Category: Opinion

This year marks the 120th anniversary of the birth of Norman Washington Manley, a world-class high school athlete, Rhodes Scholar, decorated First World War military hero, prizeman of Gray’s Inn in 1922, acknowledged as the Caribbean’s finest legal mind, and the first Jamaican to appear before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Manley, a bi-racial Jamaican, was born on July 4, 1893, in Roxborough, Manchester Parish, Jamaica. He attended the famous Jamaica College, Kingston, and later, as a Rhodes Scholar, read law at Jesus College, University of Oxford, where he took a first and was second on the list in 1921. He saw much frontline fighting in Northern France and Flanders (including at the Third Battle of Ypres, 1917, the First World War’s bloodiest battle), and was awarded the Military Medal for bravery.

Manley entered politics in 1938 when he formed the People’s National Party. A moderate democratic socialist, he spearheaded the fight for universal adult suffrage, constitutional reform and self-government, and the establishment of a West Indian federation. He also sought to infuse a sense of national consciousness and unity into a Jamaican society bitterly divided along class and colour lines. He lost the first election under the new constitution of 1944, which he, more than anyone, fought so hard to bring about. He therefore remained in opposition between 1945 and 1955, as his cousin and chief political rival, Alexander Bustamante, and his Jamaica Labour Party (a party that had, despite its name, a conservative philosophy), formed the government.

Manley’s opportunity came in 1955, when he won the general election by a slim margin, and became chief minister of Jamaica. He was re-elected in 1959, when Jamaica attained full internal self-government, and was re-designated the premier of Jamaica. His period in office was characterized by progressive social change, of the type seen in Western Nigeria under Chief Obafemi Awolowo; in India under Nehru; and in Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew as he created instruments vital for planning. Under him, the indigenization and training of the civil service took on an unprecedented pace. By 1958, he was spending 15% of government funds on education, the result of which was an unprecedented widening and diversifying of educational opportunity. His agrarian reform saw, through the Land Bond Law, a more equitable distribution of land among Jamaica’s poor and landless. However, his attempts at increasing agricultural production by offering incentives and facilities for soft loans yielded disappointing results.

Manley was more successful in skilfully renegotiating the rates of royalties and taxes paid by foreign multinationals mining bauxite in Jamaica, as revenue from bauxite mining grew six fold by 1960. Manley’s strategy for economic development called for government intervention, and in some cases, direction, in order to increase the productive powers of the country.

Like so many Third World countries, Jamaica did not have the resources to finance its development. It was without capital. The process of internal capitalization and of re-investment had to be started. Manley tried “industrialization by invitation,” as his National Plan for 1957-67 aimed at providing incentives for private investors and offering as many inducements as were reasonable to attract as much capital as possible. This policy produced such results that the people gave Manley and the PNP an increased majority in the general election of 1959.

Manley, a long time advocate of a West Indian federation, had always linked the economic and political development of Jamaica with the establishment of this federation. Unfortunately, the pursuit of this ideal was to be his undoing. He was forced by Bustamante’s opposition to agree to a referendum in 1961 on the issue of federation. He made a tactical error in agreeing to this, and lost the referendum, which weakened him and contributed to his narrow defeat in the general election of 1962. He therefore lost the opportunity to Bustamante, who was described by Harold Macmillan, the British premier, as “old and ruthless, and the most attractive demagogue in the area” of leading Jamaica to independence, which was attained only six months later.

It was a sad and ironic end to an illustrious career, as he had done more than any man to lead Jamaica to Dominion status. He continued to serve as opposition leader till he relinquished that office in 1969. He died a few months later on September 2, 1969. His second son, Michael Manley, subsequently took over the leadership of the PNP, leading it back into government and serving two terms as prime minister of Jamaica between 1972-1980 and 1989-1992.

Manley was a man who tended to be reserved and formal, and did not suffer fools gladly. Former Gleaner editor-in-chief, Theodore Sealy, described him as, “Gamin and genius, shy yet arrogant, coldly analytical yet given to much emotion.”

