuff of which Adegbonmire was made.

    But despite all the heroic exertions and the termination of that inglorious reign of terror, the more things have changed in Nigeria, the more they have remained the same. Every battle has to be painfully fought all over again and at prohibitive human cost. Every ground has to be reclaimed and every advance in national consciousness is swiftly pushed back by agents of retrogression and the uneven keel of national development.

    In early February, 1997, at Ife, snooper met an aging, sixty two year old Omo Ekun in perhaps the deepest trough of despair and despondency . It was a bleak moment. The entire country was reeling from Abacha’s despotic tyranny. And the man was obviously scheming to succeed himself. An underground man in his own fatherland, snooper had slipped from exile into the country to bid his dying mother a final goodbye.

    Snooper had met the great Awoist in drastically diminished circumstances, in a rusty dilapidated book store with its meagre and miserable stock of dog-eared titles. In the intervening thirty two years since his celebrated appearance as a celebrity newspaper vendor, Omo Ekun had graduated, had risen to become an iconic and successful university bookstore manager and a revered member of Awolowo’s inner circle. He had also taken active part in the 1983 uprising against electoral perfidy in his native Ondo state and had been rewarded with a firebombed country house. But this was as close to hell as it could get.

    In the badly ventilated bookshop, the old warrior’eyes lit up with warmth and enthusiasm after he had overcome the initial shock of my dramatic appearance. His defiant body language told me to forget any thought of commiserating with him over the equally dramatic reversal of fortune.

    “I told my children that I would take the bullet in the chest and not at the back, like a coward,” he thundered, the appetite and aptitude for political hostilities apparently undiminished.

    “Chief, kini yi ma rough ooo”, snooper sang, recalling our usual refrain in happier times.

    “Don’t worry. This too will pass. The fool will soon be history. How did you manage to evade the dragnet?” he inquired.

    “That is a story for another day,” snooper intoned.

    “You are a brave boy. Let’s go and eat pounded yam at Ipetumodu,” the great man ordered but snooper politely and firmly declined. A few minutes after, it was time to leave, after snooper had explained his mission in the country, and after the conversation had drifted to a young “progressive” senator who had suddenly decamped to the other side.

    “You see,” Omo Ekun began with a mixture of contempt and bemusement. “I am always suspicious of these young politicians who go about in three piece designer agbada. How can anybody be wearing agbada? What if it comes to immediate battle? Wont they be wrapped up with the nonsense?”

    As usual, the happy warrior was harking back to the sartorial ethos of the Action Group where the tight fitting buba and sokoto assumed the status of a universal uniform and Omo Ekun himself was a great exemplar of the civilian fatigues. With its superior organization and military-like discipline, the Action Group was a classic instance of vertical intellectual integration and horizontal mass-mobilization. The battle cry was permanent vigilance and no one did the “E stand by” war dance better than the late Ganiyu Olawale Dawodu. Watching the sprightly old Gregorian cantering back and forth was pure delight.

    Sadly towards the end, the old cohesion had disappeared and omo Ekun was no longer on the same page with most of his old comrade in arms. The falcon could no longer hear the falconer. The old Afenifere umbrella could no longer hide the deep divisions and schisms within Awolowo’s political household. All that was solid has melted into thin air.

    Their human failings notwithstanding, all these great men speak to the power of sterling leadership and the power of apostolic followership. But more importantly, they speak to the dynamic capacity of visionary ideas to move people and mountain. In the modern society, a person who has not intellectually transformed himself cannot be expected to transform others. This is the tragedy of post-colonial leadership in Africa in general and Nigeria in particular.

    As the crowd of these noble and illustrious men and women begin to rapidly thin out, this column salutes the few remaining titans. But as we yearn for another country, let us be clear in our mind that what Nigeria needs is a new intellectual master class such as was thrown up by the anti-colonial struggle who will furnish the nation with a new master plan. Let us end by quoting Louis Althusser. Only the production of new heroes keeps old heroes alive. May the noble souls of the departed rest in peace.

  • Anti-subsidy suit: Another ABN show?

    Anti-subsidy suit: Another ABN show?

    Chief Stanley Okeke’s suit urging a federal high court to compel President Goodluck Jonathan to stop fuel subsidy payment immediately reminds one of the June 12 suit filed by the Association for Better Nigeria (ABN), financed by maverick politician, Arthur Nzeribe. The suit sought the cancellation of the June 12, 1993 election. The association alleged in the suit that the primaries were riddled with corruption. Then, a few hours to the election, the court ruled that the presidential election should not commence. But the National Electoral Commission (NEC) led by Prof Humphrey Nwosu, went ahead with the election on June 12, 1993, relying on the ouster clause in the transition decree that had barred the courts from inquiring into any aspect of the electoral process.

