The Nation Newspaper

Tag: debate

  • 10 candidates unveil manifestoes at BIU debate

    Ten governorship candidates unveiled their manifestoes at the weekend at a debate organised by the Benson Idahosa University (BIU).

    The debate, tagged ‘Interactive Platform for Governorship Manifesto Presentation”, was put together, according to organisers, to encourage political participation, bring about good governance, excellence and accountability of politicians.

    The candidates present at the session were Comrade Ishaka Paul of the Action Alliance (AA): Prince Frank Ukonga of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP); Oronsaye Richard of the Mega Progressive Peoples Party MPPP); Akhalamhe Amiemenoghena of People for Democratic Change (PDC): Cosmos Irabor of the Allied Congress Party of Nigeria (ACPN); Pastor Osagie Ize-iyamu of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP); Omorogieva Gbajumo of Social Democratic Party (SDP); David Okoror of Citizen of Popular Party (CPP); Mrs Ebun Agol of the Peoples Party of Nigeria (PPN); and Thompson Osadolor of the KOWA Party.

    They spoke on their programmes and policies on health, security, human resource development, job creation and industrialisation, education, housing, agricultural/rural development, as well as transportation and infrastructure.

    Paul told the gathering that his manifesto is tailored toward meeting the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) and eradication of poverty generally.

    Ukonga said his manifesto is geared towards providing two million jobs while in office. Similarly, Richard of MPPP said that the party aims to increase youth empowerment and participation in politics, because they are the leaders of today and not tomorrow.

    Amiemenoghena of the PDC told the audience that his manifesto focuses on fostering and strengthening democracy in the state.

    In his own remark, the SDP candidate promised to focus on free education and adequate enlightenment of government policies.

    Irabor of ACPN said is campaign revolves round creating employment through agriculture, as well as provision of adequate security.

    Okoror of the CPP said he would focus on job creation through sports, while his PPN counterpart, Mrs. Agol, said health and social security would be a major concern for her government, if voted into power.

    The KOWA Party candidate, Osadolor, said he would reduce rural urban migration by making the state great.

    Pastor Ize-Iyamu of the PDP said he would strengthen the Due Process Office by equipping it to monitor and evaluate public expenditures. He said he would have an economic management team to fashion out a viable economic policy for the state.

  • The BREXIT Debate

    About a year ago, the British were faced with the choice of Scotland seceding from Great Britain and becoming a separate country after hundreds of years of forming the Union of Great Britain with England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Pollsters said it was going to be a cliff-hanger and that the outcome of the referendum could go either way. It was a very interesting debate. The Scots felt that they could survive without being part of Great Britain. They apparently thought the North Sea Oil would be sufficient for them especially bearing in mind that their population was less than five million. The Scots also said they could go into a financial arrangement whereby the British pound would continue to be a common currency and that they would continue to owe allegiance to the British Crown which of course has a lot of Scottish blood in its genealogy. Queen Elizabeth, the Queen mother, was actually Scottish.

    Those who wanted to keep Scotland within Great Britain felt that Scottish exit would diminish the importance ofGreat Britain in the world and may expose Scotland to some kind of insecurity especially at a time when Russian planes where constantly violating British airspace. Those who wanted to keep Britain together also felt the British economy, which is the fourth largest economy in the European Union, would provide a better investment environment for Scotland rather than what the little Scottish market would provide. Interestingly, English nationalism has also been rising just like Scottish nationalism. The little Englanders led by Nigel Farrage, actually wanted England to stand on its own and do away with what he called the ‘Scottish burden’. He also felt that since the English had almost become the majority in Wales, England and Wales could form their own separate country while Scotland goes its own way. There was not much said about Northern Ireland, presumably because it was felt that the unification of the entire Ireland was a matter of time especially when it appears the Northern Irish Catholics would outbreed their Protestant counterparts. The entire question was very complex. Mercifully, the referendum came and the Scottish nationalist lost their bid to separate from Great Britain. Throughout the time of the debate, the Queen of Great Britain did not intervene. Constitutionally of course she was not supposed to, but it was clear from her body language that she wanted the union to remain.

    Now, the debate is about Britain leaving the European Union. The same little Englanders joined by Boris Johnson, the flamboyant former Mayor of London are campaigning on the basis of the need for British sovereignty. They argue that Britain had ceded so much power to the European Union and that Britain was no longer in control of its own affairs, especially as it concerns immigration. They claim Europeans, especially Eastern Europeans were flooding into the country to exploit the social welfare state, particularly, collecting unemployment payment as well as benefiting from free health service that are available to tax-paying British citizens. They also argue on purely nationalistic basis, that many Europeans who flood into their country do not speak English at all and that many parts of Britain especially England are now inhabited by non- English speaking people. This particular argument is not really a honest one because there are a few cities in England like Bradford where Pakistanis and Indians predominate and you are more likely to hear Urdu spoken than English in some of these places.