He was also quick-tempered and could be combative. His greatest legacy to Jamaica, the Caribbean, and the Third World, was the nobility that he brought to the art of politics. He was a high-minded and very honourable (he had the opportunity of coming to power in 1949, when five members of the government approached him and opted to cross the carpet on the condition that he gave them ministerial positions in the government he formed. An agreement had been reached and all was set for the announcement, but Manley changed his mind at the last minute and said it would be wrong to come to power by such trickery.

Sir Arthur Richards later Lord Milverton, an exceptionally able colonial administrator who later became Governor of Nigeria, 1943-48, after serving as governor of Jamaica, made the following observation, in a letter to the Colonial Office, about Manley, with whom he had a difficult relationship: “…I wrote him a private note offering to see him and talk over privately the possibility of his co-operation with this administration unless he felt it per se to be impossible. He accepted readily and stayed from 5 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. It was a brilliant performance. He is a very complex personality and he talks on such occasions with all the ascetic aloofness of an Indian saint. The highest principles and the loftiest motives, with no mundane flaws to stain their radiance….Talking to him it is difficult to feel anything but admiration for the selfless patriot who has given up everything that makes

life worth living….No wonder he fascinates all comers….”

Harold Macmillan, the British prime minister between 1957-63, described him, in his memoirs, in the following terms : “…In the afternoon we flew to Jamaica, where there were the usual receptions and guards of honour, followed by a formal dinner in the evening. From the political point of view, by far the most interesting experience was my hour’s talk with Norman Manley. I had heard much about him from Stafford Cripps, who had a great admiration for him, but I was hardly prepared to meet such a remarkable figure….He is head and shoulders above any other politician in the West Indies.”

Sir Philip Sherlock, a former Vice-Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, recorded the following about Manley in 1962: “….Manley happened to be in Trinidad on business with the federal government, and he came out to see my wife and I. I knew that he had spent everything he had in supporting the People’s National Party, but I was moved beyond words when, on leaving, he turned to me and said quite simply, without a trace of bitterness, ‘I am practically bankrupt. I must sell Drumblair.’ It was his true home, and Edna’s (his wife) also; the place where she began her creative happy life in Jamaica.” And this was in 1962, when he had just relinquished the office of premier of Jamaica! Such integrity and selfless sacrifice would be unthinkable today in many Third World – particularly African – countries! Unfortunately, Manley, who was Jamaica’s leading lawyer between 1922 and 1955, when he entered government, was never able to recover his former pre-eminent position at the Bar. In my opinion, the greatness of Manley’s political leadership outstripped practically that of any other political leader that emerged in the 20th century from the Third World. The greatness was wider and based on firmer foundation than that of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Lee Kuan Yew, or Obafemi Awolowo. I would assert that even amongst leaders of the industrialized Western nations in the 20th century, only Franklin D. Roosevelt, Clement Attlee, and Konrad Adenauer (the West German chancellor, and architect of his country’s miraculous post-war recovery) challenge comparison. May his great soul continue to rest in peace.

In Ekiti State, there is heat again. And at the heart of the matter is the choice of who will become the next governor. Though the election is not due till 2014, the usual pandering has begun. To this end, some political jobbers have started what they know to do best – politricking. It is clear some opposing political fronts want the incumbent governor ousted. And while, I think developmental strides of politicians should not be applauded loudly, Dr. Kayode Fayemi’s performance as governor of Ekiti State is very commendable in light of the previous administrations.

I must state that the purpose of this article is to redirect the citizens’ need to make a right choice, when the time comes. As someone that has followed Ekiti politics, I’ve come to know that governor Fayemi administration has touched the lives of Ekiti citizens.

Recently, to ensure that development at the grassroots level, Governor Fayemi gave N300m to 82 communities. The gesture was a result of meetings held with the rural people across the state. Also, apart from the money disbursed for developmental purposes, realising that agriculture is a primary sector of the economy, the state government has sought to continue encouraging farmers, especially through co-operative societies. To this end, co-operative societies would get N300m while the Bank of agriculture would get an additional N300m – all for the farmers. Surely, this is what democracy should be about.

Aside this recent largesse, the governor has been up and doing in regards to delivering other ‘democracy dividends.’ Hitherto, it used to be a thing of pride that the average Ekiti family boasted of having at least a PhD holder. But, with the decline in the education sector in the country, sustaining that pride had become cumbersome.

