The Nation Newspaper

Category: Comments

  • Curtailing the spread of cholera

    Curtailing the spread of cholera

    SIR: Cholera was first reported in Nigeria in 1970. From 1990, large outbreaks were reported in 1991, 1996 and 1999 and from 2009 to 2011. Between 2004 and 2016, a total of 154,910 cases and 5,127 deaths were reported. The largest outbreaks were reported in the northern states of the country. In the north, outbreaks often spread from Nigeria to neighbouring countries around Lake Chad (Niger, Chad and Cameroon) and in the south along the Gulf of Guinea.

    Cholera is an infection caused by the bacteria vibrio cholerae. More often than not, the bacteria is transmitted via contaminated water or food that has come into contact with contaminated water. The most common symptoms of cholera include extensive watery diarrhoea, severe vomiting, nausea, dehydration, loss of electrolytes, and muscle cramps. Severe cases may result in death, especially among children and the elderly.

    Cholera has been almost eradicated in most developed nations worldwide. It is, however, still a major health hazard in sub-Saharan Africa, south and south-east Asia, some parts of the Middle East and South America. Outbreaks of cholera may occur after natural disasters such as earthquakes or after war when there is overcrowding and lack of sanitation. Travellers are also susceptible to catching cholera, especially if they are travelling to areas where cholera is still endemic.

    Read Also: Osun govt denies 13 reported cholera cases

    Good hygiene, access to clean drinking water, adequate sanitation facilities, and hand washing before eating and after using the toilet are simple measures that have reduced the incidence of cholera worldwide.

    There is an oral vaccine that can help prevent cholera and is estimated to be 85% effective. Vaccination is recommended for travelling to areas where cholera is endemic, such as refugee camps and war zones.

    The severe dehydration and loss of electrolytes from the body through vomiting and diarrhoea can cause death among victims of cholera. The first and foremost therapy is, therefore, replenishment of fluids and electrolytes in the form of Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS), as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). An ORS sachet contains a powder made up of salts and glucose, which can be dissolved in clean drinking water. Antibiotics are also useful in reducing symptoms and treating the disease.

    It is now imperative to all Nigerians to be vigilant and adhere to these hygiene practices to protect themselves and their loved ones from cholera. Nigerians should also to be on red alert and report any case of cholera to the nearest hospital to avoid or avert the spread of the dearly disease.

    • Adémólá Òrúnbon Olomore, Abeokuta, Ogun State.
  • Four things Tinubu can do to save legacy    

    Four things Tinubu can do to save legacy    

    Nigeria has its back against the wall to an extent unparalleled since independence. In all the other economic challenges it has faced – the oil price shocks of the 1970s and 1980s, the debt crisis of the 1990s, the recession in 2016, and the economic asphyxiation triggered by the global pandemic in 2020 – the country could navigate its way through by leveraging its oil wealth and international financial assistance within a framework of relatively stable global markets and regional alliances. However, today’s economic landscape is marked by stagflation – a portmanteau of high inflation, a declining economic growth rate, and high unemployment, which threatens to break Nigeria’s economic resilience with the Nigerian government facing liquidity constraints amidst high debt and dwindling revenues.

    Politicians’ exorbitant lifestyles have always created the faux perception that Nigeria’s public finances are enough to make her citizens prosperous. The fact that the national cake appears too big for politicians to treat as à la carte does not necessarily negate the fact that it’s too small for Nigerians to ‘buffet’ on. The hard pill Nigerians have to swallow is that Nigeria is not and has never been a wealthy nation. The middle-class nostalgia over Dubai airfare tickets for N150,000 ten years ago is not an indicator of a solid economy – it is a smokescreen that never captured the largest subset of people in poverty.

    The naira has depreciated against major currencies over the last 5 decades since its introduction in 1973. Fela Kuti’s melodic tantrums would better represent the struggles within the economy from the 1970s to the early noughties to this day. Nigeria has always felt like a country in decline, where different governments come in quadrennially to either stabilize or accelerate the inevitable fall. Obasanjo stabilized the country, and Buhari accelerated the fall. The economic anatomy of the country has always been patched up by subsidies and phases of growth buoyed by the services industry and oil and gas.

    On a broader level, if a partial removal of fuel subsidies, electricity subsidies, and a managed float exchange rate system that reflects the intrinsic value of the naira could decimate and deplete the disposable income of the majority of the country, then we can now see the skeletons in the fiscal closet of the “Giant of Africa”. Is Nigeria tagged Giant of Africa because of her population or her economy?

    The now fourth largest economy in Africa had to choose between biting the bullet today or dying in a Russian roulette tomorrow.

    Nigeria is in a precarious situation today because the Federal government did not project the exchange rate to be $1 to N1500 which was facilitated by the second devaluation by this administration.

    Its original assumption was Naira should be trading at N700-N800 to the dollar, which tallied with JP Morgan’s projection of N850 in 2023. Opacity on Nigeria’s net FX reserves and commitments  (FX forwards, OTC futures, and currency swaps’) is partly responsible for the wide discrepancy in forecasts and actuals.

    When the current Nigerian president proclaimed “Subsidy is gone”, social commentators decried the hasty decision claiming he did not have a backup plan for the removal of petroleum subsidies. Petroleum subsidies were not funded in the 2023 budget and by the PIA and should not have existed beyond 17th February 2022. It was initially proposed to be removed by Goodluck Jonathan in 2012 and in a dramatic turn of fate has now come to affect its then antagonist, the current Nigerian President over a decade later.

    The panacea to the harsh effects of petroleum subsidy removal is efficient public transportation systems and constant electricity where people can depend less on petroleum. But the failure of state capacity to put this in place in yesteryears is why people cannot cope with the high fuel price which comparatively is still lower than fuel prices in other West African countries.

    Conditional cost transfers to vulnerable households would be a nice buffer to have but no one trusts the executive to execute it and quite rightly so. Stagnation in wages has also made affordability more strenuous, which has led to the current minimum wage debate and labor actions.

    The explicit breakdown of Nigeria’s budget suggests that the new minimum wage cannot be funded without accumulating more debt. Some data suggest the minimum wage is insignificant in the grand scheme of things as it only benefits 2% of the entire population given that only 5.3 million Nigerians are in the formal sector collecting wages (assuming all the employers in this bracket even pay the minimum wage).

    Another controversial economic debate surrounds the tariffs on essential commodities. The Senegalese president suspended customs duties and taxes on some basic items to alleviate the high cost of living in Senegal. Nigerians want similar treatment. If the Nigerian government were to tow a similar path, food inflation may decline but higher demand for scarce FX and deficit in government revenue would be unintended consequences FG would have to battle with again.

    It’s been a year since the new administration came in and they have been fighting fires from day one. Reconciling billions of dollars in FX backlogs, servicing high external and internal debt while battling inflation escalated by high food costs and a weak naira. FDIs and FPIs would keep exiting as a result of the capital controls by the previous administration but President Tinubu will take the fall for it in the eyes of the public.

    Borrowing monopoly lingo, the President needs a get-out-of-jail card. Unfortunately, his administration is not doing themselves any favors by approving Hajj subsidies, the construction of the VP’s residence, and procuring SUVs amongst other expenditures that contravene his promises on page 17 of the Renewed Hope Manifesto.