    The strongest support for the BREXIT people are in small English towns, particularly in the North, while the south and the London Metropolitan area, where there are many people of different races are likely to support those who want to stay in the European Union. Those who want to stay, led by the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, are using almost the same argument as was used in the Scottish debate. They argue that a British exit would diminish the importance of Great Britain in the world. It would also lead to insecurity, they argue. Their strongest argument however, is the economy. More than 60 percent of British trade is with the European Union. They also argue that most multi-nationals headquartered in London and doing business in Europe, would move their headquarters out of London to either Paris or Frankfurt, thus further undermining the British economy. Friends of Great Britain, particularly the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, have advised the British to stay in the European Union, so also has leaders of Europe and Cameron has cynically said that international leaders supporting Britain’s exit from Europe are probably Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the ISIS leader Abubakar al Baghdadi. The chance of Britain leaving the European Union is 50- 50. There is no doubt that immigration has become a sensitive matter in the world, not only in Great Britain but in the United States, where Donald Trump, the Republican candidate is running strongly on anti-immigration sentiment. There is a rising nationalism all over the world and it is becoming almost an irrational force. We have seen this kind of sentiment before and if not well controlled, it always leads to crisis and even war.

    It is surprising that the British have forgotten a little bit of their history and that withdrawing from Europe is not a solution to their problem. In fact, engagement with Europe is always in the interest of peace. One would have thought that the British would remember that between 1914 and 1945, hostility between France and Germany plunged the whole world into two world wars with a cumulative loss of more than 50 million people, either through direct action or because of collateral damage. The rapprochement between France and Germany which forms the basis of the European Union has been one of the solid foundations of peace in Europe and in the world. Britain should be supporting this enduring peace between France and Germany, the cornerstone of the European Union. If Britain withdraws, there might be temptations of other countries to begin to leave the union and that ultimately, Germany and France may also go their separate ways and the world would be the loser because then peace would not be guaranteed.

    It is one of the cardinal principles of the United Nations to support the idea of regionalism and world order. Regional bodies are seen as building blocks for global peace. A British exit from Europe would strike a deadly blow to this concept. Vladimir Putin’s policy of Russia defending the interest of all Russians in Eastern Europe has led to war in Ukraine and annexation of Crimea by Russia. There are Russian minorities in the 15 former countries that form the Soviet Union and Putin’s policy of defending Russians everywhere is a manifestation of rising Russian nationalism if not militarism. Countries in the Eastern periphery of the European Union like Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Bulgaria, Romania and Slovakia, some of which have substantial Russian minorities already feel threatened by Russia’s expansionism. For the sake of balance of power, this is not the time for the western alliance especially the European Union to begin to disintegrate. This may create a room for adventurism on the part of Russia, which would invariably lead to war.

    A new dimension has unfortunately been introduced into the debate when a young labour member of the British Parliament, Jo Cox, was murdered by an apparently insane English nationalist who not only knifed her but also shot her, while shouting ‘Britain first, down with traitors’. This violence is unheard of in British recent history. The home of parliamentary debate has now witnessed thuggery and violence in their highest form of murder. It is hoped that this is not a rising phenomenon and English thuggery at football matches is also a part of this manifestation of tendency towards violence. Whatever the case may be, it is hoped that whatever the British decide would not lead to more violence of those who support exit and those who oppose it. The British generally are commonsensical people and I believe they would vote to stay in the European Union as the Scots did last year. Interestingly, the Scots this time around are supporting Britain’s stay in the European Union.

  • Reps to debate ‘sex scandal’ against colleagues

    Reps to debate ‘sex scandal’ against colleagues

    The House of Representatives will tomorrow debate the allegations of impropriety levelled against three of its members by the United States.

    Hon. Mohammed Garba Gololo (Bauchi,APC),Hon. Samuel Ikon (Akwa-Ibom,APC) and Hon Mark Gbillah (Benue,APC) were fingered as having behaved inappropriately while on a leadership training in Cleveland, Ohio, United States.

    The three lawmakers involved in the incident are scheduled to address the press today.

    Speaker Yakubu Dogara yesterday evening on Twitter said if there was no evidence, no action would be taken against the accused lawmakers

    The Speaker said: “ We closed that discussion yesterday. We await the evidence before any action is taken in line with our laws.”

    The Chairperson, House Committee on Foreign Affairs Hon. Nnena Elendu Ukeje, told The Nation at the weekend said the scandal should not sour the relationship between Nigeria and the United States.