    The question on the lips of many Nigerians then was what exactly did Nzeribe and his ABN want to achieve by that suit? This became the more pertinent as Nzeribe denied receiving any money from the then self-styled president, General Ibrahim Babangida, to scuttle the transition programme that General Babangida designed with booby traps. Nigerians had earnestly looked forward to the day they would bid military rule good bye and were happy when things were going as planned concerning the election, in spite of all the landmines, until Nzeribe sprang a surprise via his suit. The rest is history.

    The question now is: how does fuel subsidy payment by the government constitute a problem to Chief Okeke, a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain, or anyone for that matter? He is not a government official. Those who are strongly against fuel subsidy are the government people who want more money, many of them for their private pockets. If there is anything called fuel subsidy, it is because the government wants it so. It bears restating that Nigeria, a major exporter of crude oil, has no business importing fuel. And, if the government cannot put in place a system that ensures we refine enough petrol within; that is its business. I would have thought that if any patriotic Nigerian is going to have any issue to sue the government over, it should be to compel it to fight corruption and ensure that we stop this curse of a butcher eating bones.

    But the PDP chief is rather asking the court to determine the following questions:

    *Whether in view of the official corruption and abuse of office inherent in the fuel subsidy regime as evidenced by the on-going trial of certain individuals in the Federal High Court, Lagos, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is validly competent to order the removal and or abolish the fuel subsidy scheme;

    *Whether consequent upon the perennial fuel shortages and the attendant long queues on our roads, it would be proper and lawful for the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to completely remove and abolish the fuel subsidy regime;

    *Whether having regards to the near infrastructural collapse in our country, it would be proper to re-channel funds meant for fuel subsidy scheme into the building of infrastructural facilities, and;

    *Whether the 2nd and 3rd defendants, being appointees of the President, by not ensuring a corrupt- free subsidy regime have not failed in their principal duty to Nigerians. He did not even stop there; he also wants President Goodluck Jonathan to return to the federation account “such money earlier appropriated and or approved for the payment of fuel subsidy.”

    What Chief Okeke has done is to tell Nigerians that his party, the PDP, is incapable of leading the country; that it cannot fight corruption. Of course, he would have said nothing new because we all know that the PDP is corruption’s bedmate. If people have ripped off the country through subsidy fraud, what is the duty of the government? At any rate, haven’t many Nigerians said that the government is a major beneficiary of the subsidy fraud, giving that the amount usually paid as subsidy suddenly tripled in a crucial election year (2011)?

    I have said it before that we would never be able to rest the subsidy ghost because of the various interests involved. We haven’t seen anything yet. But you can trust our president; as the usual ‘see no evil, hear no evil person that he is, does not know anything about this suit. The same way he does not know anything about his reported posters flooding Abuja. The only problem is that not even all the angels in heaven swearing that this is true can convince Nigerians that it is so.

    We have come a long way with leaders in this country that we can always guess where they are going even if, like the late General Sani Abacha, they are not saying anything; we know they have said everything. What I am saying is that they are predictable and this is so because even if they do not find the same people playing the same diabolical role under different administrations, those they are recruiting have lost the capacity for creativity. It is always from the kind of ABN suit to the campaign posters that the person being promoted knows next-to-nothing about but would not complain because the people pasting them are exercising their rights; only to start showing concerns after realising the political implications. Suppose the posters had been anti-Jonathan, would those pasting them too be allowed to exercise such rights? I guess the anti-Jonathan posters too are likely to be in the offing now that those who are earnestly asking for Jonathan are having a field day exercising their right. Forget the reported manhunt for the promoters. We will never know them.

    This subsidy removal suit, to me, seems the voice of Jacob but the hand of Esau; just like the ABN suit. It is a suit President Jonathan would be dreaming to have won because he seemed to have hinged the success of his administration on fuel subsidy removal. But, pray, what is the business of a chieftain of any political party, to complain about fuel subsidy? How does a clear policy matter become a subject of litigation? How does that affect his life? And, how is that an issue to warrant going to court to ask that subsidy be stopped by the government? Chief Okeke has named two people that, in his view, did not handle the issue of fuel subsidy well. These are the finance minister and coordinating minister of the economy, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and petroleum minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke. If Chief Okeke feels so strongly, why can he not, as a PDP chieftain, sue the government to drop the ministers and prosecute them? If fuel subsidy is corruption-ridden, is that not what should be fought? Why should that be a burden Nigerians must carry?

    It is baffling that Chief Okeke is not taking the government to court over a N14billion mansion for the vice president; it is surprising that he has all these years not deemed it fit to sue the government over the jumbo allowances we have been paying our National Assembly members, which some have estimated in the region of N1.3 trillion annually, and for less than 500 people? There are over 1,000 and one things that the Federal Government can be sued for, other than fuel subsidy, and that would make more sense. Even in spite of the massive fraud in the subsidy regime, it cost us only about N800billion last year. That is not much for 150 million Nigerians to enjoy. I wonder then why Chief Okeke is behaving like an outsider who is weeping louder than the bereaved in this matter. What is his own?

