The Nation Newspaper

Category: Politics

  • ‘Why PDP can’t stop defection’

    ‘Why PDP can’t stop defection’

    Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Senator Suleman Nazif is from Bauchi State. He spoke with JOHN OFIKHENUA on the failure of the ruling party to avert the defection of its aggrieved members to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) is becoming popular by the day; why is this so?

    Today, in Nigeria, we are faced with a very serious challenge and our leaders have to adopt extraordinary solutions to save what so many of us have worked hard for many years trying to achieve to make Nigeria a better place. I must give credit to people like General Muhammadu Buhari, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Chief Ogbonnaya Onu, Chief Tony Momoh, Chief Bisi Akande and Ali Sheriff, for bringing us together to agree. Without them, we would not have achieved this tremendous success that we have brought to Nigerians.

    We believe, very strongly too, that this is the only way out of the mess, which the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has put this country in, to unite. Our doors are open to all Nigerians, who desire to come into this party in search of the opportunity to institute this change we so badly need in Nigeria, so that we can all make it possible.

    What do you have in store for those who are joining you, especially those who have made name in the political arena?

    As far as I am concerned, the APC is the party, which is offering millions of Nigerians the opportunity to bring about change; not necessarily those who have made ‘name’. Even, those who have no ‘name’ are welcome to make their own ‘name’. For those who are formidable enough to join the party, it is a welcome idea. Same applies to those who are known or unknown.

    But then, it is not about making name; rather, it is all about doing the right thing. We have been going in cycles for so long that it has become apparent to everyone that there is need and desire for change and that this change must be effected, so that Nigeria can be a better place.

    For those who are still undecided, seeing those personalities leave the party will also encourage them to do same. I can tell you that they are only bidding their time. We will welcome them. For those who took the bold step, we welcome them wholesomely and thank them for the sacrifices they have made and the place they have earned in history. They must know, though, that it is an opportunity to show Nigerians the stuff they are made of.

    Some analysts have pointed out that, if any person who was elected on the platform of a party leaves for another party, that person has forfeited that seat. What is your take on that?

    This is not the first time that members of a party have cross-carpeted to another party. Besides, we have not seen, in the past, where anyone’s seat was declared vacant for cross-carpeting; and the Senate President has made an open declaration concerning that. Nigerians desire change and it is only through radical means that this change can come about. Now, let me assure you of one thing: by the time all the lawmakers in the House of Representatives move over to the APC, the PDP will become a minority party. Slow and steady wins the race and as far as the global strategies on war agree, wars are won long before they are fought. Every Nigerian alive today knows that the PDP is crumbling, the PDP has come to its last bus-stop, the PDP is diminishing and that the PDP is sinking. It is already on its knees.

    This is the real reason why they have resorted to all sorts of strategy to stop people from cross-carpeting. We have seen so many moves to different parties. so, what is so new about this one?

    That is not all. Today, all those who are principal office holders of the PDP have lost grasp in their states. The national chairman of the PDP is from Adamawa State and the state is owned by the APC. The deputy national chairman, Uche Secondus (Rivers); the secretary to the Board of Trustees, Senator Waheed Jubril (Nasarawa); the national Secretary, Prof Wale Oladipo (Osun); the publicity secretary, Olisah Metu (Anambra); the women leader, Kema Chikwe (Imo), the president’s political adviser, Ahmed Gulak (Adamawa); the President’s Chief of Staff, Mike Oghiadome (Edo) and many others are from states where the APC hold sway. It is easy to see why they are desperate. Mark my words: By the time 2015 rolls over, there will be no one left in the PDP. So, it is an opportunity for us to come and advocate for a radical change, a radical solution to these extraordinary problems which we have been facing.

    In Lagos State, for example, Bola Tinubu believed that there was need for a radical change, so he opted for someone who could do it – Fashola. See where Lagos is today. Today, thousands of Nigerians want to be like Governor Fashola.

    If you look at the case of Kano, Governor Kwankwaso has also instituted some radical changes in the governance of the state. His Kwankwasiyya group has brought about effective governance, infrastructural development, management of agricultural potentials, all in Kano.

    Look at Governor Amaechi of Rivers State. He is a radical governor, who came to office through radical means and has since begun to proffer radical solutions to the state’s problems. He is man of the people and someone who is committed to making Nigeria better. That is why he has stood his ground so many times and all he has done is in the interest of the country.

    You can now see why the PDP is so agitated about this cross-carpeting. Some members of the National Assembly do not care, if they take their seats from them; they will still cross-carpet and, if elections are conducted, they will win. The comfort is that it won’t get to that level, because no one will remove them from their seats.

    But how can this change come if there is no change in the constitution or the composition of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC )?

    If you were in Abuja last week, you will recall that we marched to the headquarters of the INEC to go tell Jega how unhappy Nigerians are about the way the election in Anambra State was conducted and the non-provision for a supplementary election. You can see how thousands of Nigerians followed our leaders in that peaceful protest to the commission’s headquarters, to tell the chairman about the disappointment of Nigerians and that enough is enough. That is enough. What we did has sent a clear message to Nigerians and the international community that what some miscreant got away with in the past will no longer be tolerated in the present and in the future. We also succeeded in communicating to him that we want effective conduct of our elections; we have had enough of irregularities and that we support the philosophy of one man, one vote.

    For Jega, it is an opportunity. 2011 is past and what happened then should not be allowed to repeat itself in 2015, Nigerians will not accept it.

    As we speak, you and I know that the APC is not only a force to reckon with, but also the party for you to make name, the party through which you can make Nigeria better , the party for the younger generation to contribute through for the sake of change and history. I can assure you.

    You talk about one man, one vote. How can you achieve this?

    Our party is fully prepared and we are gearing up towards the 2015 elections. There is a lot of sensitisation going on within the party and Nigerians, and our party leaders, are fully involved. The locals and our officials in the state are also aware of happenings within their communities. They are advocating, campaigning and soliciting for one man, one vote and sensitising Nigerians for same.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • ‘Our leaders are self centered’

    ‘Our leaders are self centered’

    Former Minister of State for Education Chief Kenneth Gbagi told reporters in Lagos that the country is not making progress because of its leaders have deviated from the vision of the founding fathers. Musa Odoshimokhe was there.

    WHAT is your assessment of this present dispensa tion?

    Without giving credit to myself as a young man or as a stakeholder, who started very early, in term of training, and when I started working with Chief Obafemi Awolowo, later with Ahaji Shehu Sagari, I have seen the country in many phases of development. However, it is very unfortunate that we are at the level we are today in Nigeria. I don’t know what we have done to find ourselves in the quagmire. There is no country in the world that is so close to what I considered orchestrating self-distrust than Nigeria. We have no reason as a nation to be where we are today. We have no reason as a people to be to be so disrespected as a member of the comity of civilised nations. We have no reason as a people to take the back seat.