    Ukeje said: “We will deal with the matter institutionally in such a way that controls the domestic fallout of this weighty allegation and ensure a continued cordial relationship between the institution and the people and the government of the United States, and the two democratic nations.

    “As the Speaker has said, the House shall carry out its own investigations into the matter. It is an institutional thing between the legislature of the republic of Nigeria and the government of United States.

    “The initial intendment was an exchange programme to help deepen our democratic practices. We will have this investigation so as to mitigate the domestic fallout so,it does not jeopardise the relationship that parliament has with the United States.”

  • JSS 1 pupils win Inter-Public Junior Secondary Schools debate

    A Twelve year-old pupil of Jibowu Junior High School, Yaba Nnenna Onwuchekwa, with her partner, Ujong Etim have emerged winners of this year’s Inter Public Junior Secondary Schools Debate competition. However her choice, alongside others as contestants, was accidental.

    “I am very happy we won because I had just three days to prepare them for this competition,” said Morenike Arise who trained Onwuchekwa and others.

    “Initially I wanted to bring JSS2 pupils but I backed out at the last minute and assured myself that my JSS1 pupils were capable of bringing the trophy home,” she added.

    Arise, who teaches English in Jibowu High School, told our reporter that she observed that pupils in the JSS1 appeared to have an edge and showed more ability to live up to clinching the trophy, hence her decision.

    The contest organised by Concept Nova Limited, dealer in security gadgets, saw Onwuchekwa speak against the topic: Mobile devices should be banned in schools at the grand finale that featured only four of the eight schools that started  the contest.

    Nnenna’s team won with 23.8 points to beat their first runner up, Una Chinenye of Wesley Junior High School, Surulere with 22.6, while Faith Anderson of Herbert Macaulay, Ebute Metta High School came third with 21.1 points.

    Sixteen contestants (two from each school) across eight public junior secondary schools in Lagos started the competition which held at ECWA hall, Montgomery, Yaba.

    The firm’s online Manager Kehinde Onasoga said the star prize winner would go home with a scholarship valued at N200,000, adding that her school would also benefit from a project by the firm put at N150,000. Aside, the first and second runners up would also get consolation prizes ranging from books and laptops, while all contestants are given certificates of participation.

    Nnenna, who aspires to be a Lawyer, said, after winning “I am very elated.  My teacher only practiced with me for three days. I am very surprised I came first overall.”

    Concept Nova Executive Director, Chukwuma Ochonogor said the competition is part of the company’s community empowerment initiative. He said the firm is not only concerned about business success but also the society and their host community.

    He said: “The young ones are the ones who will propel us when we grow old. They are the ones supposed to take care of us. Therefore, we are supposed to ensure that the people that would inherit us are properly groomed and educated.”

    Other participating schools are: Eletu Odibo Junior High School, Bariga, Akoka JuniorHigh School, Akoka, Aje Comprehensive High School, Mobolaji Bank Anthony Junior High School and Onike Girls Junior High School, Yaba.

     

  • CRS Super Highway and climate change debate

    While at the public presentation of the Environmental Impact Assessment EIA, for the Cross River Super Highway which held at the Channels View Hotel in Calabar on Wednesday last week, I saw a white guy, whose nationality I am not quite sure of arguing that the Cross River Super Highway should not be constructed because of carbon emissions and global warming and all that.

    But a quick search showed that, in 2013, world total carbon emission figures amounted to 35,669,000 metric tonnes.Out of this, China top the list after emitting 10,540,000 metric tonnes with average per capita of 7.6 while United States came second with 5,334,000 metric tonnes with 16.5 per capita.The European Union came third with 3,415,000 metric tonnes and 6.7, India is in the fourth position with, 2,341,000 metric tonnes and 1.8 per capita and Russia follows next with 1,766,000 metric tonnes and 12.4 per capita.In the sixth position is Japan which emitted 1,278,000 metric tonnes at 10.1 per capita and Germany in the seventh position with 767,000 metric tonnes at 9.3 per capita.

    Nigeria is not even on the top 30 list of global polluters talk less of Cross River State which still holds 50 percent of Nigeria’s remaining rain forest and Africa’s largest rain forest, but the world insists that we must preserve this forest to suck the pollution that we are not part of emitting.

    But at what cost really? Another question is….How did the West develop?

    The land area of Paris is 105.4sq/km, London is 1,570sq/km, and California is 423,970sq/km, while New York City area is 1,210sq/km.

    Atlanta is 342.9sq/km, Houston is 1,630sq/km, the industrial city of Guangzhou is 7,433sq/km, China’s capital, Beijing area is 16,410sq/km, Frankfurt is 248.3sq/km, and Istanbul area is 5,343sq/km, while Chicago is 606.1sq/km. The total area the superhighway will cover is 110sq/km.

