Unpopular essays. That was the title of a slim collection of ten controversial articles originally published by the famous British Philosopher and Mathematician, Bertrand Russel, in 1950. He chose that title, according to an online resource, because “he argues against errors on both sides of the political landscape, debunking both the left and the right. He thinks his writing is unpalatable to many, possibly the majority, of people”. It is unlikely that many people will find the terse, pungent and blunt submissions of former governor of Lagos State and later Minister of Works, Housing and Power, Mr Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN), on diverse issues in his newly minted book, ‘Nigerian Public Discourse: The Imperative of Empirical Evidence and Hyperbole’, very palatable.
In writing this book, the author was obviously not in quest of popularity. He takes on and seeks to demolish popularly accepted notions and canons of what the economist, Kenneth Gailbraith, describes as ‘conventional wisdom’ with cold logic and meticulous empiricism. A compelling read, the intellectual offering runs into 218 pages fragmented into sixteen chapters and three appendices.
When he addressed a press conference in Lagos on the occasion of the launching of his book, ‘The Strategy and Tactics of the People’s Republic of Nigeria on Friday, 31st July, 1970, Chief Obafemi Awolowo declared that he wrote the book and two other accompanying ones earlier published “to raise the level of our public debate on the subjects discussed in them, from the low and barren depth of inter-personal, inter-ethnic, and inter-party abuse and strife, to an exhilarating height where clearly stated ideals and programmes dominate public attention”.
Awolowo averred further that “There is too much criminal complacency, intellectual indolence and superficiality in our approach to our many problems. It was also my aim, if possible, to try and rescue the afflicted from these dangerous maladies”. Fashola sets himself a no less lofty and arduous task in this book where he seeks to expose what he believes are no more than fashionable myths masquerading as irrefutable and objective verities.
Stating the goal of the book in unmistakable terms, he declares “Governance is an earnest affair. Each government policy has the potential to profoundly impact the lives of citizens. Therefore, policy decisions must not be founded on assumptions, suppositions, or statistical facts of dubious origins. This monograph, therefore, endeavours to challenge our collective assumptions regarding various aspects of our country. It’s purpose is to inaugurate a new cohort of INTELLECTUALS who are driven by forensic facts that are both credible and reliable, rather than being swayed by mere populist sentiments”.
The Austrian political economist, Joseph C. Schumpeter, famously opined that the individual, when functioning in a crowd or mob tends to drop to a lower level of mental performance. This is all too evident in public discourse across the world today with individuals, no matter how eminent or learned, content to follow the easier path of mouthing popular cliches or jumping on the bandwagon of dominant public opinion especially in this age of the hegemony of social media.
BRF in this book chooses not to follow the maddening crowd. He places on himself the burden of interrogating some of our strongly entrenched beliefs as a nation insisting that they must meet the stringent scrutiny of logic and fidelity to facts. It is a lonely and narrow path. The easier route of swimming along with the majority view, no matter how mistaken , may be broad and smooth but may eventuate in developmental perdition the author insinuates.
Incidentally, I commenced my reading of the book from Chapter three on ‘The Imperative of Data and Statistical Analysis in Policy Formulation: A Scholarly Examination’ which, in my view, strikes at the thematic core of the author’s dilation. BRF’s central concern is the imperative of accurate data as a necessary condition for correct and appropriate policy formulation as well as effective and efficient implementation. He demonstrates on a variety of critical public policy issues how deficient data or misleading assumptions result in the distortion of policy outcomes and deepen the dilemma of underdevelopment.
According to the author, “In the current epoch, humanity is ensnared within a global proliferation of data collection, mining and utilization. Data, in its myriad forms, has arguably ascended to the status of the most valuable currency worldwide, yet it is not minted by any nation’s Central Bank. Each sovereign entity is tasked with the generation and accumulation of as much data as it necessitates and the judicious employment thereof”. He argues that it is in the interest of every sovereign jurisdiction to ensure as much as possible the integrity of the data it utilizes in planning for the development of its diverse sectors to achieve accelerated transformational objectives.
Although the author does not expressly say so, implicit in some of his submissions is the perception that data can be manipulated by vested interests to exaggerate the magnitude of our challenges thus intimidating policy makers as regards the possibility of overcoming them or leading to the acceptance of proposed solutions that serve the purposes of external forces than genuinely address the problems in question.
In this chapter, for instance, BRF examines the often cited unemployment figures for the country. He contends that the data on unemployment released by the statutory statistical authorities tends to cite a percentage of the whole of the population as unemployed whereas “The fact is that the percentage should should only apply to those who are of working age and should exclude those who have achieved retirement age and those who are minors because we have laws penalizing child Labour”. It is because of the criticality of accurate data to efficient national planning and impactful development that he stresses the urgent necessity of reliable census figures as an indispensable factor in achieving our diverse sectoral objectives.
As Chief of Staff to the Lagos State governor in 2006, he notes, he was one of those who coordinated the legal challenge at the Census Tribunal of the figure of 9,113,604 recorded by the National Population Commission (NPC) as the population of the mega city state in that year’s census exercise. Despite the invalidation of the census figures in about 11 local government areas of Lagos State by the Census Tribunal, he states, the NPC has not adjusted the population figures of Lagos State to reflect the figures determined by the Tribunal.
According to him, “The current reality is that every development decision within the nation has been, and continues to be, predicated upon the contested 2006 census. This figure has also served as the foundation for all population estimates since that time. This situation casts significant doubts about the accuracy, or lack thereof, of population estimates and developmental decisions based on this 2006 population figure”. Incidentally, the non-implementation of the Census Tribunal’s amendment of population figures in 11 local governments of Lagos State has, curiously, escaped the attention of the media.