  • The Fiscal Cliff Follies

    The Fiscal Cliff Follies

    •Like a wheel that has lost its roundness, such is the leader who lacks wisdom.

    This piece returns to one of this column’s perennial victims: the American political economy. Two factors drive the frequent analyses of American events. First, America’s contretemps affect Africa given America’s perch atop the global political economy. Second, Africa generally is enamored by things American. The continent hungers for success and America is success’s paragon. Thus, too many people mindlessly believe that every American practice is the right way. They do so without evaluating if the thing they copy actually benefits America let alone if the benefit will transfer to this continent. To copy seems to be the first, middle and last commandment of those who would rather America do their thinking for them.

    This would not be so tragic if the mimickers were better versed in American history. Then they would hopefully steal examples from an era when America was economically robust, moving toward congenial employment and income equality. Not knowing enough about America’s complex history, the mimickers summarily conclude America is as it has always been. After all, why would a nation deviate from a winning formula? Yet such destructive deviation this is the way of man and empires. An empire is founded by the sweat of the great but lost by the folly of those who think they are great. Past empires have collapsed into the dust because they suffered chronic streaks of undistinguished leadership. While poor leadership keeps many African nations down, a similar want of leadership slowly fractures the mighty nation to the west. This must be the worst group of leaders America has experienced in roughly 130 years when the nation suffered the economic quakes and injustice of the Gilded Age.

    For such a motley group to govern a great nation is tragic. How such a petty, unenlightened ensemble came to govern the world’s strongest nation will be recorded as one of this era’s pivotal events. Instead of begetting humility and gratitude, inherited wealth and power seem to encourage a prickly arrogance that believes it knows everything worth knowing. As it is with heirs to a family estate, so it is with the leadership of powerful states. Everything hard won can be easily squandered. Sadly, wisdom is a respecter of seisin. Wisdom is always too wise to encroach into space upon which arrogance has staked its claim. Thus, the American bald eagle slowly becomes a blind one and a blind eagle is a dangerous instrumentality unto itself and all things within its range of flight.

    Even more tragic is the addict’s yearning of African leaders to copy America’s current mediocrity in hopes of repeating successes a bygone American era. It is like entering a dark room holding the candle at your back. Not only does this render the candle useless to your vision, getting singed will be the likely result of this irresolute meandering.

    Yet, we continue to mimic with a steadfastness that would be laudable if directed at copying something other than America’s benighted present. Much like vapid fads in American popular culture, the imbalanced, hyper-capitalist policies of the American government are bound to come to a country near you in the not-too-distant future. Consequently, I analyze American events to explain what is happening as well as to warn of what is likely to come. Now to the main event.

    During the waning days of last year, the international media was replete with reportage about the impending fiscal cliff toward which the United States was stumbling. The cliff was a combination of tax hikes and budget cuts estimated to reduce the U.S. government’s deficit by roughly 560 billion dollars this year. The sum is significant given that federal government spending is a few notches below 4 trillion dollars and total American GDP is roughly 16 trillion dollars. These projected reductions flowed from a 2011 bipartisan deal whereby Democrats and Republicans agreed to deep cuts to serve as a Damoclean sword hovering overhead, spurring them to make less drastic cuts prior to the January 1 deadline for the sword to fall. The obtuse logic behind this agreement reveals the bankruptcy of America’s leadership. They must be a deranged lot to first pass legislation imposing budgetary limitations no one wanted yet collectively being incapable of fashioning a legislative compromise around cuts most of them could tolerate. In others words, they found it easier to agree to an obviously harmful measure rather than pass a more agreeable law. In the hands of these illogical operatives, rests the fate of a major nation and the global economy. This should trouble your sleep and the dreams that sleep brings.

    The strident fear was the fiscal cliff measures would return American to recession, dragging along the global economy in the process. To avert this self-imposed calamity, both Democrats and Republicans espoused cures as minatory as the cliff itself. Watching these political hacks was reminiscent of the duck-headed doctor’s solution to stopping a crazed patient from severing his left arm. The doctor was amazed by the intelligence of his solution to prevent the man from cutting off his sinistral limb: he simply would amputate the man’s right hand. The doctor was the only soul amazed by his acuity. All others were mortified by the implicit evil and glaring incompetence of his resolution.

    Likewise, President Obama called for a “Grand Bargain,” a ten-year plan slicing 400 billion dollars from the deficit annually. This may have been grand in scope; it was the opposite of a bargain for the average person. If enacted, this would have cost the common man in the long-run. President Obama tried to honey-coat the arsenic by pledging continued tax breaks for the poor and middle class while advocating a mild tax increase on the wealthy. This was subterfuge to portray him as the champion of the man on the street. Yet, his tax breaks paled in comparison to the per capita reductions in social services and programs the deal promoted. What he offered the people on the front end, he would require in double payment on the back.