    All these cities were developed after authorities cut down massive and large expanse of forests to develop the cities, industries, factories, roads, rails and other infrastructure that is now generating the pollution which the world wants the Cross River forest to suck up at the detriment of our own development.

    The Mexico banana farms and the USA wheat and corn farms came from felling forests. Terminal 5 Airport in UK was constructed on a Virgin National Park in spite of protests from civil society and environmental concern groups. In Switzerland and Germany, trees are fell to generate biomass energy and replanting follows.

    It’s important to note that capital spending, like the proposed super highway, creates an asset, and this gives a return over time in the form of growth.

    I agree like most economists have argued that infrastructural projects such as rail and roads create jobs, generate taxes and stimulate further spending. This is the economic multiplier effect that capital spending brings.

    Therefore, while an increase in public spending may create a deficit in the short term, the resultant increase in productivity will lead to a higher rate of economic growth and greater tax revenues.

    According to the International Finance Corporation (IFC), for every one billion US dollars invested in infrastructure in developing economies, between 49,000 and 110,000 jobs are created.”

    I clearly understand that if forests are destroyed or degraded, large amounts of gases that cause global warming are released into the atmosphere but I don’t see how creating a very vital road, like the superhighway proposed by Governor Ayade, through our forest and re-afforesting same will so irreparably destroy or degrade the forest, if that did not happen elsewhere when they were developing their own cities.

    The government has said that 275,000 trees will be felled and 5,000,000 will be planted. The Cross River Green Police was created with that in mind and 1,500 cadets have been inaugurated.

    While the West through pittances called donor funding, is promoting this attempt to stall development in the name of conservation, in Third World nations like Nigeria, Bolivia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Tanzania, Vietnam, and Zambia, there is no corresponding effort to curb the activities of the giant polluters. Even Trump is promising not to respect the Paris agreement on emission control if he eventually becomes US President.

    My advocacy, rather than join those who say they don’t want the road is to say that the Cross River State government should pay heed to genuine concerns that are being raised by communities bestriding the route, activists, and lingering issues of compensation for those who will be losing land, and other related matters should be diligently attended to so that work can restart on the super highway project.

    For me I have chosen to support the super highway project and I will do the little I can and God willing, that road will someday become a reality to the good of northern Cross River, the entire state and Nigeria as a whole.

    For those who say the project cannot be done, let me end this article with a quote from Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum – The King of Dubai in chapter 2 of his celebrated book: MY VISION: Challenges In The Race For Excellence:”Many years ago, some merchants came to me and asked me to approach my father, Sheikh Rashid, on their behalf, and discuss the large port he was planning at Jebel Ali. Since the economy was in recession and we already had a large harbour at Port Rashid that met their needs, they thought the emirate did not need a new larger harbour.

    “I felt, I should convey the message and shortly after went at dawn to the Jebel Ali area, where I knew I would find my father. He was standing on top of a small hill examining the site. I passed on the message and waited for his reply. He looked at me intently and said nothing, then he fumbled with the ‘midwakh’ he was holding between his fingers. After a few moments, he looked at me again and then to the ground saying nothing.

    “I dared not ask him the same question again and waited until he had finished his examination and asked me to drive him home. Once we took off and after relaxing his feet against the corner of the door as usual, he said, “Listen my son, I never answered your question because I did not want the engineers to hear. But I can tell you that the reason I am building this port now is because there will come a time when you will not be able to afford to do so.”

    “Before my father conceived and implemented this project, nobody had thought of executing one of such gigantic proportions. Even now, I have no simple explanation as to how the idea occurred to him, but if I had to explain it in one word, I would use the word, ‘vision’.

    “In his great wisdom, God gave each one of us a share of material possessions, capabilities and talents. Some people may aspire to little more than their daily earnings, while others have far greater vision.

    “Just like mature trees, capabilities and feelings have deep roots, if we do not know the roots of things or how to explain or define them, this does not mean they are rootless. An enlightened leader is capable of developing a vision and using his imagination to perfect it.”

    Jalingo, an activist and social rights campaigner wrote from Lagos

     

  • Halt that debate

    Halt that debate

    •Senate should reject the Grazing Reserve Commission Bill

    The mere suggestion that grazing reserves could be established in all parts of the country is causing ripples across partisan, social, ethnic and religious divides. It is instructive that the bill to establish The National Grazing Reserve Commission for the Preservation and Control of National Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes and other matters connected therewith has met with resistance from across the country. It was first sponsored by Senator Zainab Kure in the 7th National Assembly.