    If we take our situation from General Tunde Idiagbon and Muhammadu Buhari, when they took over the government; we were respected in the comity of nations. Today’s first nation in the world, which is America, had at one time pleaded with Nigeria for commercial understanding. I was in the foreign service; that we should reciprocate by giving them four years visa in exchange for the same four years. You will agree with me that it got to a stage where America, because of the level of indebtedness, asked Nigeria to buy some of their products to bring down the level of their indebtedness. That was what brought the Uncle Bens Rice in Nigeria. So, if you follow this country, we have retrogressed and I am not surprised that, instead of going forward, we are going backward. We have reached a very bad state and have derailed from the course our founding fathers planned for the country. One of the problems we have is that a typical Nigerian still does not believe that death is inevitable. If we have that feeling, I can say that about 80 percent of what we are doing to survive will not be engaged in. Today, we still talk about Awolowo becuase the man still means so much in our lives.

    We talk about General Yakubu Gowon because he means the same thing; like wise Nnamdi Azikiwe, Michael Opara and Ladoke Akintola and Ahmadu Bello. They were not self-centered and they believed in the science of death. We still make reference to what Gowon did as a person. People don’t make reference to other presidents, governors and ministers that have acquired so much wealth from the public treasury. History has forgotten them. There is really indiscipline in the land. Like a foremost Singapore leader once advocated that leaders should be examined if they were really in the right frame of mind before they should be allowed to assume the position of responsibilities. So, I do not know whether we can design our constitution in such a manner that people who hold public office would have to be properly examined with regards to that of Singapore before they assume authority in Nigeria.

    Where did Nigeria miss the point?

    Let me say that Nigeria today, is like a mother and fatherless nation. It has become an orphan, reason being that nobody goes into public office with the thought of how to better the country. The moment you move to public office, the next thing is that you are thinking of yourself. You begin to think of your family first, then, your immediate community. Nigeria has become a fertile ground where everybody goes to cut his or her own share and not what they can contribute to its development. If you search the conscience of every leader in this country, from the President to the minister, all he or she thinks about is private gains. They do not think about what they can actually contribute to this country. This has caused Nigeria to retrogress. Individuals are becoming millionaires and billionaires over nights.

    What is the way forward?

    We as Nigerians must be prepared to save our country by to offering selfless service. Let us look at it from the Biblical point of view, which says, unless you take hold of that which is yours, it will be at the mercy of others. We must as people take hold of this country and make sure that things are properly done.

    Do you think the national conference will make impact in this direction?

    Now, we have a presidential system of government, with a constitution that structures all strata of governance. We have not amended the constitution to give relevance and legal backing to the constitutional conference. Is the constitutional conference sovereign? And if it is sovereign what makes is sovereign? What enabling laws have been put in place to give it the legal backing? Under which plank is it operating and I must say that I am at a loss because I do not know. Those coordinating the conference have they had their head examined properly? The same duty the national conference now supposedly doing is what both Houses; the House of Representatives and the Senate are expected to do.

    But Nigerians do not believe in the National Assembly because of the way the legislators emerged.

    What is the difference with the manner in which members of the National Assembly came, as against the manner in which members handling the national conference came? But I agreed absolutely that as a people we must have a conference. We have to find solution to the problems confronting this country. For instance, as an Urhobo man, who is representing my interest at the conference? As a Deltan, what interest do I have as a representative of my people? At a lecture at the Police College, I had told them that there is need to embrace community policing, where those who emanate from the community would be given the responsibilities to police their communities. We are wasting time, at the appropriate time we must go back to what is called the state and local government police.

    I am a criminologist and have lectured most of Inspectors General of Police who were my students.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • How many Mandelas can Africa produce?

    A chapter has closed in the history of Africa, following the demise of the late Dr. Nelson Mandela, the former South African President. But have the African leaders learned any lesson from his life and times, particularly his attitude to power, public service orientation and vision of development? Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU examines the tragedy of power and leadership in the ‘dark continent’ and its consequences on the far-flung nations, which had made ‘Mandela years’ an exception.

    Africa has produced great political leaders. But the dark side of these statesmen is their addiction to power. That ‘sit tight syndrome’, according to critics, is the bane of leadership in the continent.

    However, Dr. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was an exception to the rule. For him, the lesson of power was instructive. Acknowledging its transient nature, the great man’s stint in the highest office as the President of South Africa was short-lived. After serving meritoriously for five years, he rejected the constitutional second term offer, thereby leaving when the ovation was loudest.

     

    Indomitable record

     

    In office, Mandela refrained from personalising power. He had inherited a divided country. Therefore, be set out as the pathfinder as the first non-racial President of South Africa. Apart from uniting the polarised polity, he set in motion the reconciliation process. In the twilight of life, primitive accumulation, the virtue of contemporary African leaders, was not his goal. Throughout his entire productive years, he had been behind bars. Yet, he did not perceive his position as an opportunity to recover lost grounds. Rejecting all temptations to loom large and convert the country into a fiefdom, he voluntarily stepped down to allow younger elements in the epic struggles to build on his foundation of transformation and renewal.

    Reflecting on the life of the freedom fighter, former Foreign Affairs Minister Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi, pointed out that, by bowing out of office honourably, Mandela trailed slightly behind former Senegalese leader, Leopold Senghor. But Senghor only left office, after almost two decades in power.

    Before his demise last week, Mandela had become a world hero. In Africa, every July 18 is now being celebrated as the ‘Mandela Day’, marking his contributions to the cause of world freedom and democratic development. But there are some puzzles: why are African leaders failing to exhibit the Mandela trait? Why is a great example not coming from Nigeria, the most populous country in the continent? Why is the Afriaca and the world not ascribing significance to the birthday of other former African Heads of State, allowing them to pass like any other day?

     

    Tragedy of leadership

     

    No African statesman has been honoured by humanity like Mandela. World leaders believe that the anti-apartheid crusader made the difference where many despots failed before they were swept away by the wind of democratic change.

    As independence days broke one after the other in Africa, the nationalist politicians who inherited power from the colonial masters showed a lot of promise. However, after few years in office, they grew wings. From Jean-Bedel Bokassa of Central African Republic to Charles Taylor of Liberia, the indigenous leadership inflicted much tragedy on the distressed countries. Their leaders became life Presidents, thereby denying the people the right to reject and change their unwanted leadership. As the soldiers displaced civilian authorities, African countries were caged. The military rulers performed worse than their civilian counterparts. Many of them left behind legacies of horror.