However, realising the importance of education, the Fayemi-led government upon inception, trained 9,000 primary and secondary school teachers. Afterwards, it conducted a test for its teachers to make sure they still had what it takes to impart knowledge to their students. This was in addition to revamping school buildings, provision of classroom furniture, books, and computers – all necessary ingredients of a qualitative education.  It also instituted a system to reward performing teachers. Also, considering that finance could also be a barrier to indigent but brilliant students, the Fayemi administration paid for the West African Senior Secondary Certificate Examinations (WASSCE) of students in the state. Blind, deaf, and dumb students also had their schools renovated to modern standards. And recently, graduate indigenes of the state, were hosted to a two-week Ikogosi Graduate Summer School held at the Ikogosi Warm Springs Resort. This is the sort of premium his administration places on education.

Secondly, bearing in mind that ‘health is wealth’, the Fayemi administration restructured the state’s health sector. Salaries of health workers were increased in line with the new salary structure (CONMESS/CONHESS) for health workers. But, most importantly, the administration launched a free health programme on July 25, 2011. And beneficiaries turned out in hundreds of thousands. Currently, primary healthcare centres provide free health services to children under the age of five, pregnant women, elders aged 65 and above, as well as physically challenged persons in the state. This treatment involves provision of drugs and equipment to ensure quality service delivery.

And, in the area of tourism, the popular Ikogosi warm spring resort was given a make-over. Hitherto, the logistics of visiting there with the bad roads and inappropriate lodgings discouraged all, except the straggly tourists. This scenario was bad for tourism and consequently for business. But, with roads constructed to the place and hospitable lodgings in the offerings, Ikogosi now holds a better promise. Other tourist sites are also getting deserved attention. I really wonder why previous administrations failed to do this.

While to political detractors, these strides may be counted as rubbish, I want to bet that the beneficiaries, who include children, wards, and relatives of some of detractors, would wish such programmes continue.

Before Fayemi’s administration came on board, the state was in a sort of doldrums. Former governor Ayo Fayose who had earlier usurped the people’s mandate became a spendthrift, a move which earned him arraignment on a 27-count charge bordering on misappropriation of state funds. He left Ekiti in a pitiable level – schools and hospitals were in bad shape, the civil service operated epileptically, roads caved in, and life in the state became minimal. And not too long ago, posters of Fayose flooded the streets of Ekiti, suggesting a desire to come-back into office. I doubt Ekiti citizens would want to revert back to the draconian and reductive days of the past.

As it is, Fayemi’s government in Ekiti State may not the best that it could be, but it is still the best yet. And I’m sure Ekiti people are aware of that. But, should a better candidate come up, Ekiti citizens must not hesitate to throw their weight solidly behind whoever that candidate is. But, I must warn here, Ekiti parapo, and think well, because most times, it is just pure folly to change a winning team.

• Durodola writes from Ado-Ekiti

Some of my personal friends – the men who are close to me, whom I respect, and in whom I commonly confide – are members of the Igbo nation. I became close to these through university and my academic profession, through the church, and in the course of my participation in Nigerian politics.

Moreover, I have had a special interest in the Igbo nation, as a nation, since my undergraduate days in the University College Ibadan. In Ibadan, as a young undergraduate, I found myself among a unique group, the group that was being nurtured to spearhead a revolution in the study of African History. In our various secondary schools, we had all been fed only British Empire History, and some bits of European History. But now in Ibadan, we sat under intellectual icons like Kenneth Dike, Ade Ajayi, H.F.C Smith, J.D. Omer-Cooper, A.B. Aderibigbe and others, and learned that our own Black African peoples (Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, Kanuri, Edo, Dahomey, Akhan, etc, across the face of Black Africa) have histories too. It was great enlightenment for us to see that the pseudo-scientific histories of some African countries that some European colonial agents had written were not the final words on the subject, and that it was our duty to begin to do proper histories of our continent. We were surprised to learn that the fact that our peoples had no writing did not mean that they had no history, and that it was our duty to learn the techniques of using our peoples’ oral traditions, plus inputs from such sciences as archaeology and historical linguistics, to reconstruct the histories of our peoples. It was, believe me, intoxicating. Naturally, as soon as UCI attained its own independence from London University and became Ibadan University in 1962, its History Department pulled some of us back to Ibadan as graduate students, and asked us to begin to do serious research in African History. We became the first generation of African Historians to be educated on the African continent.