    The senator spoke passionately about the need to upgrade pastoral agriculture in the country, but did not secure enough support of her colleagues. The bill has been re-introduced in the 8th assembly, with a view to ostensibly putting an end to the bloody clashes between Fulani herdsmen and farmers. The bill aims at establishing a national grazing reserve commission that will acquire land for grazing reserves in all states of the federation. This is regarded as a solution to the avoidable loss of lives in different parts of the country, including the carnage in Agatu, Benue State and Enugu State.

    As we observed earlier, it is unfortunate that the herdsmen have turned themselves into murderous gangs, shedding blood everywhere they go. It is even more unfortunate that it took the Federal Government so long to respond. The government should realise that it is bound by the provision of Section 14 of the 1999 constitution to see security of lives and welfare of all Nigerians as its primary purpose. We call upon the government and security forces to be more pro-active in handling such sensitive matters.

    There is no doubt that cattle rearers will always seek pastures for their animals. We also accept that the governments have a duty to provide an enabling environment for all citizens to practice their trade, profession and vocation. They also have a duty to provide basic infrastructure for all. It is therefore not out of place for Fulanis and other Nigerians to call for special attention that could help make life more comfortable for them.

    However, we do not see the purpose in seeking to turn the Federal Government to a land grabber. Nigeria is a Federal Republic and, despite its imperfections, the constitution separates powers between the Federal Government and the governments of the federating units – states. The constitution vests control of land in the state governments. There is, therefore, no federal land to be compulsorily acquired and donated to a grazing commission, and if this is to be done, it will be another desecration of the federal principle.

    On this score, The Grazing Reserve Commission Bill is unacceptable. If at all grazing reserves are to be established, it should be left to states. Nigeria at this stage should be planning for the future to keep pace with the developed countries. Rather than seek to establish grazing reserves that belong in the past, we should be moving towards establishing ranches, which are private initiatives. Pastoral agriculture is private business, like other farmers, they could therefore acquire their own land as individuals or co-operative for grazing. However, a state government could establish ranches and let out to pastoralists.

    The bill as it is does not deserve to be passed as it could create fresh problems between the herdsmen and those whose lands might have been compulsorily acquired. Already, we could see the pattern in the opposition to it even on the floor of the senate by senators from the north central and southern zones. The Fulani herdsmen should be helped to upgrade their knowledge and skills and exposed to loans from commercial and agricultural banks. When this is done, we will be closer to the practice in the 21st century and the cows will be more productive. Nigerians deserve to live in peace in their homes, eat healthy meat and drink fresh milk. The duty of government is to help in realising these objectives.

  • Senate to debate fuel price increase next week

    The Senate is set to debate the controversial fuel price increase next week, it emerged Thursday.

    This is coming even as two senators have already disagreed over the propriety of the new fuel price regime.

    A source close to the leadership of the Senate who disclosed the plan by the Senate to discuss the fuel price increase, noted that “it will afford Senators to tell their constituents where they stand on the burning issue.”

    He said, “Surely we are going to discuss it when we reconvene next week. Some Senators are, no doubt, agitated about the way and manner the increase was announced while some others are bound to support the new policy.

    “But it is necessary that we discuss the issue so as to let our constituents know where we stand. I can tell you, as explosive as the debate might be, the leadership of the Senate will not be opposed to the idea of debating the matter.”

    He noted that although the Presidency invited the leadership of the National Assembly to brief them on the need to deregulate the petroleum downstream, “before those who attended the briefing could leave the venue of the briefing, the announcement was made.”

    Meanwhile, Chairman, Senate Committee on Police Affairs, Senator Abu Ibrahim and Chairman, Senate Committee on Local and Foreign Debts, Senator Shehu Sani, sharply disagreed over the necessity for the new fuel price regime.

    While Senator Ibrahim (Katsina South) threw his back behind the new fuel pump price of N145, Senator Sani (Kaduna Central) insisted that the increase would come with a lot of social implications.

    Senator Ibrahim said, “Every Nigerian knows that fuel price increase will eventually come. Everybody knows that the country cannot continue to sustain a corrupt petroleum product regime. It may be a little difficult in the beginning but after some time things will be better.

    He continued, “Nigeria is still the cheapest when you look at the countries around us. We need to explain to Nigerians that the new policy is for the good of the country. To leave fuel price as it is may be populist but we have to accept the inevitable. I was opposed to fuel price increase before because I believed that the money will be squandered but now we have a government that can use the money for the benefit of Nigerians and in the best interest of the country.

    “I believe we have accepted the inevitable. There is no subsidy in the budget, where are we going to get the money. Our subsidy was actually subsidizing other countries. The countries around us are still paying higher prices including Ghana, Angola and Kenya. So I believe that it is rational, it is for the benefit of Nigerians and it is long overdue.”