    Bukassa of Central African Republic, for example, indulged in extravagant life styles. His flamboyance was at the expense of his country. Instead of using the country’s wealth to fuel its development, he wasted them on private accumulation.

    Omar Bongo ruled Gabon from independence, until few years ago. His country is rich. But, the people were made poor by a single individual who monopolised state resources.

    Former President Gynasingbe Eyadema of Togo and Kamuzu Banda of Malawi adopted the same style. During their reign, there was political stability. But, it was not accompanied by economic progress.

    In Zaire, former President Mobutu Sese Seko converted his country into a personal estate. He also decreed the death of the opposition. Many critics lost their lives when the Head of State became the state.

    Field marshal Idi Amin ruled Uganda with the iron hand. He wrecked havoc on the treasury, brushing aside all fiscal measures that could stem economic decay . By the time soldiers like him were instigated by outside forces to get rid of him, Uganda was on its knee.

    Liberia suffered the same fate under the late Samuel Doe. Key figures, who opposed his misrule, were murdered. His cruelty provoked war in Liberia fought by rebel forces from all corners. Doe was succeeded by another despot, Taylor, who further inflicted pain on the citizens. Today, he is in jail for crime against humanity.

    Since 1980, when Zimbabwe achieved independence, President President Robert Mugabe has been in the saddle. Today, he is the lord of manor.

    When many of these countries were struggling under the tyranny of dictators, Mandela was in prison. When he left the prison, none of the despots was a role model to him. A leader of the dominant African National Congress (ANC), Mandela had been convicted on charges of sabotage and crimes at a time some of them came into office. For the 27 years that he spent in jail, many tense stories of their wanton corruption increased his agony behind bars. When he was released on February 11, 1990, he still met some of them as Presidents of their countries. More worrisome to him was that their countries were still on the same spot he left them 27 years ago.

    His country, South Africa, was battling with colour segregation. Mandela quickly supported reconciliation and negotiation. He consequently led his country’s transition to multi-racial democracy. On April 27, 1994, Mandela was elected in a representative democratic election. But, he only spent one successful term. His mission was accomplished when he laid the foundation for a durable democracy in South Africa. Mandela left office without blemish. He moved on to play greater roles in the resolution of conflicts across the globe. Today, he has 250 awards to his credit. The greatest is the Nobel Peace Prize awarded him in 1993.

     

    Nigeria’s bad example

     

    Nigeria has not lived to expectation, especially in the continental search for an inspiring leadership. Historians believe that a statesman who had the opportunity to make a greater impact is Obasanjo. But, unlike Mandela, after serving two terms as the civilian President, he bowed out, leaving the stage, amid the third term controversy. It is a self-inflicted wound for a continental leader and veteran aspirant for the post of the United Nations Secretary-General.

    Is Obasanjo a great leader or an impostor who craved for greatness without trying to fulfill its full requirements? The history of Nigeria is incomplete without the soldier-turned politician. At critical moments, fate had thrown him up for intervention in national affairs. Obasanjo’s commitment to national unity is undisputed. The gallant soldier, had, along with other patriotic soldiers, saved Nigeria from disintegration during the civil war. As the General Officer Commanding Third Marine Commando, he brought rebels to their knees.

    Power is alluring. Thus, Obasanjo and other senior military officers started to canvasse for increased political role under the Gowon Administration. Then, except Akinwale Way, Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, no other combat soldier was a member of the Federal Executive Council. The agitation for political power heralded the pressure on Gowon, who made Muritala Mohammed the Minister of Communications and Obasanjo the Minister of Works.

    In 1979, Obasanjo made history again. He supervised the voluntary liquidation of military power, thereby emerging as the first military Head of State to relinquish power to civilians. At home, he became a critical moral voice, whipping his successors into line, delivering lectures on good governance and chastising the military rulers, who were reluctant to permit democracy to thrive.

    Besides, the retired general played a role in international community. He was dispatched to troubled spots across the globe to solve problems of civil military relations. Obasanjo also became the curator of democratic projects in Africa. World leaders hailed him as a man of integrity and credibility.

     

    Wasted expectation

     

    When he returned to the State House in 1999, many felt he answered the patriotic call to a higher service ; the same task he had performed 20 years earlier. His first term was tedious, but he was about laying a good foundation. When he was re-elected in 2003, Obasanjo became the longest serving Nigerian leader; first as military Head of State for three years and later, as the civilian ruler for eight years.

    However, he had lost the steam by 2007 when he handed over power to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua. The major sin of Obasanjo was the flawed general election.When he left the stage in 1979, the ovation was loud. Expectations were high when he made a dramatic return in 1999. However, in 2003 when he resumed a more stable retirement, his record mocked his antecedent.

    In 1979, Obasanjo presided over a relatively free and fair election. Why then, did he fail to achieve the same feat in 2003 and 2007? To many critics, by implementing the three-year transition programme faithfully, Nigeria joined the league of democratic nations.

    Many commentators adduced reasons for the success of 1979 and failure of 2003 and 2007. They reasoned that the 1979 setting contrasted with the 2003 and 2007 settings. A critic, Kunle Ajibade, pointed out that, while Obasanjo was a neutral person, as it were, in 1979, he had become too partisan in 2007. Besides, Ajibade said that “the quality of participation and participants in 1979 influenced the quality of the electoral process.

     

    Missed opportunities

     

    In the past, Obasanjo hit many statesmen with his sword, when he scrutinised the crop of Nigerian leaders, who failed in their bid to rule the country. Today, these leaders are celebrated by Nigerians more than him. Many have argued that, if these leaders had become Presidents, Nigeria would have been a better place.

    In his book, ‘Not My Will’, Obasanjo had mocked the late Obafemi Awolowo for failing to realise his ambition to become the President. He said the same coveted seat landed on his palm without struggle. But, Awo’s achievements as the Premier of Western Region have remained the benchmark.

    Also, he dismissed Dr Nnamidi Azikiwe as a towering leader, who fell from the position of pre-eminence nationally, only to carry on with life in his old age as a tribal chieftaincy holder, the Owelle of Onitsha.

  • Can African leaders emulate Mandela?

    His assessment of Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim, a First Republic Parliamentarian and Minister of Health from Borno, smacked of emasculation. To him, Ibrahim, the rich businessmen, was an unserious politician bidding for power.

    Throughout his life, Aminu Kano had championed the cause of the repressed and deprived masses. Obasanjo simply dismissed him as a figure renowned for carrying placards, adding that he could even protest against himself.

    Former President Shehu Shagari also fell under his hammer. He described him as a slow and dull President, who was not in effective control.

    Obasanjo described Mohammadu Buhari and the late Tunde Idiagbon, his juniors in the Army, as autocratic military rulers, who held the nation in its jugular.