    The Special Adviser to the President in his rejoinder to the New York Times claimed Nigeria’s fuel subsidy regime gulped $84.39 billion between 2005 and 2022. He also said defending the currency also costs billions of dollars monthly. So it was imperative to discontinue both policies given that Nigeria has an infrastructural deficit of $120 billion with total public debt at $172 billion. Nigeria needs some financial re-engineering to channel oil and FX inflows to fix real issues that have more return on investment than consumption subsidies that cannot be sustained.

    Read Also: EFCC arrests two ex-bankers for stealing dead customer’s N4.1m

    The tough reforms he has taken may be appreciated by another generation that would outlive his stay in office if he can complement it with strong fundamental decisions. He has to create the foundation for recovery. Here are four things he needs to do.

    Fix Power

    Nigeria has always been a country that had potential. “Cheap labor”, “oil and gas reserves”, “geographically located at the coastline with access to major shipping routes”, and a young and energized population. However, it’s been missing the key component to harness all these elements – power. The power sector has been wretched and progress has been paltry over the years. Insufficient investment, policy flip flops (is it privatized or not?), and outdated infrastructure amongst other issues have impacted its development. President Tinubu needs to expend all his political capital to make Power work. History will forever remember him if he gives Nigerians constant electricity. That’s the backbone of development. That’s the gateway to replacing China and India which no longer have cheap labor as presumed.

    Fix the tax system and widen the tax net

    Nigeria has one of the lowest tax collection rates in the world at approximately 10.8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Nigeria’s tax collection system is complex and faces numerous challenges, but there are ongoing reforms and modernization efforts that aim to create a more efficient and equitable system. Improved tax compliance and administration are crucial for every country’s economic stability and growth. The government has to combat under-reporting, underassessment, evasion, and leakages as well as broaden the tax base/net. Two incentives for achieving this would be increased revenues to fund budgets and infrastructure deficits in the long-term and secondly, fulfilling one of the disbursement-linked indicators from the World Bank billion-dollar support facility would provide dollar cash flow in the short-term. President Tinubu needs to provide Nigeria with funds to support its meager budget which is 4 times less than South Africa’s budget. South Africa’s population is 3 times less than Nigeria’s.

    Integrate Nigeria’s National Identity Database

    The last Nigerian census was held in 2006. President Obasanjo presented to Nigerians the provisional population and housing result of 140,003,542 million people. Four presidents later, the Nigerian government has only relied on estimates for its population. According to the National Identity Management Commission, The number of Nigerians with National Identification Numbers rose to 104.16 million as of the end of December 2023. Those figures are less than its 2006 census data. Not capturing your entire population leads to poor planning outcomes, poor policy making, and most importantly security gaps. Launching the Consumer Credit Scheme before consolidating and validating your citizenry data is putting the cart before the horse. One of the mandates of the Credit scheme is strengthening Nigeria’s credit reporting system while ensuring every economically active citizen has a dependable credit score. How does the `President intend to do that without having a fully integrated national database?

    Restructure the country

    The current centralized structure stifles regional economic development. States are overly dependent on federal allocations, predominantly funded by oil revenues. This over-reliance on a single resource exposes the country to financial volatility, as seen during fluctuations in global oil prices. The longer Nigeria delays restructuring, the more embedded the existing issues become. Nigeria cannot change its fate with 1 leader. It needs its 36 governors, 774 Local government chairmen, 109 senators, and 360 House of Representatives to do something novel: they have to build a network of institutions and policies dedicated to development. They all need to be accountable for security, food, electricity, health, and infrastructure to the people they represent.

    These four things have to be done in parallel with being fiscally prudent. Public trust is at an all-time low. If the government cannot honor its social contract to its people during these trying times, then its days are numbered either through the ballot or through civil unrest.

  • The extreme-right and European politics: How worried should we be?

    The extreme-right and European politics: How worried should we be?

    • By Gerard Delanty

    To understand the outcome of the elections to the European Parliament (EP) it is necessary to see the election in the context of (1) national politics (2) global politics and (3) societal transformation. The extreme-right may be at the moment of consolidation in Europe but, arguably, they are also at their highpoint; they are a diverse and volatile group of parties and movements with limited capacity to govern.

    Significant moment in the post-war history of Europe

    The recent elections to the European Parliament represent a significant moment in the post-war history of Europe. The growing electoral appeal of the extreme right presents a major challenge for liberal democracy and for the European Union (EU). The era of stability that saw the emergence and consolidation of the EU is now over. The question, however, is how significant the extreme right is and whether we should be worried that what we are witnessing is a dangerous drift towards authoritarianism in Europe in a context of greater instability.

    Some contextualization is important. The results of the election, largely expected, can be read in different ways. While ever more voters – and in this instance, a surprisingly large number of younger voters especially in Germany – supported extreme right-wing parties, the majority of Europeans did not. As is well known, European Parliament elections do not have the same impact as national elections. However, despite the drift to the radical right, it seems that the center ground has prevailed, despite a significant challenge. This does not mean that we can be complacent and think nothing has changed. The extreme right has made significant gains. The Alternative for Germany (AfD), won the second-largest number of votes in Germany, after the center-right opposition. However, the extreme right is not a cohesive bloc, especially in terms of representation in the European Parliament, where it does not speak with one voice.

    The Nordic countries, which all experienced a rise in radical right parties, voted for predominately left-green. There is a wide variety of parties across Europe that advocate authoritarianism, from right-wing populist parties to more radical right-wing ones to the harder neo-fascist extreme right. It is a volatile spectrum of forces that has captured much of the ground from established parties of the left and the right, but they are not all neo-fascists.

    What is the outlook for the extreme-right in European countries?

    My sense of the current situation is that we are probably witnessing the high point of the extreme right. It may be the case that the extreme right has also reached the point of consolidation, but in view of the volatility of the parties and their electoral support, that is by no means self-evident. Perhaps more clear-cut is the normalization of their political concerns – anti-migration, anti-Green, and anti-EU. However, this normalization is as likely to take place on the national level of the major parties of the right and left who adapt their policies to the extreme right. This may be the ultimate testimony of their influence, leading to a more general drift towards right-wing ideology but not necessarily a shift to the extreme-right taking over. The exception here is Hungary, but then the Fidesz party is more an example of right-wing populism than extreme-right.

    If we look at the EU and the wider European area, including the United Kingdom (UK), it is arguably the case that Europe as a whole is more united than divided and that the real divisions are within national countries. Yet, many countries have stepped back from the brink. Poland and Spain have clearly rejected the extreme right in recent national elections. The outcome of the general election in the UK next month will almost certainly lead to a landslide Labour government.

    Ireland does not have any significant extreme-right-wing parties. It has instead Sinn Fein, a left-inclined populist party that also is the placeholder for potential radical right-wing voters. Despite the electoral success in the Netherlands of Geert Wilder’s Party For Freedom (PVV) which is more of a right-wing populist party than Extreme Right as such, he was not able to enter government.

    France is perhaps the most troubled country. Its large agricultural sector, the source of much discontent, is under threat and probably unsustainable in its present organization. The overall picture is that the extreme right has limited capacity for government while having considerable ideological influence as their agendas are becoming increasingly normalized. The lesson of the monumental failure of Brexit is also all too clearly visible. A product of radical right-wing politics, it has been a demonstrable failure and a warning to others not to follow.

    Why is the extreme-right on the rise?