    Senator Sani on his own said, “I represent Kaduna Central Senatorial District and I am also from a long history of political movement. We are opposed to any policy that will inflict hardship on the people. We have been consistent over the years. The same oil that we are told is no longer being sold as it used to before, why can’t it be made available to the people.

    “Increasing fuel price comes with a lot of social problems. If the price of petroleum goes up so also will be school fees, cost of food stuff, medical bill and others.

    “Increasing fuel price incites social discontent. I cannot be in the street some two or three years ago opposing the increase in the price of petroleum products only for me to now justify it. I am opposed to it because I can see a lot of influence of capitalist world. They wanted Naira devalued, they wanted the refineries sold. Now they are pushing for fuel price increase.

    “If we are going to address the problem, why can’t we wait until the refineries were going to build come on stream. Our bureaucrats are disconnected from the reality on the ground.”

    Asked if he would join any protest that might be engendered by the new fuel price regime, he said he would rather deploy his energy to oppose the increase on the floor of the Senate.

    Senator Sani added, “You have to insist on your right. Whether there is subsidy or no subsidy, the fact remains that Nigerians do not want fuel price increase.”

     

  • The debate on Speed Limiters

    SIR: I have watched and read with enormous interest the ongoing debate on the introduction of speed limiters for commercial drivers in Nigeria and I must confess that the arguments both for and against its implementation are clear hints that Nigeria’s road safety is still travelling on a long route of seeming undefined destination.

    On the part of the Federal Road Safety Corps, FRSC, it is very easy to notice a mixed basket of unconvincing logic. First, is that its claim that about 50 percent of road crashes are caused by speeding beyond limits is mere guess work. Nigeria has no such facility to factually state what caused a road crash especially when it relates to driving too fast because we have no speed monitors. In fact, that ought to be the vital reason why the issue of speed limiters is even on the table. Attributing a chunk of road crashes to overspeeding is far from the truth and I consider it a means of trying to bully Nigerians into endorsing the use of speed limiters. If the FRSC statistics would be considered accurate, then what it means is that our roads are now very good and well illuminated; drivers now drive very well; people no longer drink and drive; convoy drivers of most political office holders are no longer tail-gating and driving oppressively; the vehicle conditions are perfect; drivers do not get fatigued anymore and we now have more caring pedestrians. I admit that human factor can be associated with about 50 percent of why road crashes occur, but definitely not all are due to speeding above limits. In any case, inaccurate statistics should not be an issue because even if speeding too fast causes 10 percent of road deaths, it deserves prompt national attention because one preventable road death is unnecessary.

    Specifically, I have read views of persons that have thrust the blame of the non approval of speed limiter to the doorsteps of Rep. Phillip Shaibu (APC-Edo) and Rep. Onyemaechi Mrakpor (PDP-Delta) because they championed the objection on the implementation. Unfortunately, these seeming advocates of speed limiter have not done justice to their matter as they have failed to advance any credible or superior logic on why speed control is important and can be achieved through the speed limiter initiative. Indeed, this is why one may be tempted to consider the action of the honourable members as triumph of rationality and responsibility over complacency. Let me state herein that in a contentious matter where information is deficient or is lacking, even the best judge cannot manufacture evidence rather he will be compelled to rely on the facts before him to pass judgement. That actually was what happened recently at the Federal House of Representatives when its honourable members conducted their task as true representatives of the Nigerian people by asking the FRSC’s management to stay action until it truly justifies why such a policy should not be cancelled.

     

    • Phrank Shaibu,

    Abuja.

  • Knocks, applause for 2016 budget at Senate debate

    Knocks, applause for 2016 budget at Senate debate

    • Reps begin debate

    The Senate yesterday began the debate of the general principles of the 2016 budget.

    While some Senators hailed the spirit and content of the budget. Others described the fiscal document as unimplementable and asked that it be reworked.

    The debate, which cut across party lines, with most All Progressives Party (APC) Senators who spoke insisting that the budget is an honest move to fix the economy of the country, while their Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterparts, expressed skepticism about the workability of the fiscal policy.

    Some of the lawmakers cautioned the government to be mindful of excess borrowing to finance the budget as the measure might signal a wrong impression of economic affluence when the economy is actually undergoing recession.

    At a stage during the debate, there was shouting match on the floor of the Senate but the Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki, managed the situation to avoid out right rancor.

    Senate Leader, Senator Mohammed Ali Ndume, led the debate by outlining the objective assumptions of the budget.

    Ndume noted that the budget entitled “budget of change” is unique in so many ways.

    The preparation of the budget, he said, was based on Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB) system which required all expenses on projects and programmes to be fully justified by MDAs.