Inevitably, we quickly found that the histories of those of our peoples (like the Yoruba, Edo, Hausa, Ashanti, etc) who had developed towns and kingdoms in their past were easier to research and reconstruct than the histories of our other peoples (like the Igbo) who had lived mostly in simpler – what was called acephalous – societies (peoples who had developed no towns or kingdoms), etc. None of our professors, not even Kenneth Dike, had dared to tackle Igbo history frontally. They had mostly worked on aspects of the British colonial experience as it had touched the Igbo nation. But, finally, thank God, a member of my own class, Adiele Afigbo, after taking his PH.D., sat down at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, and brought the best of what we had learned at Ibadan into the task of reconstructing Igbo History. And he made a very impressive success of it. In fact, he was so successful that, a few years ago, one of the most eminent of the younger men whom we ourselves had taught, Professor Toyin Falola, respectfully collected together into one volume Professor Afigbo’s most important essays on Igbo history. Then Professor Falola proposed that we should all join hands to do a book in Adiele Afigbo’s honour. I was already retired, but I pulled myself together and wrote a chapter for that book. Unfortunately, soon after these things, Adiele Afigbo passed away. Because of the difficulties that it presented, reconstructing Igbo History is regarded among us, Nigerian historians, as one of our greatest victories.

I find it, therefore,mortifying that many members of the Igbo nation, including some of our most educated and eminent citizens, seem now absolutely determined to distort the history of the Igbo nation itself as well as the histories of many other Nigerian peoples. Some of what one reads from these Igbo men and women these days are very strange indeed – anddo nothing but harm to the history and image of the Blackman in the world.

Many Igbo citizens are now clamouring that the Igbo nation is one of the lost tribes of Israel! In short, they are now happily reasserting something that their Nigerian and other historians have fought and struck down in the course of the past 60 years – namely, the European claim that the Blackman is too primitive, and too immature, to develop any serious culture, and that any signs of cultural achievement found among any Black nation must have somehow come there from some culturally more capable Middle Eastern people. Many Igbo people are now saying something blatantly untrue – namely, that the art of Igbo Ukwu, the evidence of Igbo skills in metal fabrications, the Igbo capability as traders, etc, all came from the culture of the Jewish people, and that the Igbo people themselves could never have developed such high levels of culture or civilization. Why are we now engaging in self-denigration – why are we doing this harm and ignoring the best facts that the best in historical scholarship and various other sciences have established quite definitively in our times?

Some Igbo citizens also seem to find it fashionable to say that the Igbo are the only indigenous or autochthonous people in what is now Nigeria.A prominent Igbo citizen, Dr. Pius Ezeife, was reported recently as saying, “The only autochthonous Nigerians are the Igbo”.From where did these people get this piece of untruth? According to the very best in scholarship, the place where man first lived in the world was the Rift Valley area in East Africa (in modern Kenya and Ethiopia). From there man slowly spread out to all parts of the world. In Africa, some spread to the then large grassland territory that was later to become the Sahara Desert. There they developed Stone Age cultures. After millennia, as the area gradually dried up due to climatic change, some of the people spread slowly southwards into West Africa – and became the very first humans in West Africa. Most lived along the Middle Niger, down to the Niger-Benue confluence. By about the 10th century, they became farming folks and therefore began to live as settlers. That made it possible for a sort of proto-language to develop among them – a proto-language which then gradually split into various proto-languages. These proto-languages gradually developed into mature languages. The speakers of each language became an ethnic group. The ethnic groups are the Nupe, Gbagyi, Kakanda, Ebira, Igala, Idoma, Yoruba, Igbo, Edo etc. Over time, these groups spread out of the Niger Valley and occupied the territories that are now their homelands. Each of these peoples is indigenous to their homeland. None can claim to be the only indigenous or autochthonous people in Nigeria.

But there is another angle to this early history. There is no truth in the claims being made by some Igbo that every occurrence of the word Igbo in any place outside Igboland is evidence of some early presence or influence of the Igbo nation. Because of the common origin of the languages of our many peoples, many words are common to our different languages. The known fact, authenticated by no less a historian than Professor Afigbo, is that before the British creation of Nigeria, the Igbo had no contacts with peoples other than their immediate neighbours – Igala, Idoma, Efik, Ibibio, Ijaw, and Edo.