    As bad as President Obama’s solution was, Republicans were much better at being worse. The budget cuts they wanted were more severe. Unlike Obama, Republicans bucked against tax increases for the wealthy. They were so arrogant that they refused to even bother with a gesture to the public. They unabashedly swam in the palms of the wealthy. Apparently, their answer to poverty is to let the poor waste away until there are no poor left.

    In the end, the fiscal cliff was averted by a stop-gap “small deal” whereby tax hikes were avoided and decisions on budget cuts delayed for months. Sadly, this deal will prove injurious to the economy. The fiscal cliff generated false drama where none actually existed. With the false drama gone, media attention will divert elsewhere. The attention will divert when the more critical decisions on budget reduction are taken. The tax issues received great scrutiny but were always of secondary importance. Important budget cuts will be done in the legislative shadows. Anything done in the shadows will be an inferior product weighed toward those moneyed interests who created the shadows in the first place.

    More importantly, the elite’s orchestration of the discussion of the fiscal cliff obscured a fundamental point. Both Democrats and Republicans espoused measures steeped in archaic economics. Watching the leaders of both parties spout their arcane explanations was like witnessing the commanders of medieval navies give detailed instructions to captains and midshipmen alike on how to avoid falling off the end of the earth. No matter how intricately presented, their ideas were flummery.

    At no time during the discussion of the fiscal cliff did anyone question why a government with authority to print money must borrow its own currency. In the past decade, there was one congressman courageous enough to raise this question. The powerful conspired to segment and reconfigure his district so that he could not even regain his party nomination in 2010. Since then, the topic has been taboo.

    Yet, this matter has deep significance if America is to regain its economic vitality. For those emerging nations copying the Anglo-American financial system, understanding this may well determine if they truly develops or whether their systems forever ossify into plutocracies. Contrary to the general public’s understanding, the American government prints relatively little money. By act of Congress, the government long ago transferred the authority to print currency to the private banking system. The vast majority of money in America is “printed” by private banks. However, private banks can only print new money based on making new loans. When a bank finds creditworthy loan applicant, the bank simply creates money to lend the person. The person gets money but at the cost of having to repay it with future interest. When government revenues are insufficient to meet expenses, government borrows money as well.

    In this system, money creation also creates new debt. This is a banker’s paradise. Private banks create money out of thin air then derive interest on the money invented. This benefit should be enough. However, big banks are further secured by government borrowing. Government can never go insolvent. By law and due to their own self interests, certain large banks must fund government bond sales. Because of this, government can never run out of money. In an emergency, as during the recent banking crisis, government can resort to printing its money on its own. Thus, government always pays its debts. Government borrowing constitutes a vast welfare payment to the banking industry. The largest welfare payment in the history of mankind is being paid to the richest people in the history of mankind. This venal symmetry is being paid for by the poor and humble who don’t even realize the game being played. This system ensures that banks prosper and grow. By cosseting the banks, the system places the rest of the economy in debt peonage.

    What this means is that anonymous bank loan committees, in aggregate, control the trajectory of the economy more than government fiscal or monetary policy. This is not the ideal way to develop an economy. The objectives of these loan officers and committees are selfish and narrow. They care only for their institutions and personal salaries. It is a fallacy of classical economics that a nation’s political economy is optimized by this mad dash of oft colliding selfish interests. What may profit an individual bank will just as likely injure the overall economy as help it. This is true because, to an extent orthodox economics seek to obscure, one man’s profit is another man’s loss. To keep the economic game from becoming too skewed to the detriment of most people, a regulator is needed. That regulator should be government. The American government has abdicated the role of a neutral arbiter, justly allocating economic profits and burdens across the various sectors of the economy. Instead, government is the servitor of financialist Money Power. For this reason, wages have stagnated, poverty increased and overall consumer debt mushroomed during the past thirty years, beginning with the Reagan era.

    Taking a longer historic perspective, a tragedy of the Industrial Revolution was that it coincided with the evolution of this system of privately created debt money. Most economists assert this private money system positively contributed to the global prosperity associated with the Industrial Revolution. The correlation may not be as ironclad as mainstream economists think. That two events coincide does not denote a causal relationship. A small child always sees a newspaper on the front porch at sunrise. The child concludes the sun brought the newspaper. Only as he gets older and wiser does he realize how wrong he was.

    The debt money system did not promote the Industrial Revolution. The sadder truth is the debt money system made the Revolution and capitalism in general more inhumane than they would have been. The debt money system took capitalism further down the Dickensian road of sweatshop labor and impoverishment of the working class. Had this system been supplanted by one where more money was actually debt free money created by government in direct payment for labor, services and good rendered, there would have been a more equitable allocation of money instead of the great hoarding done by the financialists.