    There are two additional considerations. The rise of the extreme right must also be seen in the context of major societal structural change and in the context of global politics. Europe, like much of the rest of the world, is undergoing major societal upheaval as a result of the double transition to the digital economy and the green economy, a transition that is occurring in the context of climate change and now insecurity due to the need for increased military expenditure for defense against Russia. This is all unfolding in the context of major demographic shifts and the collapse of the possibility of an inclusive society. The nation has become a zone of struggle and division.

    Read Also: NIN: NIMC warns against data harvest portals

    The other context is the global one whereby the world, at least the Northern Hemisphere, is re-aligning into two blocs, the Western liberal democracies and authoritarian states in Asia, with Russia and China at the center of these. In this shift in the balance of world power, there is much instability and uncertainty. Ukraine and Donald Trump in the United States (US) are such instances of global volatility and reference points for the extreme right, but with unclear consequences how these will play out. If Trump is re-elected later this year, the extreme right in Europe as elsewhere will find a new source of legitimation; if Russia succeeds in overwhelming Ukraine, the largely pro-Russia extremist parties will gain additional leverage.

    What happens if the rise of extreme rights is successful?

    The success of the extreme-right can be attributed to their ability to express all kinds of social grievances without offering solutions. They are receptacles of discontent that are particularly attractive to voters of authoritarian dispositions. They appeal especially both to those who tend to see their situation as unfavorable – due to falling standards of living, rising cost of living, housing crisis, stagnant wages, and loss of social status – and to those who are prone to resentment regardless of their situation.

    The extreme-right is a product of inchoate anger which easily combines with a cultural backlash against anything that is representative of progress. A characteristic of the politics of resentment is that it is not fixed but is volatile and unpredictable. These parties with their focus on the figure of the migrants are more adept at mobilizing discontent than left-wing parties or those of the center since they don’t have to grapple with the problem of solidarity and the challenges of the Green transition. And there is the simple reality that European societies need migrant workers.

    My overall conclusion is that the results of the European Parliament elections are in line with the general rise of the extreme right but this is not a cataclysmic moment; future trends are likely to see the continued influence of the extreme right through the normalization of populist politics as the center parties adapt to them. But there are also countertrends and we may be witnessing the high point of the extreme right. If there is a cause for concern, it is less likely that we will see a takeover by the extreme right than a failure of governance by the center in the wake of what is increasingly looking like a crisis of governability.

    • This article was first published in www.aa.com.tr
  • Olanipekun: Towards a better UNILAG

    Olanipekun: Towards a better UNILAG

    • By Sunday Saanu

    One of the positive attributes of President Bola Tinubu is his sensitivity to the public opinion. In response to the demand of Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), which gave a seven-day ultimatum for government to constitute governing councils for the federal universities, government came up with an appointment list of new council chairmen and their members, thus, putting an end to the agitation. That is good. But could this not have been done before the agitation and ultimatum? Government should be more proactive by addressing danger on time before it becomes an emergency!

         However, governing council is central to the progress of any university. It is the highest ruling body, regulating the activities of a sitting Vice Chancellor who heads the administrative structure. Perusing the list, it was such a cheer to see that former Pro-chancellor and Chairman of Council, University of Ibadan (UI), Chief Wole Olanipekun has again been appointed as University of Lagos (UNILAG) Council Chairmen . Let it be said that the appropriateness of this particular appointment is unassailable. While President Tinubu deserves kudos in this regard, Akoka should roll out drums in celebration of a new dawn.

    Universities are the resource bases of the nation. They are places of light, learning and liberty. The purpose of universities is to provide rational explanations and meaning to society, shape new individuals through teaching, and create new possibilities through research. But unfortunately, university system in Nigeria is still tottering. Its survival is still far from being assured. So much has been put into making the system to work, a lot more still needs to be done. Obviously, government alone cannot shoulder the responsibilities, no matter how much it pretends. The survival of the system solicits the support of private sector and well-to-do individuals.

    University of Lagos, like universities of Ibadan, Ife, Ilorin, Benin, Calabar, Jos, Maiduguri among others are federal institutions of class which deserve special attention on account of their pedigrees and contributions to national development. Those appointed to lead governing council of these institutions are however expected to be highly distinguished and notably influential, capable of generating resources to lift these universities. Leading these universities is not only tough; but tasking, given multifaceted challenges in the system.

     Perhaps it is against this backdrop that one is motivated to cite Chief Wole Olanipekun as a quintessential mode for those who are interested in knowing what it takes to lead a university council. Chief Olanipekun; with this latest appointment, is one of the few Nigerians who have rare opportunities of leading two prestigious federal universities and a private institution with a streak of successes, trailing his engagements.

     In 2009, the then President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua appointed this legal colossus as Pro-chancellor and chairman of council of Nigeria’s premier university of Ibadan (UI). As soon as he came to Ibadan, miracle began to manifest. He leveraged on his closeness with the then President to get a huge amount of money released for the betterment of UI. With the money, UI opened up its second phase in Ajibode for more infrastructural development and campus expansion. Determined to make the university better than he met it, this legal icon rejected his constitutional sitting allowance,  directing the bursary department to use the money as scholarship for students in Law, Computer Science and Medicine. To avoid any scandal, he never indicated interest in any contract, neither did he surreptitiously introduce any contractor to the management of the University.

    The point cannot be overstated that he kept spending his own personal money for UI instead of taking from UI. For instance, when in 2011, UI was ravaged by flood, Chief Olanipekun personally donated N10million for the amelioration of the disaster. Again, towards the end of tenure, this Commander of the Federal Republic (CFR) built and donated a 400-sitting capacity lecture theatre in Ajibode, called Wole Olanipekun lecture theatre.

     No sooner he concluded his tenure in UI than the Anglican Communion, the proprietor of Ajayi Crowther University (ACU) appealed to him to come and replicate his feats at UI in Oyo. In his characteristic benevolence, he took up the chairmanship of the council at ACU and began to deploy his resources and talents to uplift the faith-based University. He personally built and donated the Vice Chancellor’s lodge.

    Read Also: NIN: NIMC warns against data harvest portals

    Amazingly, a reliable source informed this writer that when Chief Olanipekun got to ACU, the university was in a poor financial position. It was borrowing money from banks to pay salaries. Shockingly, when a particular bank asked ACU to provide collateral to obtain loans, Chief Olanipekun was said to have offered himself as collateral. Seeing his bank balance, the bank quickly obliged ACU the request. Today, ACU is financially self-sustaining, paying salaries on the 25th of every month.

          If indeed, we know what a man can do by what he has done, it is therefore realistic and reasonable to expect that UNILAG will be better, bigger and richer with the coming of Chief Olanipekun. He is certainly going to do far more than what he did in UI and ACU for Akoka because it is his alma mata. He graduated from the university in 1975 with a Bachelor of Law degree. With him, UNILAG will grow and go fast from slowdown to success.

    With the benefit of hindsight, let me state with unmistakable exactitude that this great man of legal profession who characteristically carries greatness lightly is coming back to Akoka as council chairman to use his voice for kindness, his ears for compassion, his hands for generosity and his heart for love. He is coming with an authority of experience. He is coming to hold aloft the ideals that promote academic excellence. He is bringing illuminative panache.

    Without doubt, when it comes to university governance, structure and administration, Chief Olanipekun is not a fresh sailor at sea. He is a veteran of sort. Clearly, he is a titan in boardroom battles. I am so certain that from the inaugural meeting, the Vice Chancellor, amiable and delectable Prof. Folashade Ogunsola and her management team will be struck by the force of a gentle soul with a mental magnitude that belies gentility. UNILAG Management will feel the imprimatur of his positive vibes as well as the scent of his smile. He is always at peace with elevated arguments, garnished with facts and figures while he hates pettifogging issues with chicanery.