    Apart from flaying former Military President Ibrahim Babangida for detaining Buhari and Idiagbon after toppling them, he also criticised his economic policies. On the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), Obasanjo disagreed with Babangida on the implementation process, saying that adjustment must have human face, human heart and milk of human kindness.

    When Babangida tinkered with the transition timetable, Obasanjo rallied prominent Nigerians to protest the elongation of military rule. He was one of the leaders who suggested the Interim National Government headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan.

    He said, the option was regrettable but understandable. The suggestion nailed the coffin of the “June 12”. Of course, Obasanjo said the winner of the historic presidential poll, the late Chief Moshood Abiola, was not the messiah.

    The late Gen. Sani Abacha sacked the interim contraception that was set up by Babangida. He also imprisoned Obasanjo after he was roped in a phantom coup. He was saved by divine intervention.

     

    Between Mandela

    and Obasanjo

     

    From grass, Obasanjo rose to grace. He had a second chance. He emerged as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate in 1998. When he became the civilian president, Nigerians had high hopes. His commonwealth leaders welcomed him back to power with optimism. Their confidence was intact.

    Former United States President Jimmy Carter hailed his re-emergence. He said, judging by his leadership qualities, he would justify the trust of a model of transparency and a leader committed to higher ideals. It was a wasted expectation. The previous achievements were not repeated.

    Obasanjo could not fight the infrastructure battle adequately. He left behind a prostrate nation, agonizing over lack of electricity, good roads, good hospitals and good schools.

    In 2003, there were complaints about electoral malpractices. It was a child play to what happened in 2007.

    The leader of Campaign for Democracy (CD), Dr Joei Okei-Odumakin, alluded to a large scale electoral fraud unrivalled in Nigeria history. He said the malpractices had created a hollow in the leader’s record of transparency outside power. Many also doubted his commitment to the sanctity of the ballot box. Up came the third term project, which was knocked out by credible politicians and the media.

    As the election drew nearer, there was confusion. Court orders were disobeyed by the leader. The anti-graft body, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was misused to witch hunt perceived political enemies. Council allocations in some states were seized, thereby aborting grassroots development.

    Obasanjo ran a large administration. The cabinet size was huge. According to critics, it was largely unproductive. The dividends of democracy were scanty.

    When the former President now exposed the ballot box to a virulent attack, all hopes were totally lost. Democracy thrives on periodic elections as a means of choice, rejection, endorsement and change of leadership. This right reinforces the strength of the voting public and it is a predictor of democratic survival.

    The former President had shocked the anxious nation that the contest would be a do-or-die affair. Hell was let loose on poll day. It was akin to war. Domestic and foreign monitors said it was the worst in the history of the country.Three years after, the cases were still in court. The victories allotted to Obasanjo’s favoured candidates were later upturned by the judiciary after he vacated the exalted seat.

    Before he left, it was impossible to right the wrongs.

  • Retrace your steps, Fasanmi urges Bamidele

    Retrace your steps, Fasanmi urges Bamidele

    Second Republic Senator Ayo Fasanmi yesterday lamented the crack in the Ekiti State All Progressives Congress (APC), warning the House of Representatives member, Hon. Opeyemi Bamidele, to retrace his steps to the party.

    Bamidele, who represents Irepodun/Ifelodun Constituency in the House, recently defected to the Labour Party (LP), where he hopes to contest for the governorship next year. He was one of the leaders of the party in the state before his defection.

    Fasanmi, who reflected on history, advised the federal legislator to ponder on the fate of prominent politicians, who left their political families for other camps, based on temporary political challenges.

    He also advised him to learn from the political career of the famous Ekiti son, the late Chief Akinwole Omoboriowo, who deserted his leader, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, in a bid to dislodge former Ondo State Governor Adekunle Ajasin from power. Fasanmi recalled that Omoboriowo, despite his popularity, never bounced back into reckoning after he left the proscribed Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN).

    The elder statesman said that past experience should instruct ambitious young men and women to think deeply and peep into the future before taking far-reaching decisions that have implications for their political future, their political groups, and the welfare of the state they hope to govern.

    Fasanmi, who spoke with our correspondent on phone, said: “The defection of Bamidele from the APC is most unfortunate. It is an unfortunate incident. He is a boy I know very well. Well, he is a man now. I first saw him in 1994, when I was a member of the Constitutional Conference Commission set up by the late military Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha. I have followed his career since then.

    “I am disappointed. This is an unfortunate situation. As an elder statesman, I will advice Fayemi (Governor Kayode) not to be diverted. The APC is on a sound footing. Fayemi is doing well as the governor of Ekiti State. The APC is on course in Ekiti”.

    Fasanmi recalled that the parting of ways between Awolowo and Omoboriowo was painful to many Ekiti patriots, who equally loved the former deputy governor. He said that history is merely repeating itself as Bamidele will be seen to be parting ways with his leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

    He added: “There were Awolowo and Akintola. There were Ajasin and Omoboriowo. Now, there are Fayemi and Bamidele. But this should not be so in Yorubaland. We should learn from the past”.

    The veteran politician noted that Bamidele’s career in the progressive fold under the Tinubu’s tutelage has been impressive, adding that he had climbed the ladders of leadership and fame as a key functionary of government in Lagos State.

    He said that it is risky for a promising politician like Bamidele to desert the party he had jointly nurtured with compatriots and seek refuge in another, where some people may perceive him as a stranger. Recalling Awo’s advice to his disciples, he said: “It is better to discuss and disagree in your party and fight for your interest there, but if it appears that you can’t have your way, you should jettison your personal interest and subscribe to the collective interest, where accommodation would be found for your interest. In the progressive camp, where service to the people is the watchword, you cannot be a loser”.

    Fasanmi, who described the LP chieftain as a competent and vibrant person, warned that a progressive politician may lose relevance outside his original political family.

    He added: “The question people are asking is: what does Bamidele want? I understand that he has served as a party officer, special adviser, commissioner for two terms. Now, he is in the House of Representatives. He who the god will destroy will first make mad. This should not happen to Bamidele. That is why I want him to retrace his steps. His grievances can still be addressed within the progressives family. I like him so much. So, I want him to learn from history”.

  • ‘Bayelsa is on course’

    ‘Bayelsa is on course’

    The Chief Press Secretary to Governor Seriake Dickson of Bayesa State, Mr. Daniel Iworiso-Markson, spoke with MUSA ODOSHIMOKHE on the activities of the administration and challenges of governance.

    How has it been managing the governor’s image?

    I think it has been an experience to work in the government at this level and it’s still stretching. Every day comes with different issues, small or big. We keep learning the peculiar intricacies of how government works and the communication management. Having said that, I think actually, the starting point is to commend our governor for assembling a crack team, very competent and professional.