    The chronic economic stagnation the world now faces signals that centuries of this debt money system have run their course. There is too much private and governmental debt worldwide. The overall global economy buckles under the weight of this oppression. The debt money system is now a brake on future hope and prosperity. It is a parasite grown larger than its host.

    We have a choice. Either this system is reformed or we are consigned to debt slavery. The average person and debt money system can no longer prosper at the same time. One has to give way so the other may get his way.

    In the end, American and all nations that deploy this debt money system need to evaluate its continued use. The system’s custodians will cry that reform is impractical and that we must continue with things as they are because that is what responsible people do. The response is that this system has been too responsible for poverty, income inequality and the burgeoning strength of Money Power for it to be allowed to continue as is. They will fight back that the private sector is more efficient than government at all things economic and financial. The facts speak differently. More private sector ventures fail than succeed. This is the empirical truth and it hardly speaks of efficiency. When General Motors went underwater, government salvaged it, turning it into a profitable venture. When the banking system cannibalized itself into near extinction in 2009, government rescued it with trillions of dollars of aid. The private sector operates differently than the public sector but in reality is it no more efficient. Government is imperfect and flawed. But it remains a better regulator of the private sector, especially the financial industry, than the private sector can be for itself. After all, every financial crisis for over 100 years has been started by private sector folly not government mistake.

    Those developed nations that want to revive their economies and not merely slink from crisis to crisis must recalibrate their financial systems to encourage greater creation of government (public) debt free money and the reduction in private bank debt money. For developing nations this rebalancing is even more imperative. To mimic what has contributed to the Western world’s financial stagnation is to immure developing nations in destitution. The nations of Africa need not worry so much about the sanctity of their borders or changing geographically. Yet they need to make new lands of themselves for the good of the people. The only way an old place can become a new land is through new ideas.

    08060340825 (SMS only)

  • 2013: Beyond promises of deliverance

    2013: Beyond promises of deliverance

    There’s something about a new year that gets everyone giddy with excitement and hope. Whereas the Bible speaks about a hope that never disappoints, for several decades Nigerians have had to go through the gut-wrenching annual ritual of the evaporation of their dreams when our national peculiarities and weaknesses kick in as the months roll along.

    One of the great mysteries about this country is that in virtually every area of human endeavour you find the best minds – world beaters who excel when they are in a different environment. This is not an original thought or observation, yet it remains relevant as we begin the excursion into 2013.

    We need to crack the riddle as to why a nation of energetic, hardworking, creative people living in a land blessed with endowments many nations only dream about, have contrived to make their homeland one of the most wretched on earth.

    For a while the thinking was all we needed to get the country moving was to assemble our brightest and best in a federal cabinet. In 2011, fresh from a comprehensive victory at the general elections, President Goodluck Jonathan set about one of the most long-drawn cabinet construction exercises in recent history.

    Excoriated by impatient critics for his undue deliberation, he explained that he was putting together a first class team. In the end, even he would have agreed that what he finally assembled could in no way be accused of being Nigeria’s finest.

    A little over a week ago, an exasperated president who has been at the wars since that distant victory in 2011, offered a new explanation why this country continues to fail in delivering on her immense promise. Speaking at the funeral of his erstwhile National Security Adviser, General Andrew Azazi, in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, he suggested that attitude and not corruption was Nigeria’s problem.

    He said: “If Nigerians would change their attitude, you will realise that most of these issues being attributed to corruption are not caused by corruption.

    “Recently, I met with officials of the Federal Road Safety Corps who told me that they had discovered that majority of the road accidents are recorded on good roads. So you can see it is not a matter of corruption, it is an issue of the people’s attitude. If we change our attitude to life, if all Nigerians do what is right, Nigeria will change.”

    For daring to suggest that corruption was not the problem, Jonathan received a fusillade of flak. Beyond caring, he would weigh in a few days later with another philosophical observation that national transformation was a job for all – not just the president.

    Let me say that, as the name suggests, leaders have a responsibility to lead. So ultimately a president or governor will take responsibility for progress or failings in his area of authority – even when those success stories are the products of chance, or some other X-factor. That is life.

    Still, I find myself agreeing with some of the positions of the president. Long before his Yenagoa speech, some other Nigerian leaders had come to the conclusion that the basic problem of this country was lawlessness. The then Major-General Muhammadu Buhari and his sidekick, Tunde Idiagbon, ran their short-lived regime prosecuting a War Against Indiscipline (WAI).

    Of course, they went over the top in trampling people’s rights. But truth be told: if you give a pig a bath in a Sheraton bathroom it would soon find its way into the nearest gutter. Nigerians, unused to orderliness strained at the leash, and were only too glad to return to their old ways when General Ibrahim Babangida offered them a shiny object that looked like freedom.