     Having interacted with him in the last 15 years when we met in UI, I can boldly assert that Chief Olanipekun, being a first-class lawyer in this country is one council chairman who wages war against deceit, runs races for the truth and he is not among those who hunt money and sell lies. Being a private sector player, he hates lethargy which is commonplace in public service. To him, eternal sameness is anathema to the principle of human progress and social development. He has a reputation for incisive analyses backed by electrifying brain power. His language is robust and non-offensive with an aristocratic finesse. He has respect for knowledge and scholarly enterprise as he is racy, but largely restrained. He will never engage in any deal that will make a mess of the wise, neither does he fall fool gladly.

    Indeed, the optics are good for UNILAG. Aside having a solid deep pocket, coupled with network of influence, Chief Olanipekun knows the game and how to cultivate the process. He is a strategic conveyor belt that will deliver the goods and services for Akokites. That is probably the reason he has been appointed. There is no doubting the fact that his appointment is a source of succor for his former school.            Matter of factly speaking, unlike greedy people who drain from those dying of dearth without giving a hoot, Chief Olanipekun, with his superlative fame, based on his accomplishments, does not see his appointments as an opportunity for personal gains or mercantile interest, rather, he is out to render selfless service pro bono. I can therefore declare that under his watch in UNILAG, rats will squeak as they wont and birds will tweeter in their traditionally known voices.

    Everyone has a role to play in saving public university education. The system must not be allowed to collapse. Collapse of public university education is the collapse of the nation. The system requires the like of Chief Olanipekun who believes that what we have done for ourselves alone dies with us. But what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal. He is one of the happiest people who love to give more and more to noble causes. Interestingly, he gives without expectation of receiving anything in return.

     Since UNILAG is his alma mata, should it therefore be any surprise if he goes extra mile to lift the university far higher than he did in UI and ACU? He will certainly live beyond expectation as his wealth of experience has molded him into a titan of propriety in public service. He will make the sacrifice for he believes that any service without sacrifice is a lip service.

    •Saanu (08034073427) is on sabbatical at Ajayi Crowther University, Oyo.

  • Global opinion of US goes down the toilet

    Global opinion of US goes down the toilet

    • By Jim Lobe

    Dragged down in important part by disapproval over the U.S. position on the Gaza war, the popular image of the United States abroad has declined over the past year, according to a new poll of public opinion in 34 countries released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center.

    The survey, the latest in an annual series that dates back more than two decades, also found that international confidence in U.S. democracy has fallen. A median of four in ten of the more than 40,000 respondents said U.S. democracy used to be a good model for other countries to follow but no longer is. That view was most pronounced in the ten European countries covered by the poll.

    This year’s survey also found that respondents in 24 of the countries have more confidence in President Joe Biden to “do the right thing” in world affairs than they have in his rival, former President Donald Trump, while Trump was favored over Biden in two countries (Hungary and Tunisia). It found that there was no significant difference in confidence in the two men in the remaining eight countries.

    At the same time, however, confidence in Biden’s stewardship of international issues fell over the past year in 14 of the 21 countries that were polled by Pew both this year and in 2023, by double digits in eight of the countries, notably South Africa, Australia, the UK, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Israel, and Japan.

    The survey was conducted from early January this year through the latter part of May. In addition to Hungary, the UK, Poland, Sweden, and Spain, European countries included France, Germany, Greece, Italy, and the Netherlands. In the Americas, the poll covered Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru.

    In the Asia-Pacific region, ten countries were polled. In addition to Australia and Japan, they included Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. Besides South Africa, sub-Saharan African countries included Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria.

    Overall, views of the United States remained more positive than negative across all of the countries with a median of 54% of respondents offering a favorable opinion, with the most positive ratings found in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. In ten of the 21 countries that were also surveyed last year, however, favorable views fell by six percentage points or more, with the biggest declines found in Australia, Israel, South Africa, and Germany.

    As for confidence in Biden “to do the right thing” in world affairs, confidence was highest in sub-Saharan Africa, with the exception of South Africa where opinions were evenly split. In the Middle East, on the other hand, nearly 90% of respondents in both Turkey and Tunisia said they had “no confidence” in the U.S. president whose ratings were also mostly negative in Latin America (with the exception of Colombia), southern Europe, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, France and Hungary.

    Of five specific issues on which respondents were asked to rate Biden’s performance, by far the most negative appraisals were related to his handling of the Gaza war. A median of 31% across the 34 countries said they approve of his conduct in that conflict, while a median of 57% said they disapproved.

    The most negative assessments were recorded in predominantly Muslim Turkey (8% approval), Tunisia (5%), and Malaysia (15%). Twenty-five percent or less of respondents in Hungary, Italy, Peru, Mexico, and Chile also said they approved of Biden’s policy on Gaza.

    With respect to the war in Ukraine, a median of 39% of respondents voiced approval of Biden’s policies. The most positive views of his performance in that war were recorded in Canada and Europe, particularly in Poland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, and the UK. In Asia, views were most favorable in Japan and South Korea, although they still fell short of 50%.

    As with Ukraine, a median of 39% of respondents said they approved of Biden’s approach to China with his strongest support of around 50% coming from respondents in Poland, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Kenya, and Nigeria.

    Read Also: Fubara replaces Rivers Traditional Rulers Council chairman Sergeant Awuse

    Asked to rate their confidence in four current national leaders “to do the right thing” in world affairs, French President Emmanuel Macron scored highest at 44% of all respondents, followed closely by Biden at 43% . Chinese President Xi Jinping received a median confidence score of 24%, and Russian President Vladimir Putin placed lowest at 21%.

    The lowest confidence scores for Putin came from European respondents (with the exception of Greece), Japan, South Korea, Australia, Israel, Brazil, and Chile. European respondents also gave Xi poor marks, as did respondents in Japan, South Korea, Australia, Israel, Turkey, Brazil, and Chile.

    ·This article was first published in www.responsiblestatecraft.org with the headline ‘That stinks: Global opinion of US goes down the toilet’

  • Oyebamiji, NIWA and Blue Economy

    Oyebamiji, NIWA and Blue Economy

    From the track records of Munirudeen Bola Oyebamiji, his appointment into the hitherto moribund National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) as its Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer (MD/CEO) is well deserved. Given his pedigree, experience and previous positions, expectations are high that Oyebamiji’s good leadership style will ultimately impact inland waterways in a way as to make Marine and Blue Economy relevant and fulfill its mandate.

    In the past, not much has been heard about NIWA as it has just been job-for-the-boys kind of establishment. But now that a technocrat, famously called Bola Oyebamiji, has been put in the saddle, it’s believed that there will be a major turnaround in the inland water transportation sector; and, since the focus of the Bola Tinubu-led administration is restructuring to boost revenue, it’s also believed that the Ikire, Osun State-born banker, economist, public administrator and politician will make a mark in his new assignment.

    No doubt about it, Nigeria is in economic dire straits and all eyes can see it! Therefore, the strategic position in an agency or department that can help to diversify the country’s economy and boost productivity and revenue in the short and medium term is vital. If we had known what we’re doing, inland waters, like the Marine and Blue Economy, should have been a driving force of the economy. The two of them should be worth trillions of naira annually in terms of output and be responsible, directly and indirectly, for five to six hundred thousand employment opportunities, with almost all of them captured in the taxpaying scheme.