    You’ll realize that the governor has the gift of spotting talents and using them to deliver the best results. This is not limited to the media. If you look closely, you’ll find a similar situation in the choice of people in other departments and agencies of government. Again, the governor is media savvy. He understands the workings of the media and the important role the media could play in any government.

    I think he laid a good foundation by first getting the right people and giving them the right support. I think we have to reckon with his intellectual disposition too and his curiosity to know himself without waiting to be briefed. The media team knows too well that they have both an intellectual and a strategist as a boss. And so, it is expected that working with him, you have to be at your best all the time.

    Does he find time to check what the newspapers are saying?

    Here is a governor who wakes up as early as 3 am every day to read all the newspapers online and the social media sites. So, tell me who are you, as a media aide working with him without striving to keep pace with him. More importantly is also the good deeds of the government.

    In spite of all these, however, I should let you know that information management in any government is usually hectic for obvious reasons. There is so much cynicism and distrust for the government. If you look at it critically, may be, the people may have a point here, which is a function of their past experiences. If a government promised A,B,C and failed to deliver on them, then, there’s a problem; there is the tendency for the people to believe successive governments may do same.

    So, it takes time and demonstrated integrity to overcome this as an issue we have had to contend with. As media aides to Governor Dickson, we are always on our toes. As I noted earlier, it is particularly difficult when you have to manage our kind of public here. We have a very virile public that is always probing every move and decision of the government. Too often, they can be goaded by some desperate and mischievous politicians.

    Do you have to constantly explain to the public government action?

    These politicians often take the advantage of their gullibility to sell lies and steer up needless rumours mostly against the government of the day. That’s our experience here.That’s why you hear of terrible rumours making the rounds in Bayelsa. But I’m happy to tell you that we are winning the war against rumour mongering. Thanks to Governor Dickson for the measures he has put in place to address the rumour malaise. The Bayelsa Information Management Committee set up by the governor is doing a fantastic job in this regard. Still, integrity in government is key here; doing what you promised you will do.

    I would like to refer you to the governor’s inaugural speech, when he said he will not play politics with security and development. Although that speech generally inspired hope, yet, others felt it was the usual sweet talk by politicians. You see, they never knew that Governor Dickson is not someone you can describe as your conventional politician. He meant what he says and, if you now relate what he said in that inaugural speech with what’s on the ground in the state today, you can appreciate the fact that the governor has matched words with action. Security has been effectively restored the various sectors of the state economy are on course.

    The first thing you must understand is that Governor Dickson is not frivolous about governance and indeed, any issues for that matter. If you have followed him and his restoration government, you will see a pattern, a consistency that has defined the administration. The governor doesn’t like doing things half-heartedly. If anything is being done, it has gone through a thorough process and planning and decision taken which will be followed to a logical end.

    How far has the administration delivered on its restoration agenda ?

    The ‘Restoration Agenda’ is a vision and I can confidently tell you the implementation is progressing steadily. The vision is to lay a solid foundation for rapid socio-economic development of Bayelsa State. I think we should commend Governor Dickson for keeping his words on security, which was basic to any proper and effective implementation of the whole agenda. Now, everybody takes security for granted ,compared to the situation we met on the ground.

    It is a remarkable achievement. After securing the state, then, other things have since followed; tackling the challenge of diversifying the economy of the state, whereby we can have major alternatives to oil and gas.The attention now is on tourism and agriculture without neglecting other areas in need of attention. Basic to the realization of dthe iversification is the provision of infrastructure like good roads, power, rail lines, airport and such other infrastructure that can help the cause of the government’s economic focus. In this regard, a lot has been done by the Restoration government.

    Already, a rail line is being constructed to link Yenagoa to Brass and to Agge, where we have a deep seaport. The establishment of the Bayelsa Development Investment Corporation (BIDC) is also of particular great importance which will help the state government to maximize its economic potentials in the future. For those who can see the implication of this economic enabler, the future is really great for Bayelsa State economically and of course it is in the best interest of the people.

    This is expected to arrest youth unemployment…

    There will be many good jobs in due course, good pay and enhanced living standard as government actualises the combined efforts in the diversification of the state economy.

  • ‘Amaechi on rescue mission in APC’

    ‘Amaechi on rescue mission in APC’

    House of Representatives member Hon. Dakuku Peterside spoke with Victor Oluwasegun and Dele Anofi on the defection of Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) and other issues.

    Recently Governor Rotimi Amaechi defected to All Progressive Congress (APC). What in your reaction?

    You need to understand the issues to understand, if the move is justified or not. There are two strands of the issue. The first has to do with the direction the country is going and the second is the interest and aspiration of Rivers people within the context of Nigeria. In recent times, there is anxiety in the country about the insecurity, rising wave of corruption, impunity and retarded growth, generally, and many patriots are concerned. All these concerns are linked to the quality of leadership of the country and the political party that plays the role of a facilitator, like in other democracies. Unfortunately, it appears the leadership of the country is not sensitive enough to the need to urgently tackle these issues and the party that is in power at the centre, by its conduct and lack of internal democracy in all facets, is aggravating the matter. The party, in this case, the PDP, does not respect its rules, does not accommodate divergent opinions and it has made no effort to harness the collective ideas and energies of its members. The result is what we are seeing today. The second strand of the crisis is the corporate interest of Rivers State, which is under serious threat.

    How is the interest of Rivers State under threat and how does that justify the defection of Governor Amaechi to another party?

    Politics, as you know, is a means of allocating resources. Parties are vehicles through which politics is played to optimise the benefit for the people. Parties to a reasonable extent determine outcomes in a political process. The scenario is this; PDP as a political party superintends over the expropriation of Rivers common wealth, I mean our resources, deny us even the least benefit for our modest contributions and does nothing to advance our development in anyway. Only a man who is pursuing his own selfish interest will remain in such a platform, to the detriment of the people you are on oath to serve. Can anybody point to one federal project of worth going on in Rivers State under the present administration? Even, the blind can see that there is a calculated attempt to undermine the interest of Rivers State. No principled leader who has the interest of the people at heart will stomach that at the alter of regional sentiments.

    Is the denial of Rivers State development benefits the reason why the governor moved to another party?

    Yes, among many other reasons. You see, people have different reasons and different incentives for being in politics. Some are in politics to make as much personal wealth as possible through the instrumentality of power. Others want to serve the people and transform their socio-economic status and yet, others to cause confusion and derive joy from the confusion. These different reasons determine the choices we make. By now, it is obvious to the least discerning that the likes of Governor Amaechi are in power and politics for the higher interest of the people. This compelling interest will not allow him fold his hands and allow the wealth of Rivers people be expropriated under his watch, their rights and entitlements trampled upon and the people treated as if they do not matter. If Governor Amaechi has kept quiet, history would have been most unkind to him. For standing up for Rivers people and their collective aspiration, history will celebrate him.