Many Igbo people are also saying of the Benin Empire that it was “a village empire”, and therefore inconsequential in our history. Well, they are very very wrong. With the exception of the Kanuri nation in the Northeast, we have more documentary information concerning Benin history than we have concerning the history of any other Nigerian people.By the time the first European explorers came to the West African coast in about 1480, Benin was already a prestigious kingdom. In the centuries that followed, Benin’s position in the coastal trade with Europeans helped it to grow into a rich and gorgeous empire. The Benin Empire is a source of pride to most Black Africans. Where did our Igbo brethren get their own disparaging opinions about the Benin Empire?

Many Igbo citizens have been saying also that Lagos is a no-man’s land – that Lagos only belonged to the lagoon; that the Igbo developed Lagos. It is shocking that members of one of our own nations should be so carelessly, and blatantly falsely, twisting and distorting the history of any of our peoples. I don’t think that Lagos needs any defence against this egregious falsehood. I don’t care what Igbo people want, and I am intervening only as one of the men who have spent whole adult lives studying the history of our peoples. I have stood up in many situations (in writing) against the views popularized by the European colonialists that the Igbo are not a people and have no culture and no history. According to the best scholarship on this subject, the Awori subgroup of the Yoruba people established typical Yoruba kingdoms in the Lagos coastlands and islands as early as the 12th century. By the 19th century, the island kingdom of Eko was so important in the coastal trade that it became a bone of contention among merchants of various European nations. The British, in order to control most of the trade, used brute force to establish dominance on the Lagos kingdom in 1851, and then signed a treaty of cession with the Lagos king in 1861. Fifty-three years later, in 1914, they made Lagos the capital of their new Protectorate of Nigeria, and many Nigerians, including the Igbo, first began to come to Lagos in the 1920s. What is the foundation, therefore, of the statement that Lagos belonged only to the lagoon until the Igbo came? And where is the evidence that the Igbo contributed more to the development of Lagos, as federal capital, than other peoples of Nigeria, or as much as the Lagos people themselves and the larger Yoruba nation to which Lagos belongs? What is the value of engaging in such obvious falsehood?

Again, I am not talking about what the Igbo may want. But I am certainly interested in the welfare and future of the Igbo nation. I am concerned therefore that if the Igbo continue to earn for themselves the image of a people who are easily given to falsehood and to needlessly disparaging other Nigerian peoples, they may be building a strong barrier against their prospects in Nigeria. I know that some Igbo citizens have been warning about this. I strongly urge that the Igbo people should listen seriously to them.

Friday, August 2, Biola Sodeinde (not real name), was in her office in Abuja, when she heard a beep on her telephone. It was actually a bank alert, welcoming her into the club of millionaires. Although she confirmed that the account where the alert came in was actually hers, she was still not convinced about the reality of the figures before her eyes. Not with the numerous scam messages informing GSM users of billions of dollars they had “won” in strange promos they had no idea about.

Fidgeting, she went to contemplate, then came back and picked her bag, went into her boss’ office to ask for permission to attend to an urgent business and immediately rushed to a branch of her bank a few streets away, barely pausing to acknowledge any form of greetings. She had to double-check her information directly from the source. Of course, she did a few minutes later. Since then, she has not only become a new person, but the real import of one of the popular verses in the holy book “old things have passed away, behold, everything is new,” has come into a sharp focus.

Sodeinde’s story underscores the new gale sweeping across the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN), since real cash started dropping into the accounts of some of its workers a few days ago. It is a phenomenon that is not only swelling their accounts but their confidence as well because a new window where opportunities meet realities has since opened.

For those still at sea, the implication of this landmark development, signposts the beginning of the end of a journey, which started exactly 13 years ago, when the axiomatic first step of a thousand miles was taken to meet the power needs of Nigerians.

Though it has been a journey through a thorny, winding and crooked road, strewn with landmines, broken bottles and other sharp objects that inflicted deep and enduring wounds and pains on many stakeholders that walked through it, some of which they are still nursing till date, the promises of its ending appear to be worth the wait.