    In the First Republic, the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) contributed circa 42% of the Federal Government’s revenue; and that was under the legendary F.S. McEwen, a brilliant technocrat from Warri in today’s Delta State. As a matter of fact, NPA was the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) of that era. In today’s globalized world, international trade as well as internal trade mechanisms must once again be the propelling mechanism for the economy as a whole.

    It also needs to be noted that Nigeria’s navigable rivers are grotesquely untapped. Well, this is not surprising, especially since the political economy is based on rent-seeking, prebendal politics, corruption and poor service delivery, not productivity-fired value-addition. Under normal circumstances, the territorial waters can provide immense services in terms of moving cargoes and passengers, thereby saving the country from constantly repairing roads. It can also generate a lot of employment with the development of internal ports which will become bases of production activities such as light manufacturing and commodity exchanges, which are vital as price modulating frameworks, especially in a country battling unprecedented 40% food inflation.

    Yes, the national inland waterways ought to be the vineyard for a N4 trillion economy, which is an unambitious, deliberately conservative target, for the multiplier effect of well-structured developed internal waterways is massive. It is our belief that Oyebamiji as a seasoned technocrat has the captivating managerial capability to drive such a process in tandem with the Honourable Minister of the Blue Economy, H.E. GBoyega Oyetola, and reflecting Tinubu’s desire to diversify the economy and its operating modules from consumption to a productive, increasingly export-oriented, internationally competitive economy. The neglect of the inland waterway system is a clear indication of the way we have lost our way and the president should be given an ovation for creating a Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy and characteristically finding an astute technocrat such as Oyebamiji to be the driver of the reinvigorating process. If, as expected, Oyebamiji delivers on his mandate, the benefits will be unquantifiable.

    Read Also: Oyetola outlines plans for NIWA, others

    In the considered opinion of yours sincerely, the Asiwaju of Ikireland should outline a private sector-led framework for the inland waterways – if he has not already done so – by detailing the immense untapped benefits of the Blue Economy. The private sector will be awake to a new vista of investment opportunities and the well-above-the-average return on investment. This will also attract foreign investment capital as the world contradictorily is awash with capital looking for investment destinations. For example, ferry services for the movement of passengers and cargoes alone under a well-structured operating framework can bring in hundreds of millions of dollars of direct foreign investments.

    At a time like this, the NIWA boss should call an investment summit – if he has not already done so – under the working title, ‘The Immense Possibilities of the Inland Waterways’, tying the private sector and international capital, insurers, professional services and banks. The possibilities are simply mouth-watering! The investment summit should not be a talk-shop of limited value. Instead, there must be strict timelines as to the achievements of defined performance targets. The aim must be production-led, job-creating, industry-stimulating, investment-attracting and revenue-generating inland waterways, and the key ingredient towards achieving a trillion dollar economy.

    Birmingham is the 2nd largest city in England. But, in spite of its Spaghetti Junction, 60% of movement of passengers and goods in Birmingham is by canals. Coming back to Nigeria, there are more than fifteen hitherto untouched areas where Oyebamiji’s expertise can be applied to provide job opportunities for Nigeria’s teeming-yet-unemployed youths as well as generate revenue for the country. For example, there are internal waters that can be turned to commercial and/or transportation hubs. So, what prevents NIWA from dredging River Osun from Osogbo, through Ijebu-Jesa, to Esa-Odo? If internal waterways can reach remote areas, promoting trade and development in Nigeria, what stops NIWA from dredging Sokoto River, to get to Bakura in Zamfara State, ending with a light port? Beyond the fact that it is safer, cheaper, efficient and less polluting by sea or water, what that means in economic terms cannot be quantified.

    The development of River Osun alone will help create jobs; and jobs create revenue. Added to this is that the damage incessantly done to our roads will be drastically reduced! Of course, River Osun is just one out of the only-God-knows-how-many Rivers in Nigeria. Tragically, Nigerians are not exploiting this opportunity because everybody is too fixated on oil rubbish which, pathetically, has continued to rubbish our fortunes as a nation and people! Even the oil that we are so much talking about can be moved by ferries! If these are possible, why destroy the roads?

    For an economy to grow, determination is key! Refinement is also important! Former Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola of Lagos State understood these and Lagos State was better for it! For example, by banning night parties in Lagos, the state accessed a sudden boom in the hospitality business, ranging from event centres, to ushering and ancillary services. Even clothing, fashion and footwear retailers were not left out as everybody would want to look good during the day. To this end, NIWA must work determinedly to support recreational and related critical activities that can aid economic development, trade and sustainability. For optimal success, it is also expected that Oyebamiji and Oyetola as the Supervising Minister would enjoy excellent unity, more so as either by choice or divine design, the two great technocrats are from the same state. A road to the contrary will be a big opportunity gone wrong and … a beautiful disaster!

    Oyebamiji has started on the right foot and the can-do technocrat should put himself at the end of his shift among the greats such as F. S. McEwen. If he does so, the economy will be better off and, his place in history, assured.

    It is in all our interests as stakeholders to wish the Balogun Musulimi of Irewole, Isokan and Ayedaade the very best!

    May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nige

  • Minimum wage, President Tinubu and the cow family

    Minimum wage, President Tinubu and the cow family

    I request readers’ indulgence to share this captivating story to demonstrate my support for President Bola Tinubu’s policy of eliminating fuel and naira subsidies—a measure that has been in place in our nation for roughly four decades.

     It goes thus: A family resided on the outskirts of a tiny village. They possessed one cow and consumed its milk every day. If there wasn’t enough milk, they consumed less. If there was enough milk, they consumed it well. Consequently, that cow was critical to the mother, father, and children’s survival.

    One day, a lone traveller passed through the village. He was starving. The family generously shared their milk with the stranger, who was grateful and wished to repay the favour. When the traveller heard that there was a wise man in the area, he went to his house and told him about the cow-owning family who hosted and fed him when he was hungry. He requested advice on how to express his gratitude.

    The wise man urged him to kill the cow. The traveller was taken aback. However, because of the wise man’s reputation, he followed orders. A year later, the traveller went through the same community. This time, he observed a busy market store and a hotel.

    When he stepped into the hotel, the eldest son of the cow family was standing behind the front desk. “What happened?” inquired the traveller. “We lost our cow and had to go out and find a way to eat and so we opened a market and it grew and we opened this hotel and it is growing”. The wise man’s remarks returned to the traveller’s head – “Kill the cow”.

    When the advice was offered, it seemed like a terrible thing to do. But, alas, it was the saving grace for the family, who had become ensconced in and gotten accustomed to their peasant lifestyle of living from hand to mouth, which they believed they were destined to lead. But things changed for the better for them when they got compelled to move out of their comfort zone after the cow was killed by their benefactor, who wanted to repay their kindness.

    The lesson in the preceding anecdote is that sometimes you have to let go of your security (comfort zone) and the things that keep you comfortable to progress in life.

    Obviously, the narrative above is highly relevant to our current situation in Nigeria. Drawing a parallel, the subsidies on petrol, the naira, and electricity are analogous to the milk from the cow in the family cow fable.

    Read Also: Army receives two helicopters to fight terrorism, others

    By now it must also have dawned on some critics who have been arguing that President Tinubu should not have eliminated the subsidy without first consulting Nigerians, that the ‘traveller’ did not consult the cow family before slaughtering the cow which is the family heirloom. l can bet that they would have rejected the plan and continued to rely solely on cow milk for subsistence living until the cow died naturally.