    Is there no better way of going about it than this present approach?

    There are always many ways to pursue a course, but that does not change the fact that there is an injury or that there is an attempt to compromise the interest of Rivers State or that the PDP has been most unfair to Rivers State. Nobody is addressing the root or causative factors of the crisis. Rather, we are concerned with the ceremonials. Nobody has said that the PDP has served the interest of Rivers State or that the government at the centre has been fair to Rivers State. Even, those who appear superficially to be supporting the Government at the centre all the time say to me – this Government has been most unfair to Rivers State. I have heard this consistently and it is nauseating how unprincipled our politicians can be.

    The picture we have is that heavy weight politicians in Rivers State are not with him because of the perception that he is pursuing his own ambition?

    This is a deliberate attempt to disinform the populace. I am sure that propaganda is being spread by some selfish politicians that have lost touch with the reality in Rivers State I can beat my chest and say that the majority of principled politicians in Rivers State, who means well for the state, are with Governor Amaechi because they know he is fighting for the interest of Rivers state. It is unfortunate that in this clime, politics is an enterprise that is not governed by principles but by opportunistic selfish tendency. In many cases, opportunistic men thrive at the expense of the general good, but the people are now wiser. They know the difference between “stomach infrastructure politicians” and those who genuinely want to change society for good. Very often, the intelligence, determination and courage of our people are underrated. Rivers people are solidly behind Governor Amaechi. One way of measuring the support base is the number of elected officials with the governor and his capacity for resilience. Another will be the result of the forthcoming elections after the whole noise.

  • Fayemi: Expanding scope of participatory governance

    Fayemi: Expanding scope of participatory governance

    In this piece, Odunayo Ogunmola writes on the soaring popularity of Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi at the grassroots, based on his administration’s achievements across the 16 councils.

    It has become a tradition for the Ekiti State Governor,Dr. Kayode Fayemi, to embark on a tour of all communities in the state November of every year holding village square and town hall meetings with the people in the grassroots.

    The governor holds this annual interface with the people asking for their inputs into the budget of the subsequent year as budget estimates are presented to the parliaments by chief executives at federal and state levels between the months of November and December.

    In other places, it is the governments in power that dictate what they want to implement for the people who have little or no say on what are their most pressing needs.

    This, on many occasions, has become counterproductive with many projects forced down the throats of the people many of which are not in tune with their wishes.

    The budget of Ekiti State is unique in the whole federation in that the state government does not determine the projects to be executed in the budget but the people themselves who lay bare their minds on what they want to be included in state fiscal estimate.

    In ensuring that a truly people’s budget is presented to the House of Assembly and duly passed into law, each village, town and city in Ekiti State is asked to present three most needed projects for consideration for each fiscal year.

    The three projects are then included in the budget for execution based on the resources available to the state government.

    This process ensures that all the 130 communities in the state will get at least one project to be executed through the instrumentality of the state budget to be presented by the governor to the state legislators.

    As a result of the budget tours of the past, most of the communities have all the three projects they requested for executed, many have two projects executed while few get one project executed.

    The tour afforded Mr. Governor an opportunity to assess what he had been able to do for each community in the state and also present his report card on governance and policies that affect the lives of the ordinary people in the grassroots.

    Governor Fayemi’s budget tour of Ekiti communities embarked upon between November 3rd and 29th threw up many startling revelations which bordered on essence of running a people-oriented and accountable administration.

    This writer who was on the governor’s entourage to the communities visited discovered the level of appreciation the people showed to the governor for counting them important in asking for their inputs into the budget.

    Apart from this, the people also expressed their gratitude to the governor for giving them the projects they want which had been completed through the implementation of the previous budgets in the state.

    It was a moving and emotional sight to behold the aged people who are beneficiaries of monthly stipends of N5,000 each under the Fayemi Administration’s Social Security Scheme singing, dancing and praising the governor to high heavens.

    Many of them breached protocol by coming directly to the high table where the governor sat praying profusely for him for taking care of them, saving them from old age poverty and elongating their lives in the process.

    A beneficiary in Ipao, a far-flung community in Ikole Local Government Area, confessed that many of the beneficiaries would have died if they have not been benefiting from the scheme as the money is enough for them to buy food, medicine and meet other basic needs.

    Traditional rulers, community and religious leaders, women, youths, students and other stakeholders paid glowing tributes to Governor Fayemi for touching their lives in the areas of road construction, renovation of schools and hospitals, distribution of laptops to students and teachers, financial empowerment for community-based projects and execution of other projects.

    The people of the grassroots also appreciated the Ekiti governor for rural electrification, construction of drainages and culverts, channeli-zation of flood-prone areas, new palaces for monarchs, civic centres, town halls, examination halls in schools, markets, viewing centres, among other life-changing projects.

    The governor also used the tour to assess their level of work on projects being executed by communities with special grants given to them to carry out self-help projects.

    Apart from the projects commissioned during the administration’s third anniversary, the governor also commissioned new projects in 85 out of the 129 communities visited during the budget tour.

    During the first edition of the tour which was conducted in 2011, the governor’s visit was done on local government basis in which he met the representatives of communities who presented their requests at the headquarters of each council area.

    Since 2012, the governor decided not to restrict his visit to the local government headquarters but to personally go to all communities and receive their requests for incorporation into next year’s budget.

    One common factor in Governor Fayemi’s village square and town hall meetings on the 2014 Budget was the people’s desire and readiness to reward him with their votes in next year’s election.

    Apparently excited by what the governor has done through the budgets of previous years which had yielded projects that are physically verifiable, the people urged the governor to continue in office because they have never had it so good.

    Although the governor told the people during the tour that the visit was not political in nature but to interact with them on budget saying he would come back to ask for votes when the time for campaign comes.

    No doubt, this year’s budget tour of communities has increased Governor Fayemi’s popularity contrary to what his political opponents may want the world to believe.

    Many of their traditional rulers and community leaders who are appreciative of what the Governor Fayemi has done for them turned the tour to prayer sessions for the state’s number citizen who has not lost touch with the grassroots.

    Apart from turning the state capital, Ado-Ekiti to a modern city that is comparable to any other state capital in Nigeria, Governor Fayemi’s magic is also being felt in all parts of the state.

    With other ongoing projects due for completion before election is held middle of next year, Governor Fayemi has endeared himself to the people of Ekiti who are eagerly waiting to pay him back with votes.