    The Senate Leader who said that the budget is aimed at promoting inclusive growth including the poor and vulnerable noted that it would however be challenged by the decline in oil prices and slowdown in the global economy.

    Ndume said that the budget was designed to ensure that the country’s economy survived by stimulating economic activities, making it more competitive by focusing on infrastructural development as well as to create a number of jobs.

    He added that budget focuses on broadening the tax base and improving the effectiveness of revenue collection as well as diversifying the economy and moving it away from dependence on oil.

    He said that the 2016 budget of N6.08 trillion is a “framework that will consolidate and add impetus to the change agenda of this administration and will promote economic growth, job creation, poverty reduction and service delivery to all Nigerians.”

    Let me start by saying that indeed we have to fund part of this budget by borrowing because in the previous administration a huge chunk of our common patrimony our resources have been stolen.

    Senator Ahmed Lawan (Yobe North) in his contribution noted that the challenge of the economy is not the current price of oil in the world market.

    Lawan said that the challenge of the economy “is and has always been corruption, corruption. 55 privileged Nigerians in the last 16 years stole 1.34 trillion.”

    He added, “This is the 17th budget I am debating in the National Assembly and with the exception of 2005 Appropriation, there was never an implementation of more than 40%. Nigerians was shortchanged for 16 years.

    “The proposal before us is the first in the last 17 years that an allocation of 30% of the appropriation is given for capital expenditure and for the first time in a genuine, sincere, honest and transparent manner the executive arm of government as deem it necessary to give ordinary Nigerians something, some succour, some hope and genuine one for that matter that we have N500 billion allocated to the school feeding and social and the safety nets generally.

    “Mr. President 2015 budget when we debated it here the proposal was N500 billion for the entire capital budget and we said it and it came to pass that they were not going to implement even half of that.

    “In fact at that time I mentioned that Nigerians with over 179.9 million will have only about N200 billion in a budget of 4.9trillion.

    “Today, we have a budget that provides 30% in the first instance and so many other social safety nets that will be for disadvantage Nigerians, Nigerians that are most vulnerable that have little or no hope. This is again the first budget presented to the assembly in the last 17 years in which revenue from oil is not predominant and is not overwhelming.”

    Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (Abia South) faulted the budget and urged the government to withdraw it so as to go back to the drawing board.

    He said, “I am going to quote copiously from the Senate Leader. He said this budget is unique and titled `Budget of Change’.

    “This budget is indeed unique, the first budget that has ever been sent out to the public of Nigeria and after the budget presentation, the finance minister has never come to explain the details of the budget as it is normally done.

    “It is a budget of change, I agree but it is a change in the wrong direction. I say it is a change in the wrong direction because it says that it is based on zero budgeting requiring all expenses to be fully justified.

    “A budget that increases spending up to 30% based solely on borrowing, in what way is it justified? That is the question we want to ask the people who brought this budget of change.

    “We ask a question: this budget has moved the 2015 budget from N4.45 trillion to N6.08 trillion and we felt that moving it on zero based budgeting should actually show how it is done.

    “Of course we get nothing; all we get is that we are going to borrow.

    “A budget that moves domestic spending within Aso Villa from N580 million to N1.7 billion cannot be a budget of change.

    “We were told that in the revised budget there was an adjustment due to error, we agree but what has happened is that the money up to N7 billion were moved from buying vehicles to being spread in offices.

    The House of Representatives began consideration of the 2016 Budget yesterday.

    The budget was laid by President Muhammadu Buhari on the 22nd of December 2015.

    The Majority leader of the House, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila who presented an overview of the budget before the House allayed the fear of members.

    According to him, the 2016 budget is different from what obtained in the past.

    He said: “The 2016 budget is epic and historical not just because of its super mega size of N6trillion but for reasons that it touches the economic and social well being of the people of Nigeria.

    “It is a budget based n the internationally acclaimed zero based budgeting system where every kobo has been justified by the MDas.

    Gbajabiamila said the 2016 budget contained N6.077 trillion out of which N2.648 trillion would be for recurrent (non-debt); N1.845 trillion capital expenditure; N1.475 trillion for debt service and N351. 37 billion for statutory transfers.

    He said the budget “comes with N2.2 trillion deficit to be financed with domestic borrowing of N984 billion and foreign borrowing of N900 billion,” adding that its the first time  that domestic borrowing will be higher than foreign borrowing.

    He saint the domestic loans would be at a “highly concessionary terms with moratorium and single digit interest of about 3 percent.”

    Gbajabiamila said the borrowings would stimulate Nigeria’s economy, particularly the capital component, which makes up is about 30 percent of the budget.