    George Bernard Shaw, an Irish polemicist and political activist, once stated: “Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.”

    In light of the consequential high cost of living crisis exacerbated by the current minimum wage agitation by organized labour, President Tinubu is currently standing between the devil and the deep blue sea.

    Practically, periods of decision or hesitation occur when the two best options available are both difficult and provide no reprieve or comfort. That is why President Tinubu is caught between approving the N62,000 recommendation of the team of negotiators he appointed to engage with organized labour for a new minimum wage and the N250,000 minimum demand of organized labour following the crippling strike action that was called on June 3 and got suspended after 48 hours.

     Mr. President is in such a precarious position that can be equated to sitting on a tinder box which is underscored by the fact that a new minimum wage negotiation driven by a 2019 Minimum Wage Act that requires renegotiation every five years has fallen due at such a critical time that the ongoing one-year-old socio-economic reforms in Nigeria have disrupted and dislocated all the normal economic fundamentals in the country moving her from regular dynamics into uncharted territory.

     Because of the exceptional circumstances outlined above, it must be extremely difficult for him to establish which parameters to apply in determining the new minimum wage, which is required by law to be reviewed  – usually upwards, as inflation frequently rises and seldom falls in our country.

    Given the aforementioned conundrum, President Tinubu may be wondering whether it is best to base the new minimum salary on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) or pegged to an inflation rate. It is a particularly dilemma for the president, possibly because it is as complex as untying the fabled Gordian knot, as neither choice has redeeming qualities.

    In a classic book on negotiation based on theory of principled negotiation which aims primarily for win- win agreements and nothing else, written by Roger Fisher and William Ury titled “Getting To Yes. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In”, the authors talked about issues creation which is aimed at meeting the interests of all the parties engaged in the negotiation.

    It is that spirit that spirit that President Tinubu should aim to expand the pie on the table by factoring in other considerations into his offer to workers and indeed all Nigerians.

     The economy as it currently stands, the government, especially at sub-national levels would find it very difficult if not impossible to support the 100% increase plus another N2,000 that her negotiators have already committed to pay to halt the strike action. That being the case how would it shoulder the weight of the massive N250,000 that organized labour is requesting?

    It is striking that labour negotiators have been telling Nigerians that their goal is a minimum salary of N250,000, but astute observers can see that labour activists are just using the demand as a red herring and gimmick.

     The best course of action for President Tinubu, in my opinion would be to accept the N62,000 minimum wage agreement reached by government negotiators on his behalf and combine it with a further offer to reverse the hurriedly and poorly packaged increase in energy rates for so-called Band A customers. At best the increase should be graduated and the so-called Band A high tariff regime be well thought out as it is killing both large and small businesses.

    Indeed, that electricity tariff upward review policy implemented earlier this year, in my opinion, needs to be revisited to drastically reduce it so that Nigerians can breathe. In my assessment, the recent exit of some major manufacturing concerns from our shores may in part be traced to the drastic increase in electricity tariff. It may be the last straw that broke the camel’s back before their exit. So that makes it a candidate for re-calibration in the manner that the National Education Loan Fund, NELF was taken back to the lawmakers for amendment into a more functional document.

    Another reality is that the major key stakeholders directly involved in wage payment-federal, state, and local governments, as well as the organized private sector-had already spoken out boldly about their inability to bear the burden of a 100% increase in the minimum wage of N62,000 recommended by President Tinubu’s negotiating panel.

    Similarly noteworthy is the fact that organized labour may only speak or act on behalf of around 8% of Nigerian workers in the formal sector. That is because scientific studies have revealed that approximately 92% of Nigerians work in the informal sector. Remarkably, the above-mentioned category of workers may not be in sync with organized labour in their demand for N250,000, because the decision to raise the minimum has no direct effect on them.

    •Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos.

  • What is the worth of Nigerian worker?

    What is the worth of Nigerian worker?

    • By Ayodele Okunfolami

    Nigerians waited to hear something on the national minimum wage, whose negotiations have been ongoing from President Bola Tinubu during his nationwide Democracy Day broadcast. Yes, President Tinubu did say something but not what Nigerians wanted to hear. Nigerians expected Tinubu to be more specific with the numbers. All that the president said was: “We shall soon send an executive bill to the National Assembly to enshrine what has been agreed upon as part of our law for the next five years or less.” Who are the “we”, when in particular will the executive bill be sent and what specific

    Minimum wage negotiations between the labour unions and the federal government have been ongoing for some months now. Besides the minimum wage which currently stands at N30,000 being overdue for review, the soaring cost of living, skyrocketing inflation, falling naira and more frustratingly, the opulent lifestyle of the political elite makes the minimum wage talk more urgent.

    Labour had initially demanded N615,000 as the minimum wage after calculating what it would take to feed a family of four for one month using the prevailing market prices when federal government proposed N48,000. As labour went down to N497,000, government upped it to N54,000. The last I heard as the tripartite parties came out from negotiations is that labour stuck to N250,000 while government says it can’t afford more than N60,000. What is agreed (if there was an agreement) has not been made public. We are watching to see what will be passed to the National Assembly and how labour will respond.

    The issue of minimum wage is about what is ideal, reasonable, affordable and moral.

    On affordability, the federal government and the 36 state governors are claiming insolvency and inability to pay the minimum wage. In fact, some have not even started paying N30,000 while one of them even said some workers in his state collect N7,000!

    Read Also: Ekiti APC endorses Oyebanji for second term

    How can Nigerians believe the nation is broke? The Eurozone that generates a GDP of $16.07 trillion have prime ministers that use public transport while Nigeria that is struggling to meet its OPEC quota is buying SUVs for its parliamentarians and built a N21 billion accommodation for its vice president. It is this offensive and sickening spending by the political class that denies the government the moral argument that it cannot afford union demands. The optics is that Nigeria is not lean but that her wealth is lopsidedly distributed.

    The minimum wage is a legal issue, reason why the president mentioned sending it to the National Assembly. What this implies is that it becomes illegal to pay any Nigerian below the minimum wage when signed into law. It means from youth corps members to pensioners and everyone in between will be placed on the minimum wage.

    Now, some have argued that in a federal system like Nigeria, individual states should determine what it can pay and respective union chapters negotiate accordingly. I disagree. If governors and legislators earned flat salaries irrespective of the fiscal size of their states and constituencies, why now bring that case when it concerns the Nigerian worker?

    Secondly, every nation sets standards in education, healthcare, public transportation, marriage, who a child is et cetera, so why not have a legal minimum wage that no Nigerian worker should be paid below? It is called minimum wage; it simply means states should exercise their respective fiscal strengths by choosing to pay higher.

    Some have described labour’s demands ridiculous because along with capital, entrepreneur and land, it is also a factor of production. So aside making the economy having more money casing fewer goods when salaries are raised, the cost of production increases thereby making inflation inevitable. That’s logical. However, inflation has been galloping long before labour made demands. Where is the inflation argument when legislators’ salaries top the global league table but when poor workers ask, we remember we had credits in economics? Nigerian inflation is more fiscal than monetary. Spending power is grossly reduced, job losses are highest in a generation, multi-nationals are relocating abroad while smaller enterprises have gone extinct. Consumer prices of goods and services have since risen to a three-decade high last month, especially those of food stuffs, not because many want to buy them but because of infrastructural constraints, insecurity and local dislocations within our economy.