    When campaign begins, Governor Fayemi has unprecedented achievements to showcase to justify the mandate given to him by the people while his opponents will only make promises to the electorate.

    Everybody knows that there is a difference between a candidate that has performed excellently and others who have not been tested in the serious business of governance.

    Definitely, he is in a pole position to enter into history books as the first governor in Ekiti State to secure a second term in office judging by the enormous impact of his administration in all the nooks and crannies of the state.

     

    • Ogunmola is a media aide to the governor

  • Can African leaders emulate Mandela?

    Can African leaders emulate Mandela?

    His assessment of Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim, a First Republic Parliamentarian and Minister of Health from Borno, smacked of emasculation. To him, Ibrahim, the rich businessmen, was an unserious politician bidding for power.

    Throughout his life, Aminu Kano had championed the cause of the repressed and deprived masses. Obasanjo simply dismissed him as a figure renowned for carrying placards, adding that he could even protest against himself.

    Former President Shehu Shagari also fell under his hammer. He described him as a slow and dull President, who was not in effective control.

    Obasanjo described Mohammadu Buhari and the late Tunde Idiagbon, his juniors in the Army, as autocratic military rulers, who held the nation in its jugular.

    Apart from flaying former Military President Ibrahim Babangida for detaining Buhari and Idiagbon after toppling them, he also criticised his economic policies. On the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), Obasanjo disagreed with Babangida on the implementation process, saying that adjustment must have human face, human heart and milk of human kindness.

    When Babangida tinkered with the transition timetable, Obasanjo rallied prominent Nigerians to protest the elongation of military rule. He was one of the leaders who suggested the Interim National Government headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan.

    He said, the option was regrettable but understandable. The suggestion nailed the coffin of the “June 12”. Of course, Obasanjo said the winner of the historic presidential poll, the late Chief Moshood Abiola, was not the messiah.

    The late Gen. Sani Abacha sacked the interim contraception that was set up by Babangida. He also imprisoned Obasanjo after he was roped in a phantom coup. He was saved by divine intervention.

     

    Between Mandela

    and Obasanjo

     

    From grass, Obasanjo rose to grace. He had a second chance. He emerged as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate in 1998. When he became the civilian president, Nigerians had high hopes. His commonwealth leaders welcomed him back to power with optimism. Their confidence was intact.

    Former United States President Jimmy Carter hailed his re-emergence. He said, judging by his leadership qualities, he would justify the trust of a model of transparency and a leader committed to higher ideals. It was a wasted expectation. The previous achievements were not repeated.

    Obasanjo could not fight the infrastructure battle adequately. He left behind a prostrate nation, agonizing over lack of electricity, good roads, good hospitals and good schools.

    In 2003, there were complaints about electoral malpractices. It was a child play to what happened in 2007.

    The leader of Campaign for Democracy (CD), Dr Joei Okei-Odumakin, alluded to a large scale electoral fraud unrivalled in Nigeria history. He said the malpractices had created a hollow in the leader’s record of transparency outside power. Many also doubted his commitment to the sanctity of the ballot box. Up came the third term project, which was knocked out by credible politicians and the media.

    As the election drew nearer, there was confusion. Court orders were disobeyed by the leader. The anti-graft body, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was misused to witch hunt perceived political enemies. Council allocations in some states were seized, thereby aborting grassroots development.

    Obasanjo ran a large administration. The cabinet size was huge. According to critics, it was largely unproductive. The dividends of democracy were scanty.

    When the former President now exposed the ballot box to a virulent attack, all hopes were totally lost. Democracy thrives on periodic elections as a means of choice, rejection, endorsement and change of leadership. This right reinforces the strength of the voting public and it is a predictor of democratic survival.

    The former President had shocked the anxious nation that the contest would be a do-or-die affair. Hell was let loose on poll day. It was akin to war. Domestic and foreign monitors said it was the worst in the history of the country.Three years after, the cases were still in court. The victories allotted to Obasanjo’s favoured candidates were later upturned by the judiciary after he vacated the exalted seat.

    Before he left, it was impossible to right the wrongs.

  • PDP: Battling to prevent more defections

    PDP: Battling to prevent more defections

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been jolted out of its delusion that a vacancy does not exist in the Presidency in 2015, following the recent explosion that shook the party to its foundation. Now, embattled party leaders are strategising on how to prevent more defections to the opposition, reports Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU.

    Had President Goodluck Jonathan and the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, taken decisive steps to avert the doom, perhaps, the explosion in the ruling party would have been averted.

    How to halt the spate of defections from the ruling party to the All Progressives Congress (APC) is now the concern of members of the Board of Trustees (BoT) and National Working Committee (NWC), who have acknowledged that electoral disaster looms, ahead of the next general elections. As the PDP tries to prevent more defections, the APC is wooing more aggrieved chieftains, promising to address their grievances under the progressive platform.

    Party sources disclosed that the PDP is exploring a number of options to prevent more embarrassment. A former minister, who craved for anonymity, said that key party leaders have woken up to the reality that power shift is imminent, unless the PDP puts its house in order. ‘There have been defections before from the PDP, but this is going to have a significant effect”, said the party stalwart from the Northeast.

    Apart from threatening a legal action against the governors and other elective office holders who called it quit, chieftains loyal to the President and Tukur have been persuading federal legislators in the aggrieved governor’s camps to sheath their swords.

    The legal option, a party source said, was turned down, when some lawyers doubted its efficacy. A former member of the NWC from the Southwest, who spoke on the issues said that lawyers advised the party to explore political solution to prevent the escalation of the crisis. “We were reminded that some governors have previously defected to the PDP from other parties in the past”, he said.

    Also, the founding fathers and some BoT members have been dispatched to the six geo-political zones to arrest the drift to the main opposition camp. “What we are doing now is to identify the states not affected by the major defection and consolidate our hold there. But we also appreciate that, if we cannot resolve this crisis in a way that will make them return, we should ensure that we minimise acrimony across the chapters”, said the minister.

    A PDP elder from Lagos State, who expressed disgust at the poor handling of the crisis, lamented the split. “Governors are state leaders and they are powerful. We have not produced any PDP governor here, Therefore, we are not happy that we are losing more governors to our opponents. The crisis was not managed”, he fumed.

    However, he disagreed that the defection was final, saying that there is nothing that cannot be reversed in politics. “In 2007, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar left the party. But he later came back. Therefore, if the demands of those who left are met, under the right atmosphere, they will return to the fold. That is why we should not relent in this reconciliation effort, I mean, genuine reconciliation”, he added.