    No government will work in this country, no president can succeed in this land, for as long as Nigerians, retain their contempt for order or the rule of law. Those nations we all love to escape to only work because the people have accepted that order is paramount.

    To understand this country you need to observe how we conduct ourselves on the roads. No one wants to obey any sign; traffic lights are just flashing objects to be ignored. Only fools drive on designated lanes; wise men drive against traffic. No one wants to be regulated; commercial bike riders want to be free to break every rule in the book. The upshot is that the Nigerian road is a jungle where only the craziest and most cunning survive; the larger society is its mirror image.

    Nigeria’s problem is not just one of legislation, or amending constitutions to produce the perfect document. In the end a people whose mission in life seems to be the subversion of all things lawful, would be expected to implement these same laws.

    It is not just a problem of building infrastructure. It is also a question of a gang of people banding together to disrupt the national electricity supply network by stripping off miles of transmission cables with a view to selling same for personal gain. It is about vandals who will rip aluminum railings meant to safeguard motorists off bridges for the sole reason of profit making.

    It is hard to explain away this sort of deranged behavior by crying poverty. Even in the United States, United Kingdom and other parts of Europe with very high standards of living you still find the poor and homeless. Their poverty has not caused them to descend on public infrastructure like a plague of locusts.

    Yes, corruption is a problem, but it doesn’t explain everything about where we are. It is the old chicken and egg debate. Is it corruption that causes our bad attitude, or our indiscipline that manifests as corruption?

    Even if Jonathan and his team deliver on their promises on power, the larger economy and insecurity, Nigeria will still not work if we carry on the way we are doing. Nigerians know what is good and right – that is why we are a nation of vociferous critics. But you will find that some of the loudest noisemakers are the first ones to do something disruptive to order when things get inconvenient.

    Deliverance will not come from Jonathan in 2013; it will only come when a majority of us determine to do the right thing in our little corners. It is a commitment very few are willing to make; it is the reason Nigeria is the way it is.

  • Jonathan’s marginalisation of theYoruba?

    Jonathan’s marginalisation of theYoruba?

    President Jonathan should have nothing but gratitude for Yoruba people

    A startling revelation came from Afenifere Renewal Group a few days ago. It is to the effect that the Jonathan administration is marginalising Yoruba people in recruitment into the public service. According to Afenifere Renewal, 45 cadets were recruited from the Southwest (a region with about 25% of registered voters in the country) for training at the Customs Training College in Kano. On the contrary, the Southsouth, the region that has the incumbent president got 91 recruits while Southeast had 68 and the Northcentral had 157. The only region whose share is not revealed is the Northwest, the region with the biggest block vote, according to the last INEC registration report.

    If the information about Yoruba marginalisation has come from several other organisations, this column would not have bothered. But with such information coming from Afenifere Renewal Group, a traditionally fast thinking but slow talking organisation, lovers of diversity in unity in Nigeria have reasons to be startled, as some of the readers of this column have demonstrated in several telephone texts to me. The good part of the saddening statistics about recruitment to Customs Service and retrenchment of Yoruba workers from the ministry of aviation is that the word marginalisation is not new in the country.

    The Igbo people have consistently accused the rest of Nigeria of marginalisation since the end of the Nigeria-Biafra war. Some of their best minds have even claimed that the war was prosecuted to achieve marginalisation ‘of the aggressive and dominant Igbo people.’ Even after an Igbo had become vice president to ShehuShagai in 1979, Igbos still claimed to be experiencing peripheral status in the scheme of things. And when the Igbo constituted the team that drove Nigeria’s economy under General OlusegunObasanjo: the Okonjo-Iweala, Soludo, Ekwesili operators of Nigeria’s fiscal machine, Igbos continued to cry marginalisation.Leaders from the North first started to worry about marginalisation only after the end of zoning and the coming of Jonathan as president in 2011. Such allegation by the North was more atmospheric than specific. While the claim by the Igbos was perceived as a device to shoot for the presidency, the complaint by northern leaders is viewed as another way for the North to complain about the loss of federal power to Jonathan, after the death or killing of zoning.

    What is startling about Afenifere’s revelation is that a nationality known to be proud, self-reliant, and taciturn about marginalisation has been pushed far enough to hang its toga of pride and self-reliance and competitiveness. Under the pressure of Yoruba youths, their elders have been forced to come out to cry foul about being disempowered. Readers must also be reminded that this is not the first time that the Yoruba would cry about marginalisation. In the days of SaniAbacha, hard facts were revealed aboutAbacha’s policy of disempowering Yoruba people via retrenchment and refusal to hire them into the public service. People perceived by Abacha henchmen to be NADECO soldiers, police, and public servants were purged or prevented from coming into federal institutions. At a time that the Yoruba should say that the rest of such policy is history (especially under a post-military government that the Yoruba lost more blood than any other Nigerian nationality to make possible), the Yoruba are, according to data at the disposal of Afenifere,victims of marginalisation under a regime that should have no reason to punish the Yoruba.