    And those that say union should not be fighting selfishly for better pay because of the inflationary consequences or unemployment it may cause miss the point. The purpose of unions everywhere in the world is workers’ welfare. It is not their responsibility to fight cost of governance or reduction in living costs. There are internationally funded civil organizations and opposition political parties to speak on issues of governance. Unions are meant to fight for themselves.

    Moving forward, some empirical analysis have come up with N104,000 or thereabout as the ideal minimum wage based on current market realities. I believe government should take a cue from that and do the needful. NLC/TUC have made enough compromises in my opinion; the tripartite committee, not labour, should consider economic realities.

    The political elite should return to reality and stop speaking grammar on the difference between salary and wage. It is said that if you pay your workers peanuts, you will end up having monkeys for you. Do they expect to be safe forever when their cooks, guards and drivers that commute from cholera prone areas daily are poorly paid? Armageddon is brewing so the leaders should please walk their talk. They should not only resolve it in cash to the workers, they should also act in character by reducing the cost of governance, fix the economy, reduce the cost of living, and establish a just and true society. In addition, implement the Oronsaye report and make the civil service more productive per capita.

    You cannot have monkeys working for you and expect the economy to improve. Poverty does more harm to democracies than weak institutions. Already, workers’ withdrawal from their voluntary pension savings is said to have increased by 87.6 per cent in the first quarter of 2024. You cannot be wondering how official government gets leaked to the public when confidential files are passed from one poorly paid staff to another. You cannot demand discipline from staff when welfare is taken for granted.

    •Okunfolami writes from Festac, Lagos.

  • Breaking the cycle of national trauma

    Breaking the cycle of national trauma

    • By Temitope Omoakhalen

    Abiodun was raised by an alcoholic father while his mother was the subservient punching bag who could not stand up to her husband. Abiodun grew up watching his father batter his mother under the influence of alcohol, and he could not do a single thing about it, especially since his mother always defended her abusive husband. Imagine seeing your father develop a dependency on alcohol without which he could not function. How do you think you would feel every time you set your eyes on him? It was a traumatic childhood for the young boy. Perhaps he could have found solace in the company of friends, but his father never allowed him to visit friends out of fear that he might reveal what happened at home. Abiodun felt his life was like a prison. He was not allowed to spend an extra minute in school once the closing bell rang because being late immediately translated to being beaten blue-black. He was really bitter towards his father.

    When Abiodun eventually had his own family, he prevented his only son, Dare, from ever visiting his grandfather. Alcohol was also banned in the Abiodun household. But Dare was a youngster surrounded by friends who drank and rolled with the ideology that drinking was a sign of maturity, so he began to secretly drink. By this time, though, Abiodun’s father had outgrown his terrible ways. He had seen how his lifestyle negatively impacted his family and hated that his only son, Abiodun, was not on speaking terms with him. He checked himself into a rehabilitation centre and had been clean for over a decade, but Abiodun had sworn never to have anything to do with his father.

    Dare, on the other hand, was always curious as to why his grandfather was a no-go area. He had sneaked out many times to see his grandfather and, by his own analysis, found him pretty chill. He would pay his grandfather secret visits to complain about his father’s domineering attitude. Abiodun was too blinded by his rage towards his own father to realize that he was suffocating his son. In trying to protect Dare, he made the home a psychologically toxic place for his son. Dare eventually snapped and ran away from home as soon as he could. He took to alcohol as a coping mechanism and before long became alcohol dependent.

    By the time Dare began his own family, he tried to keep his children away from his “bitter” father, Abiodun, but a cycle had been established. Unless someone deliberately tries to stop this pattern, there will be a perpetual disconnect between generations, a trend we already see playing out in our dear nation, Nigeria. Perhaps, this is the root cause of our disunity as a nation. The psychological impact of bitterness and resentment can be profound. Abiodun’s unresolved trauma from his father’s abusive behaviour led him to harbour deep-seated anger and resentment, creating a psychological barrier that prevented reconciliation. This bitterness not only strained his relationship with his father but also impacted his ability to connect with his son. Dare, in turn, rebelled against this oppressive atmosphere, seeking solace in the very behaviour Abiodun tried to shield him from.

    Read Also: Ekiti APC endorses Oyebanji for second term

    This story of Abiodun’s family is a metaphor for Nigeria. The alcohol dependency speaks to the corruption perpetuity that has unintentionally become an entrenched value system. This value system has given room for bitterness and resentment to take a foothold between the older generation and the youth. Are we surprised that the disconnect between the old and the young in this game of politics and governance is fast becoming worrisome?

    Nigeria as an entity has hurt its people deeply. The older generation, for example, has made mistakes, costly ones, that are almost unforgivable. Thankfully, as they age, they are forced to face the brutal realisation that perhaps, they made a mistake. While I think that some are trying to make amends, I think it is also important to remember that this unresolved trauma has lingered for many decades and has created a psychological barrier that is preventing reconciliation. This is why today we seem even more divided as a nation than we seemed many years ago. Until this trauma is healed, I do not see a way forward for this nation.

    In cutting off the older generation, we may end up creating another Dare, who would repeat the mistakes of the older generation. But if we embrace in its entirety the ways of the older generation, will we not make the same mistakes they did? Is there any way out?

    I think there is. The starting point is to allow for an integrated approach where the wisdom of age converges with the dynamism of youth. This inter-generational synergy is crucial in creating a psychologically safe nation and holistic wellness-focused people, free from the cumulative hurt and bitterness from the actions of the older generation. To address this cycle of unresolved trauma and bitterness, healing must happen, as biases formed in one generation can poison subsequent generations as has been established in Abiodun’s family and as we see in our nation today.

    I think it may help for the government and other key institutions to formally acknowledge the wrongs and injustices of the past, admitting mistakes and the harm caused. While this is underway, what immediate remedies can kick-start this healing process? I think we can begin with the deliberate inclusion of youth in the decision-making process, at all levels and in all spheres, including the tripod of governance: the public sector, the private sector, and civil society. I think a policy that compels every leader of stature to have a youth shadow them may trigger the healing process that can reconcile “Dare” back to “Abiodun”. In shadowing, the youth has the opportunity to see why the older generation acts the way they do, why they think the way they do, and why they made some of the mistakes they did. It will be a hands-on experience to ensure that not only is there continuity but the possibility for forgiveness can be activated.

    Time and again, organisations, both private and public, are recognising the importance of inter-generational synergy. Governments like Lagos State are establishing initiatives like the Lateef Jakande Leadership Academy, which enables youth to shadow cabinet members and heads of agencies. Similarly, private organisations like the Aig-Imoukhuede Foundation are offering scholarships to West African youth interested in public service careers, facilitating their pursuit of a Master of Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford. I can see a deliberateness to include the youth in the decision-making process and I commend the older generation for being deliberate about this.

    The journey towards a transformed Nigeria is not solely the responsibility of the “Dares” or “Abioduns” independently. It is a collaborative effort. By curating environments of psychological safety and national wellness, and by recognising and supporting intergenerational mentorship, we can create a leadership ecosystem that is resilient, adaptable, and responsive to the needs of our nation.

    •Omoakhalen is Fellow, Lateef Jakande Leadership Academy.