    The handwriting was bold on the wall. But gullible PDP leaders dismissed the anticipated explosion as a feeble threat. When the ‘G7’ governors protested the chairman’s leadership styles, he branded them as rebels. Tukur advised them to embrace reconciliation. But, as Kano State Governor Rabiu Kwakwanso, one of the protesting chieftains pointed out, the reconciliation was a shallow step, repeated window dressing and ill-focussed game plan orchestrated to make it appear that the acclaimed largest party could undergo a rebirth.

    To observers, PDP’s crisis is proportional to its size. State and local government chapters are not insulated from the logjam. Thus, when the aggrieved party faithful realised that the so-called reconciliation lacked the elements of candid dialogue, they withdrew their enthusiasm. Wielding the big stick, the NWC wanted to whip them into line by asking them to appear before the party’s disciplinary committee headed by Second Republic Transform Minister Dr. Umaru Dikko. The panel was still expecting them at the trial when five out of the seven ‘rebel’ governors -Kwankwanso (Kano), Muritala Nyako (Adamawa), Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto), Abdulfatah Ahmed (Kwara) and Rotimi Ameachi (Rivers)-left the platform.

    Also, the departure of party big wigs, who worked for the party’s electoral victory in 2011, including Senator Bukola Saraki, Senator Abdullahi Adamu and Alhaji Kawu Baraje and other New PDP chieftains, decimated the ruling party.

    What is worrisome to the PDP is the analysis of the previous presidential election results, which revealed that the APC now has a better prospect. In the 2011 election,President Jonathan polled 22,495,187 votes as against General Muhammadu Buhari’s 12,214,853 votes. The result revealed a margin of 10,280,334 votes, which gave the President victory, despite Buhari’s impressive showing in the North.

    While Dr. Jonathan obtained the required 25 per cent in 33 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FTC), Buhari had 25 per cent in 17 states.

    In the breakdown, Buhari’s strongholds were as follows: Northwest- Jigawa: 663,994; Kaduna: 1,334,244; Kano: 1,624,543; Katsina: 1,162,919; Kebbi: 501,453; Sokoto: 540,769 and Zamfara: 624,515. The total vote cast in the region was 6,453,437.

    Northeast- Borno: 909,763; Yobe: 143,179; Bauchi: 1,315,209; Gombe: 459,898; Adamawa: 344,526 and Taraba: 257,986. The total was 3,430,561. The total votes cast from the two zones was 9,883,998.

    President Jonathan’s strongholds were the Southsouth and Southeast. The breakdown of his votes is as follows: Southsouth- Edo: 542,173; Delta: 1,378,851; Rivers: 1,817,762; Cross River: 709,382; Akwa Ibom: 1,165,629 and Bayelsa: 504,811. The total was 6,118,608.

    In the Southeast, the analysis is as follows: Anambra: 1,145,169; Abia: 542,173; Ebonyi: 480,592; Enugu: 802,144 and Imo: 1,190,179. The total vote was 4,160,179. The total for both zones was 10,278,865.

    Although the PDP strategists had envisaged a scenario where the aggrieved governors would opposed the President’s bid for a second term, they did not anticipate their defection to the APC. It was also evident that the PDP had lost hope in Zamfara, Borno and Yobe, the pre-dominantly Muslim states controlled by the APC.

    In the North, religion is a crucial factor in political calculation. Therefore, Kebbi, Katsina, Bauchi, and Gombe votes may not go to a candidate not from the North. Some analysts have disputed this, saying that it did not work in Buhari’s favour, as widely anticipated. These states had 4,176,485 votes. Thus, if it is subtracted from Dr. Jonathan’s 22,495,187 votes, they pointed out that the President would still have smiled away with 18,319,702 votes against Buhari’s 12,214,853 votes. By this calculation, they reckoned that Jonathan would still have won with 6,104,849 vote difference.

    However, in the Southwest, it is a different ball game. The calculation dill definitely be altered. Although the region voted for the President in 2011, it is doubtful, if he can repeat the feat in 2011. The analysis is as follows: Lagos: 1,281,688; Ogun: 309,177; Oyo: 484,758; Osun: 188,409; Ekiti: 135,009 and Edo: 542,173. The Southwest and Edo had 2,941,214 votes, giving the President 3,163,635 votes.

    “In 2015, we can build these scenarios. Northwest and Southwest, which usually have the highest number of votes, may tilt the pendulum towards the APC, to the disadvantage of the PDP. In the Northeast, the calculation is foggy. Boko Haram problem may result into voter apathy”, said analyst, who added: “Even, in Kaduna, the home of Vice President Nnamdi Sambo, the PDP may not do well. If it does, it is will not be due to the influence of the Vice President because he is not perceived as a strong man”.

    But, the PDP’s calculation also is that the Middlebelt is not in hot romance with the APC, despite its footing in Kwara and Benue. “PDP may want to rely on the votes from this area to neutralise the votes coming from the Northwest and Northeast zones. But, now that Kwara is not for the PDP, it is dicey”, said a PDP member from Lagos, who also craved for anonymity.

    In 2015, the expectation of the PDP may be dashed in the Southeast, owing to what observers have described as the ‘Okorocha factor’. The Imo State governor, Owelle Rochas Okorocha, is consolidating his hold in the state, ahead of the poll. This may undermine PDP’s projection in the region.

    In 2011, the sentiment in the Southsouth was that Dr. Jonathan needed a home base to launch himself to power. But, it is a disunited region today. Although Bayelsa, Akwa Ibom, Cross River and parts of Delta will gravitate towards the Presidency, it is not certain that Rivers will fall in line.

    Both PDP and APC have returned to the drawing board. The original APC states remain a no-go area for the PDP. The performance of APC governors have sealed the hope of the conservative bloc to bounce into reckoning. The APC National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said that the tempo of achievement will be sustained in the interest of the party and the electorate.

    In the spirit of the merger, proposals for the harmonisation of party structures are being considered by the party leadership. Lagos APC chieftain, Alhaji Abiodun Sunmola, said the governors will not regret their defection. Echoing the Interim National Chairman, Chief Bisi Akande, who said the APC will be a party of equal founders and joiners, he said there will be no discrimination against the new members.

    “In Lagos, we are setting the pace. There is no tension among members of the merging parties. We have resolved to be one and we are acting as one and that will be the situation in other states”, he said.

    In Kwara, the merger generated ripples. But the national leaders of the party have restored confidence by reconciling the Saraki and Dele Belgore forces.

    In Adamawa, Nyako and Buba Marwa camps have also been reconciled. A party source said that efforts are being intensified to woo the Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM) chieftains led by Abubakar.

    The APC reconciliation train has also rolled into Sokoto and Kano states for the purpose of uniting Kwakwanso and his predecessor, Alhaji Attahiru Bafarawa, and Kwakwanso and former Governor Ibrahim Shekarau.