    There is a Yoruba proverb that says Oro to bakojaekun erinlaarin (there are some serious problems that are better mitigated by laughter). It is proper for Afenifere to take the matter up with the Federal Character Commission. That is one of the objectives of the commission. But Afenifere also needs to assuage the feelings of the youths that are putting pressure on it to learn how to laugh some of the pain off. It is better for the Yoruba region and for the country to prevent Yoruba youths from acquiring the kind of anger and alienation that motivated formation of Boko Haram. Afenifere Renewal needs to assist Yoruba youths in identifying some talking and counselling points.

    Have the Yoruba destroyed their NADECO spirit? Shouldn’t the Yoruba know that marginalisation is a possible response in a winner-takes-all system midwifed by some measure of election? Is it not proper to assume that President Jonathan should be too grateful to his benefactors to want to condone marginalisation of the Yoruba? The best way to illustrate this quality of the president is his recent open display of gratitude at the Redeemed Camp in Shagamu, where he knelt down in the glare of international cameras to thank the General Overseer of the country’s leading Pentecostal movement for assisting him to win the 2011 presidential election.

    President Jonathan should have nothing but gratitude for Yoruba people, not only for being a protégé of General OlusegunObasanjo before the 2007 presidential election. Most of the leaders of SNG that protested in Lagos and Abuja (including this writer) to ensure that Vice President Jonathan was given his entitlements after the passing of President UmaruYar’Adua were Yoruba. There is no way that President Jonathan would readily forget the struggle that gave birth to the Doctrine of Necessity. It was the intervention of the same SNG that made it possible for President Jonathan to know that several of those who pretended to be helping him to import petroleum for use by the masses were in fact economic saboteurs who were too glad to reap where they did not sow. It was the exposure of such saboteurs of the nation’s economy that led to attempts to prosecute some of the subsidy fraudsters.Afenifere should not for one minute believe that the president would forget this act of patriotism on the part of SNG, more so that the attempt to prosecute subsidy thieves has become a poster child in the attempt to fight corruption in the country.

    Even if the president believes the claim of its image makers that opposition political parties in the Yoruba region are critical of his presidency because he belongs to a minority group, he is not likely to believe that the generality of Yoruba people did not make it possible for him to become Nigeria’s first transformation President in 2011. Thousands of Yoruba voters who should normally have voted for a progressive party in the 2011 presidential election abandoned their party’s candidate to vote for Jonathan who they know is from Otuoke, a minority group, even in the context of theSouthsouth. The President is not likely to forget this part of the history of his election so soon. There are reasons to believe this: two of his image makers, hired at different times, are Yoruba; Abati and Okupe.

    Afenifere Renewal should seek a dialogue with President Jonathan, in addition to writing a petition to the Federal Character Commission. In the face-to-face dialogue, Afenifere should impress on Jonathan that Yoruba traditional‘concern for equity, fairness, and justice for all’ provides the only credible philosophical framework for transformation, rather than an excuse for marginalisation.

  • 2013: A year of infinite possibilities

    2013: A year of infinite possibilities

    Cleaning the nation’s Augean stables is a million times more rewarding than being a 2-term president

    Welcome to 2013. It shall be well with us all. Amen

    In a recent article he captioned ‘The Year That ‘Was’ 2013″, the author, Victor Oladokun, indicated that he is neither a prognosticator nor a prophet; rather that he is only an observer of future trends, and do believe that ‘beyond the realm of ‘impossibility’ is infinite possibility and that it is possible to create the future by working backwards’.

    From here he proceeded to itemise 20 things he believed ‘happen’ in the country in 2013; which ‘happenings’ some have described as either quixotic or utopian, but which I personally found inspirational enough to lead me to comment on the article as follows on a web portal:

    ‘I must say am humbled by the gentle man’s thought process. That it is inspirational is not a surprise as Victor Oladokun had more than paid his dues, producing/presenting Turning Point, a programme devoted to life-changing experiences, especially, the spiritual. In sane societies, while individuals will read this and use it to moderate their own life style and see it as a PUSH for great things that can happen, especially amongst the youth, but more particularly, in the group of the upwardly mobile and the middle class which do create businesses, the government could use it to inspire totally unforeseen, yet very impactful, set of actions that can change peoples’ perception of it as being a laggard. The amount of importance we give the document could also enable us accord ideas its rightful place in development. The federal government can find the document useful beyond our wildest imagination given that it is at that level that a country’s macro-economic plans and programmes are incubated’

    A word then about the author and some of his prognosis as, given our space constraint, we would have to deal with those affecting the entire country first and, in the concluding part, touch on those that can significantly reduce unemployment in Nigeria by facilitating the emergence of IT as a driver of business. A graduate of the Great University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Dr Victor Oladokun, the versatile, long-running, erstwhile producer/presenter of TURNING POINT is a broadcaster, writer, media & leadership consultant, and a public speaker, all rolled into one. It is the totality of his expertise in these various callings he puts together as his New Year message to Nigerians. See http://www.ynaija.com/victor-oladokun-the-year-that-was-2013.