  • National anthems: Purpose and practice

    National anthems: Purpose and practice

    By Dan S. Izevbaye, Kunle Adeniran & John A. A. Ayoade

    A national anthem is one of the instruments of modern government. The lyrics are typically approved by the government and people as correctly expressing their history and national aspirations. Ideally, a national anthem is a patriotic song aimed at galvanizing national patriotism by socializing the citizenry and thus produce patriotic citizens. National anthems are therefore not mere symbolic national cosmetics, but essential national spiritual instruments for national edification.  Even the monarchy-centred British national anthem which was adopted in September 1745 aimed at the edification of the nation using the monarchy as the rallying point.

    National anthems became very prominent in the 18th century. Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle wrote the poem of the French national anthem in 1792. He also composed its music, which was adopted as the French national anthem on July 14, 1795. It was a war song during the French revolution. It is no surprise therefore, that Anne-Marie described it as “bold, catchy and revolutionary”. It is a celebration of French chivalry and the popularisation of the French revolutionary triad of ‘liberty, equality and brotherhood’. Similarly, the American national anthem was inspired by the victory over the British at Fort McHenry during the war of 1812. The anthem, “The Star-Spangled Banner” is a song based on the poem “The Defence of Fort McHenry”. No wonder it celebrates what is often described as elements of American character, namely: independence, bravery and heroism in such phrases as ‘land of the free’ and ‘home of the brave’. It was also Scott Key, the lyricist, who supplied the tune of a popular British song for his poem, which was officially adopted as the American National Anthem in 1931.

    The Nigerian saga

    The British acquired different parts of Nigeria either as colony or protectorate, by conquest or by treaty and coalesced them into Colony and Protectorate of Southern Nigeria and Protectorate of Northern Nigeria. In 1914, the two were amalgamated into one country called Nigeria. The name Nigeria was coined by Flora Shaw, the girl-friend of Lieutenant General Frederick Lugard, a boisterous officer, who was deployed to colonial service. After a stint in Uganda in which he introduced indirect rule, he was posted to Nigeria where he effected the amalgamation that was aimed at colonial balanced budget rather than the integration of the two halves of Nigeria. He then assumed the title of Governor-General although there were no governors. In 1959, a year to the date set for Nigeria’s independence from colonial rule, an advert was posted for contestants to produce the national anthem. Over 500 Nigerians submitted entries but paradoxically the lyric submitted by a British expatriate, Lilian Jean Williams was selected as the winning entry while the music competition was won by a British ballet musician, Frances Brenda.

    As one would expect, Ezekiel Mphahlele recorded the criticism of Nigerians that the winners of the national anthem were both Britons rather than Nigerians. It is contradictory, some people argued, that a very significant document for the independence of Nigeria from Britain was British-brewed. It was therefore not an autochthonous document, which is a serious charge in independence matters as it would appear to detract from the independence of those who claim preparedness and readiness for independence if they could not prepare their own national anthem. By that date (1959), Nigeria had produced such literary giants like Chinua Achebe who had published the globally successful “Things Fall Apart” and Wole Soyinka who had published and staged many plays including, in fact, the Independence Play, “A Dance of the Forests”. It could not have been that Nigeria which went ahead to produce a Nobel Laureate in Literature and more than 200 entries annually for the Nigerian Prize in Literature could not have produced a winning entry for the national anthem. As it were, they were Britons who made the statement, “Nigeria We Hail Thee”.

    The anthem was in use from Independence in 1960 till 1978 when the military administration of Olusegun Obasanjo replaced it with “Arise O Compatriots” which was written by four Nigerians – John A. Ilechukwu, Eme Etim Akpan, Babatunde A. Ogunnaike, O Sola Omoigui, and P. O. Aderibigbe. The music was written by a Nigerian, B. E. Odiase. The second anthem lasted forty-six years.

    President Ebele Jonathan convened the 2014 National Conference which approved the recommendation of its Committee on Political Restructuring and Forms of Government that Nigeria should revert to the old national anthem or what some people term the ‘Original National Anthem’. The conference based its submission on two main grounds. First, it was of the opinion that the old anthem is a better symbol of unity, peace and prosperity without substantiating how it does. Second, the conference argued that the change would assist Nigeria to achieve her goal of building a fully integrated nation. The two grounds sounded good to the ear but are hardly plausible. At best, they are general political platitudes. They also, more or less, form the basis of the adoption of what the Senate President, Senator Godswill Akpabio, termed the “up-dated national anthem”.

    The protagonists argued that “Nigeria We Hail Thee” connects “more to our core with a deeper meaning”. This is still in the realm of generalizations. Candidate Tinubu had promised to revert to the old anthem during his presidential campaign claiming that it “describes us much better” because “it is about service, commitment and nation-building”.  

    There is no prescribed amendatory process for a national anthem because it is not specifically written into the constitution. The change is therefore technically not an amendment to the constitution. It could therefore be handled as a bill which is what was done in this case. Democracy demands a participatory process which normally involves a public hearing. At the public hearing, the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) argued that public hearing is necessary but not sufficient for the proposed amendment. Senate Majority Leader, Michael Opeyemi Bamidele, is quoted to have said, on the same subject, that “if considered necessary, further consultation would be had on the matter”. It turned out that no further consultation was had on the matter. The ‘original anthem’ was therefore brought back without subjecting it to any editing. 

    Read Also: Stakeholders seek Nigeria’s participation in $105.61b yogurt market

    It was reproduced completely with the most offensive derogatory line of the lyric which states “Though tribe and tongue may differ; in brotherhood, we stand”. The derogation is proved by the fact that the term ‘tribe’ is reserved for Africans, Indians and Native Americans and not for peoples in similar circumstances in Europe and the United States. Chinua Achebe in his “Things Fall Apart” had referred to the penchant of colonial officers and European anthropologists for denigrating colonial peoples as tribesmen. We rely on the definitions of two eminent dictionaries of the English language to demonstrate discriminatory attribution of the term to Africans and in this particular instance to Nigerians. The Oxford English Dictionary defines tribe as “an aggregate of people in a in a primitive and barbarous condition” just as the Century Dictionary defines it as “a division of a barbarous race of people”.

    To retain this in the national anthem will be the worst and unfortunate intentional self-denigration in the 21st century. Even worse than that is the fact that the colonial metropolis deliberately applied the word ‘tribe’ as a justificatory phraseology for colonialism and its attendant atrocities. It inflicts a double jeopardy on colonial peoples and neutralizes the right of independence. To retain it is to accept   that self-determination is a concession for which Nigerians should show gratitude. Self-determination is a right.

    The conjunction ‘Though’ that begins the third line of the anthem suggests that the differences caused by ‘tribe and tongue’ are major obstacles to unity but moderated by brotherhood as a solvent. The role of brotherhood as solvent for the differences of tribe and tongue is counter-intuitive because differences would not have been noticeable and/or worrying if brotherhood is an efficacious solvent in the first place. Even if brotherhood were efficacious, the word brotherhood has become suspect as sexist in matters of this nature. It is better avoided in critical matters like the national anthem.

    We want to put on record the speed with which the ‘original’ anthem was brought back to life. It shows that the National Assembly can speedily attend to issues. In this same spirit, we implore the National Assembly to set in motion the process of expunging the offensive words so as to relieve all Nigerians of the memories of colonialism in our national anthem.

    •Izevbaye, Emeritus Professor of English; Adeniran, Professor of Linguistics and Ayoade, Emeritus Professor of Political Science, write from University of Ibadan.