That is the underpinning outcome of the privatisation initiative, conceived as the panacea to steady power supply for Nigeria, an idea that was began to take effect with the development in the year 2000 of the National Electric Power Policy (NEPP), approved by then Federal Executive Council (FEC) under President Olusegun Obasanjo.

The development, which was hinged on making fundamental changes in the structure of ownership, control and regulation of the power sector, provided the framework for the eventual promulgation of the Electric Power Reform Act (EPRA), in 2005 that gave way to the transmutation of the defunct National Electric Power Authority (NEPA), to PHCN. By this metamorphosis, the new entity assumed the legal teeth to warehouse the assets and liabilities of the decades-old NEPA, including the staff.

However the concerns of workers as to their fate in the new formation, which began to manifest at this point added to other factors in stalling the process. The attempt by their leaders to cut out the fairest deal and the insistence of government stakeholders to grant only what was practical, realistic and legal, drove a wedge into what ordinarily was considered in certain quarters as a done-deal. The effect was a monstrous set of crises that burgeoned over time.

Recall the situation in the power sector by this time a year ago. Surely, nobody would have forgotten that era of long knives when the devil himself practically took over and held the entire sector and Nigeria at large by the jugular, threatening to snuff out life from the vortex of the privatisation engine, cause a crack in it and bring it to an abrupt and unedifying death. Recall the lockouts, the confrontation between workers and the security force; the vigils and prayer sessions and deafening din; the gradual push towards the edge of the precipice; the apparent fear of that final push to tip the entire process and bring the dream cascading down to the bottom of jagged rocks and eventually crashing to an inevitable death.

Compare the sharp difference of that era of despondency among the PHCN staff and now with the experiences of the likes of Biola. That is when the import of the new reality becomes evident.

At the centre of it all is the Minister of Power, Professor Chinedu Ositadinma Nebo. A few days ago, the minister gave the nod for the commencement of actual payment of the severance benefits of the PHCN workers. This was hinged on the completion of the paper works, including forensic assessment and documentation of the records of beneficiaries.

According to media reports quoting the Chairman of the Implementation Committee, for the exercise and Permanent Secretary Ministry of Power, Ambassador Godknows Igali, N118billion has been approved for the first tranche of the payment of about 20,304 staff who have been cleared for the Generation (GENCOs) and Distribution (DISCOs) companies whose names were sent to the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation (OAGF), the outcome of which has already registered in the accounts of the beneficiaries.

What could be more demonstrable evidence of his ability and potency for exorcising the demons and witches in the power sector, which Nebo had promised the nation even before assuming his seat than this feat of taming this particular devil in the labour conflict? Of course other demons had fallen before now, one which also gave way for the enthusiastic payment of 25 per cent of the cost of the GENCOs and DISCOs by their new owners in April.

With the apparent demise of the “labour devil” and the expected burial by the time each of the PHCN workers smiles home with his pay cheques, the coast would have been clear for the handover of the facilities to private hands, signalling the safe berth of the privatisation ship.

That is when another phase will begin. Nebo enthusiastically calls it “Awakening the Nigerian Giant.” This is an era which he envisages will become a child’s play to the transformation experienced in the country’s telecommunications industry; where Nigerians, enjoying uninterrupted power supply will go back to work again, unleashing in the process, in their own country the full potentials and resilience through which they not only became indispensable elsewhere in the globe but practically squeezed water out of stones to eke out a living at home; where industrialists will no longer suffer huge costs of production as a result of generating their own power, the wielders, hairdressers, cold room operators and other artisans, who are actually seen by economists as the real engine of economic growth will be fully engaged and earn an honest living; where by so doing, few would have little time for the devil to use them as a workshop by leading them into unimaginable vices including crimes; where the gory stories of deaths by carbon monoxide from generators would be told in the past tense and where the revving engine of growth will continuously propel the nation to achieving its fullest potentials as one of God’s most endowed nations of the world.

That’s what is in the offing at the moment. Already, Anambra State, especially Awka, the state capital and environs now report almost a 24-hour power supply. In a few months time Abuja, Nigeria’s seat of government would start experiencing 24-hour power supply while strategic industrial cities like Lagos would get a minimum of 22 hours.