    What then are the basic ingredient of his message?

    OLADOKUN: ‘THE YEAR of ME:

    ‘2013 was the year when millions of Nigerians engaged in Meaningful life and work. It was a year when we all owned, dealt with, and cleaned up our Meanness and our MEsses. In our families, at work, in our communities, and as a nation, we set aside the incessant negativity that comes from pointing the finger, blaming and shaming others. Instead, we let change begin with ‘ME’.

    COMMENT: At the burial of the late National Security Adviser, the President said: “If Nigerians would change their attitude, you will realise that most of these issues being attributed to corruption are not caused by corruption,” I agree with him but rather than his example of most accidents happening on good roads, I would merely say that in my childhood, growing up in Ekiti, a passerby would not as much as touch the banana laid by the roadside without paying for it. Today, put a battalion of soldiers, Nigerians would still try to cheat the owner. The earlier is an example of our peoples’ attitude then before the contamination brought about by today’s penchant for fast living.

    Therefore, like the President said, an attitudinal change is key to getting us out of our national morass.

    OLADOKUN: THE END OF PROFLIGATE GOVERNMENT SPENDING:

    ‘Positioning himself for 2015, … the President banned lavish banquets and luxurious cars; showed that he is irreversibly committed to stamping out wanton waste by thieving politicians and civil servants’.

    COMMENT: Again, this is attitudinal and the president must lead the way by personal example. No multi- billion banquet halls and asinine Vice-Presidential lodges are jettisoned just as he no longer appoints tainted politicians to important public offices or be their cheer leader to acquire higher national or political party posts, all with an eye on 2015.

    OLADOKUN: THERE WAS ‘LIGHT

    ‘In 2013, we found the magic switch and exclaimed in unison “we have seen the light!” Refurbished thermal generating plants in Egbin; hydroelectric power stations in Kainji, Shiroro, and Jebba; Gas turbines in Afam and Sapele in the Niger Delta; and solar power farms scattered across Nigeria’s northern belt, together churned out 15,000 uninterrupted mega watts of power that more than met domestic, commercial, and export needs. As we go into 2014, millions of Nigerians are saying their stress levels have gone down; business boomed, industrial output quadrupled, electronic media consumption broke all records, and street lighting on all major roads increased overall security.

    COMMENT: This is self-evident. The President should, rather than the next election, concentrate his mind on bringing these about. He does this, the Nigerian leadership cabal will no longer turn to Obasanjo but will merely ask him to ‘carry go’. But can he; does he dream those dreams a leader, to be successful, must?

    OLADOKUN:TRANSPARENT ACCOUNTABILITY:

    ‘Instead of being branded the 35th most corrupt nation in the world, and placing 139th out of 176 countries surveyed in Transparency International’s 2012 global Anti-Corruption Index, in 2013 Nigeria jumped 39 notches to place 100 on the Index, ushering in a new era of accountability and transparency at all levels of Federal and State Governance in budgeting, spending, audits, project performance, and the activities of the military, judiciary, the House and Senate, NNPC, EFCC, NPF, Customs, Immigration, institutions of higher learning, and a host of public institutions; as well as a more aggressive prosecution of those engaged in fraud and corrupt practices’.

    COMMENT: At first, looks like a chimera but certainly not impossible. We once saw Saakashvili sack 16000 Georgian police men for corruption in one day and the heavens did not fall. If Jonathan’s hands are not clean, let him make restitution, but if they are, let him go after all the known thieves in the land. Cleaning the nation’s Augean stable is a million times more rewarding than being a 2-term president.

    OLADOKUN: TRANSFORM NIGERIA

    ‘became a popular slogan in 2013 as Government leaders and proven private sector stakeholders had a meeting of the minds. The tremendous value of a maintenance culture finally dawned on our collective consciousness. Following the public outcry that came on the heels of the scandalous amounts of Naira mentioned in the construction of an Aso Rock Banquet Hall and a new Vice Presidential Mansion in 2012, a nation-wide list of strategic projects in roads, schools, hospitals, stadiums, airports and buildings were identified, evaluated, and contracted out for complete overhauls. The end result was that hundreds of thousands of Nigerians became gainfully employed; monumental eyesores became shimmering landmarks of excellence; community-wide pride of ownership became the norm; and since like tends to beget like, the rehabilitation and maintenance culture had a domino effect throughout Nigeria’

    COMMENT: Again, Nigeria can be transformed. It depends upon you and I and it is attitudinal and therefore less depending on President Jonathan though his personal life of sacrifice will facilitate and enhance the process.

    TO BE CONCLUDED