Read Also: NLC to Fed Govt: let salaries, wages be commensurate with cost of living
BRF raises a number of critical queries as regards current census estimates extrapolated from the 2006 figures as the baseline. Could the country’s population realistically have risen to surpass the over 200 million mark as currently claimed within a fourteen-year period from 2006? How can the claims of geometric population growth be reconciled with the apparently declining birth rate particularly among the emerging generation?
Analyzing the attributed population size further, he states that “It is an incontrovertible fact that Nigeria has a youthful population. However, how many young couples are having more than three children in the past two decades on a scale of one to ten? How swiftly are these young people settling down and how many offspring are they producing to suggest that even in the absence of a census, the growth has remained constant at 3%”.
He continues, “The argument being advanced here is that a census represents the most realistic methodology to delineate the size of the population and the demography across age and gender. In the absence of a credible census, the country is susceptible to encountering data which could be manipulated to accommodate whatever purpose suits the originator”.
In another chapter, the author focuses his attention on the conclusion by the “Brookings Institute Report on Global Poverty” that “Nigeria is the poverty capital of the world”. This is a claim routinely and reflexively echoed by large sections of a seemingly uncritical Nigerian intelligentsia but which BRF subjects to close scrutiny. Of course, he does not deny that there is abysmal and unacceptable level of poverty in Nigeria. According to him, “Let me clear that my comments do not suggest that there is no poverty: Poverty is a global phenomenon which every society tries to manage and reduce. But given what I know about India and Nigeria, I was curious about the conclusions in the “Brookings Institute Report on Global Poverty Poverty” that Nigeria is the “Poverty Capital bog the World”.
Fashola’s position, I surmise, is that the problem of poverty can be tackled seriously, as indeed it is in diverse ways, without exaggerating the scale, demeaning the self-esteem of Nigerians or assaulting their psyche. There are, surely, some Nigerians who take sadistic pleasure in constantly re-echoing negative narratives and portraitures of their country. This book indicates that BRF is not one of them and he is unapologetic about it. Rather, he brings a scientific mindset and a logistician’s disposition to dissecting the labeling of Nigeria as the ‘poverty capital of the world’.
Is it true, he asks for instance, that the average Nigerian subsists on less than one dollar a day as some experts and institutions who measure the level of deprivation in this and other countries claim? He submits that “Another limitation of the one-dollar-a-day fallacy is that it fails to appreciate the purchasing power of the national currency vis-a-vis the dollar. While it might be practically impossible to purchase anything of value with two dollars in the United States, a full meal could be purchased with N1,000 in Nigeria”.
Continuing, he contends that “…in the United States, a 0.33 litre bottle of Coke is sold for USD1.89 whereas the same 0.33 litre bottle of Coke is sold, pre-unification of the Naira, for USD0.32 in Nigeria. In effect, the cost of one bottle of Coke in the United States could purchase about 6 bottles in Nigeria then. Thus, whether it is assessed from the perspective of cultural relativity or from the prism of purchasing power, the claim of living in less than one or two dollars per day is of no help in determining the poverty or otherwise of the average Nigerian”.
For him, the data proffered as regards the poverty indices in Nigeria are not adequately informed by a proper understanding and appreciation of the realities of the Nigerian economy within its socio-cultural context. “Even if telephone usage is employed as a rudimentary metric, the average Nigerian expends more than a dollar on telecommunication activities such as voice calls, text messages and data usage daily” he argues. He points out that, unlike western societies where the individual subsists on his monthly paycheck, the natural, cultural and social support system of the African family constitutes the backbone of the economy.
“In addition to their pay-cheque”, he posits, “the average Nigerian has access to a robust network of social support on an informal basis. However, this is discounted in computing the disposable income of an average citizen to what is formally earned as income”. It is an urgent imperative, he suggests, that an exhaustive study be conducted to determine the actual dimension and reality of the poverty challenge in Nigeria within the context of the traditional, extended family support system and “Only then can the development of policies and interventions that are truly reflective of the needs and aspirations of the people begin”.
Whether he is dissecting the claim that Nigeria has a housing deficit of 17 or 20 million; the statistics on out-of-school children in the country; the corrosive menace of corruption; the quantity of electricity generated for the population; the constitution as the alleged fundamental problem of Nigeria; the duties and responsibilities of the citizen; or the endlessly contentious issue of minimum wage etc, BRF is surgical in his approach and brings a rigorously critical mind to his mission. He forces the reader to consider factors beyond the conventional and generally accepted as the real challenges behind our problems. This literary work is a voyage in courage. It takes boldness and a steely disposition to challenge entrenched beliefs and mindsets. The fervent patriotism of the author is evident even though he does not deny his country’s weaknesses and failings.
It was the Nobel Laureate, Wole Soyinka, who in his interview with the journalist, John Agetua, in the early 70s described literature as a hand grenade which you detonate under a stagnant way of perceiving reality. This book with logic and facts as it’s weapons seeks to jolt contributors to public discourse out of stultifying complacency. The author eschews emotion in his application of cold reason and logic to his examination of public policy reminding one of Awolowo’s famous quip in his interview by the great Peter Enahoro that ‘electricity has no feeling’.
Someone who once watched a BRF interview on television told me he thought the often dispassionate lawyer was “intellectually arrogant”. That was an accusation that was often leveled against Awolowo who always responded by saying he worked very hard to arrive at his position on issues and only superior arguments could change his mind. This book should stimulate intense debate, add value to public policy conception and implementation and enhance the quality of public discourse.