It may yet be early to roll out the drums and call the party right now. But who would blame Nebo if he takes a drink now as the nation awaits this great end?

• Igboanugo, a journalist wrote from Abuja.

In a previous life when I was a National Immunisation Programme Manager in Ghana, I saw firsthand the challenges that many African states face in delivering healthcare. Last week, while attending the Ministerial Forum on China-Africa Health Development, representing the GAVI Alliance, I was struck by the common legacy that China and countries across Africa share in overcoming such obstacles, and the important gains that have been made.

China and African countries also share a vision for the future: one where all citizens have a chance to lead healthy and productive lives. Our governments understand the African proverb that if you want to go fast, go alone, if you want to go far, go together.

To forge the path ahead, dozens of health ministers from across Africa and high-level Chinese government officials met at the Ministerial Forum on China-Africa Health Development in Beijing, China last week. Along with representatives of international organisations including the United Nations, they explored ways to strengthen their partnership towards greater health gains across the continent.

Ministers at the Forum also signed the Beijing Declaration of the Ministerial Forum on China-Africa Health Development, which sets a vision for a continued partnership to address a number of pressing health issues that affect Nigeria and other African countries disproportionately. Among these are HIV, malaria, schistosomiasis, reproductive health, immunisation and vaccine-preventable diseases. The declaration also highlights efforts to address the shortage of healthcare workers and increase joint research efforts. Moving forward, China-African cooperation will aim to align with African countries’ priorities as well as national and regional development plans.

These new actions at the forum build on the long-standing health partnership between China and African countries, which began when China first sent medical teams to the continent 50 years ago. Since then, China has worked with countries to establish hospitals, clinics and malaria control centers in many African countries as well as sharing technical expertise to help address health issues.

Recognising these past efforts, officials at the forum emphasised that they are entering a “new era” of Sino-African health cooperation that will meet the health needs and priorities of African countries more effectively, including Nigeria.

By working together as partners from the Global South, China and African countries can help develop sustainable, local solutions to health challenges. Addressing shortages of doctors, nurses and health technicians and improving health facilities are just some of the ways that the partnership can drive greater health impacts across the continent. Additionally, China and African countries are exploring ways to increase access to high-quality, low-cost health technologies produced in China that can make a public health impact.

China’s partnership with Africa draws on the lessons it has learned from improving the health of its own citizens, and is generating solutions to many health issues, issues which continue to affect millions of Africans.

Although many countries on the continent have made progress in increasing access to vaccines, many children still remain unimmunised. Through advances in disease surveillance, service delivery and research and development, China has reduced childhood deaths and illness from diseases such as polio, which was once widespread.

Another example is China’s partnership with the GAVI Alliance to increase access to immunisation against hepatitis B, a disease that can cause chronic liver infection and cancer. Just a decade ago hepatitis B infected one in 10 Chinese children. Today, less than one percent of children under five are chronic carriers. Such an improvement shows the dramatic gains that can be achieved by expanding access to immunisation. Through sharing best practices, technical expertise and innovations, China and Africa’s partnership can work towards addressing other health priorities across the continent.

Chinese and African leaders at the forum further pledged to develop a strategy that is responsive to the needs and priorities of African countries, and which invests in country-led development. The Nigerian government, like many of its counterparts across Africa, aims to create a health agenda that is led by African leaders and health professionals and which puts the country on a path toward sustainable progress. In May, when I joined African and Chinese officials at the International Roundtable on China-Africa Health Collaboration in Botswana, we engaged in similar consultations to help inform policies and initiatives for the partnership moving forward.

Chinese and African partners will work closely with multilateral and international organisations to help strengthen and scale-up joint efforts. The GAVI Alliance is committed to supporting China-Africa health cooperation to drive even greater impact.

Health plays a key role in reducing poverty and helping the world’s poorest communities build self-sufficiency and accelerate their own development. When people are healthy, they can reach their fullest potential. Through collaboration on health, China, Nigeria and other African countries will help advance the well-being and prosperity of all of their citizens. China and African countries have built a strong partnership over the past 50 years and, together, they can achieve even more in the decades to come.

•Dr. Ahun, Special Representative for GAVI eligible countries was formerly the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) manager of Ghana.