    According to him, priority areas of government are: “ Works, Power and Housing with the allocation of N433.4 billion, Transport N202 billion, Defence N134.6 billion, Interior N53.1 billion.

    The lawmaker said Agriculture and Solid Minerals Reforms are also priority areas in the budget

    “I would like to state at this point that there is also a direct correlation between the government’s credibility and anti-corruption fight and the willingness of the World bank, IMF and even the domestic lenders to give this very concession rates.

    “They believe the monies borrowed will be properly channeled and utilized and their chances of getting paid back a lot higher and so have expressed a willingness to assist the government in financing its budget deficit through these loans.

    “The government also intends to reduce taxes whilst broadening the tax net and pursue a more aggressive revenue collection drive. It also intends to block leakages and waste thereby freeing up more funds for budget implementation. Reforms such as the Treasury Single Account are already yielding positive results.”

    He said the president has called the budget the budget of change and called for a speedy passage of the document.

    Members of the House who spoke yesterday were of the opinion that though the budget seem to be people-oriented, there is the need to be cautious based on the current economic situation in the country .

    Some of the main observation of members were the crashing oil prices which has dropped below $30 per barrel; the lack of adequate implementation of past budgets by the executive; need to move away from being an oil- based economy and the huge deficit in the budget.

    Budget performance should be between 75 or 80 percent at least so the 2016 budget would not go the way of previous budgets, the lawmakers said.

    A member, Jimoh Olajide expressed concern on the deficit of N2.2 trillion in the budget and wondered it it would not impact negatively on the budget

    Lawan Abubakar ( Adamawa) spoke on the strength of the dollar against the Naira saying its causing a disjunction in the Nigerian Economy? He opined that its necessary to stem oil heft and pipeline vandalization to enable the federal government implement the budget reasonably in the face of dwindling oil revenue.

    The Speaker of the House, Hon. Yakubu Dogara said members would be allowed to contribute to the debates on the budget from yesterday  Wednesday to Tuesday next week.

    Many members indicated their intention to contribute to the budget debate

    The debate continues today.

    “It also increases the spending that is due to renovations within the Villa; they are going to renovate the Villa with N3.9 billion.

    “What else do you want to renovate there that Nigerians will see in the Year 2016.

    “We know what is going on in the global economy; this budget is predicated on an oil benchmark of $38 per barrel and I can now say that with oil being $28 today, this budget is dead on arrival.

    “The job of the opposition is to help the government to get its priorities right so I want to please urge this government to withdraw this budget and go back to the drawing board.”

    Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance, Senator John Owan Enoh, (Cross River Central) took a critical view of the budget insisting that the budget has quite some fine points no doubt.

    Enoh said that the debate should dwell on some of the matters that will concern everyone.

    He said, “The budget seeks to stimulate the economy for example through economic diversification, import substitution, export expansion and promotion. This is good.

  • Lagos State Model College wins Felabration Schools Debate

    Lagos State Model College wins Felabration Schools Debate

    It was a flurry of ideas at Freedom Park, venue of this year’s edition of the Felabration Schools Debate, as secondary school students came together share their notions on the topic Poverty is not an accident, a quote famed by the late South African President, Nelson Mandela.

    After bouts of competing, ten finalists emerged; Epe Grammar School; Aunty Ayo Comprehensive Secondary School, Ikoyi, Lagos; Kings College, Lagos; Vivian Fowler Memorial School for Girls, Oregun, Lagos; Metropolitan Senior College, Isolo, Lagos; Oriwu Model College, Ikorodu Lagos; Dowen College, Lekki Phase 1, Lekki, Lagos; Lagos State Senior Model College, Ikosi, Agbowa, Lagos; Meiran Community High School, Meiran, Lagos. Queens College; one of the ten finalists failed to show up.

    Individual speakers had five minutes to argue in favour of their positions. The schools that emerged at the end of the first segment were Kings College, Epe Grammar School, Aunty Ayo Comprehensive Secondary School, Dowen College, and Lagos State Senior Model College, Meiran. The speakers were then given five minutes to further make their points.

    After the final round, Lagos State Senior Model College, Ikosi, Agbowa won the competition. Kings College came second, while Dowen College came third. The competitors representing each of the top three schools won a tablet, and mini laptop each, while all nine participating schools each received a 32 inch Sharp LED Flat screen television set.

    Moderated by comedian and TV host, Teju Babyface, professionals who served as the panel of judges were Adesuwa Oyenokwe, a seasoned broadcaster/Publisher; Kunle Bakare, a Publisher; Olajide Bello, a renowned legal practitioner; Morayo Afolabi Brown, an On Air Personality as well as Jumoke Alawode James, a Media Consultant.