Tag: Disruptive

  • Recapitalisation counter-productive, disruptive, says Ogunbiyi

    Efforts by the National Insurance Commssion (NAICOM) to reposition the industry through Risk-Based Supervison (RBS) and Tier-Based Minimum Solvency Capital (TBMSC) could be counter-productive, anti-growth and disruptive, Mutual Benefits Assurance Plc Chairman Dr. Akin Ogunbiyi has said.

    He spoke at the fifth  Businesstoday Annual Anniversary and Awards held in Lagos.

    Ogunbiyi said the implementation of the Tier-based rating of insurance companies could lead to a crisis of confidence for the  industry where only about seven of the 29 companies will qualify under the new standard.

    He said it would lead to de-listing of insurance stocks from the stock market.

    Ogunbiyi stressed that insurance stocks were already classified as penny stocks due to inability to the support pricing by regular dividend payments, adding that there would be hostile take-overs of the companies for peanuts, especially by foreign investors with short-term gains as focus.

    He said: “It might be practically impossible to fully implement the provision of the Local Content law.The Rebranding project of the industry may suffer a major set-back as the public perception of some companies and the entire industry will be affected adversely and there will be significant job loss

    “As an industry, we need to urgently adopt a value innovation strategy to enable us provide relevant affordable products for our teeming population. My advice is that as a priority, we must align insurance services to the unique lifestyles of our citizenry in all income groups.

    “Is it only capitalisation that can drive insurance development in Nigeria giving the experience of other African insurance markets? What has been the contributions and performance of the industry since the 2007 recapitalisation exercise? What level of returns (Return on Equity/Return on Investment) have accrued to the investors and shareholders of the industry ever since? Who are the target investors expected to shore up the new capital call even if there was time?” he asked.

    Ogunbiyi said shrinking profit pool and the overall performance of the industry could only be checkmated by innovation, technical capacity, healthy competition, adoption best practices, governance structure and creating ‘blue oceans of untapped new markets.

    “As an industry, we need to urgently adopt a value innovation strategy to enable us provide relevant affordable products for our teeming population. My advice is that as a priority, we must align insurance services 2to the unique lifestyles of our citizenry in all income groups,” he advised.

  • Earthshaking, disruptive but anticlimactic 2017

    Earthshaking, disruptive but anticlimactic 2017

    Of all the major events that shaped 2017, three stand out for their great impact on the country and on the year. The furious legal gymnastics over who leads the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) convulsed the better part of the year and only ended, fairly dramatically, after the party’s December 9 convention. The outcome of the legal fight and the consequences of the convention are bound to influence the shape of politics in 2018 and perhaps far beyond. There was also President Muhammadu Buhari’s illness which took the better part of 2017. The health crisis began almost imperceptibly in January, intensified by midyear, and culminated anticlimactically in August. The politics of that illness has already begun to shape 2018 and will most likely reverberate into 2019, Nigeria’s epoch-defining election year. The third event was the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) agitation that rocked the Southeast and exhumed a hugely disruptive and sweeping ethnic suspicion and bigotry template long thought to have been ameliorated by years of tribal co-mingling, expansive interethnic and interstate business deals, and political alliances.

    It is not certain which takes the precedence between the PDP’s fateful events of the year and the president’s equally impactful illness. But it is clear that both events will deeply shape Politics 2018 and Elections 2019. When the president first took ill around June 2016, it seemed to be nothing more than the consequence of overwork going by what was marketed as a thoughtful president engrossed in the humongous task of cleaning the Augean stables left by the PDP. But by early 2017, it was gradually becoming clear that the president was not in such a fine fettle as he and his aides sold to the public. For an illness that first manifested as a simple ear infection, and was apparently believed to elicit nothing more than a week or two of vacation and medical examination in the United Kingdom, it shocked everyone that that trip soon yielded to another trip in May, this time more desperate and urgent. Whereas the January trip was to begin on the 19th and end on February 6, but ended inadvisably on March 10, the May trip took nearly all of 104 days, ending only on August 19.

    Both the January and May trips, around which buzzed whispers and rumours of the president’s death or vegetative state, triggered rounds of speculations and permutations about the survival of the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the politics of re-election or, more accurately, succession. Presidential aides, supporters, ambitious party officials and other political adventurers had even started to entertain very fanciful projections about Elections 2019. Visit after visit to the president in the UK, not to talk of social media gossips that strained credulity, birthed morbid stories of the president’s debility. It was soon concluded, albeit prematurely, that even if he recovered he would be in no shape to seek a second term. Neither the president, whose voice in those debilitating days never rose above hoary whispers, nor his dispirited aides who pined in agony, talked about a second term.

    But when he returned in August looking more sprightly than anticipated, most calculations fell apart. His recovery since August has even been more surefooted, leading to speculations that he might be disposed to re-election. Not only has he now spoken of a second term, for a man and president so naturally reclusive, he has even begun to make trips to states few ever thought he would go. As his health status becomes more robust, he has become more mollifying, more gregarious, more conciliating. It is remarkable how the ebb and flow of his health bore direct impact on the political mood of the country, and particularly the moods of many top politicians. Those who cannot endure the president having a second term, that is if the electorate would oblige him, have embraced radical alternatives. The conclusion in both the APC and the PDP is that President Buhari is interested in a second term, will be nominated by his party, and will give the re-election race his all.

    Now to the PDP. After first appearing to be depressed by its terrible electoral loss in 2015, and even seeming to have fractured irreparably, the PDP finally decided to pick up the pieces in 2016. But like a jilted lover falling in love on the rebound, the PDP in desperation climbed into bed with the colourful and rambunctious former Borno State governor, Ali Modu Sheriff. He seemed the perfect counterpoise to the fierce and unrelenting APC, and with his immense wealth and generosity of spirit, gave indications he was both prepared to spend the money at his disposal and give battle to the intransigent ruling party. He was not beholden to anyone or group, and was not known to suffer fools gladly, nor to be discomfited by any form of squeamishness. The PDP leaders thus saw in him a champion worth the name and the money. However, soon after a giddy start to a reign initially conceived as a stop-gap only, PDP leaders and apparatchiks whose ways and ideas appeared at variance with that of the former Borno governor began to scheme how to reclaim their party.

    After many months of bitter legal wrangling, complete with a Court of Appeal judgement in favour of Sen. Sheriff, the PDP finally reclaimed their party from the ambitious former governor through a July 12 Supreme Court judgement. That final judgement left the party in the hands of the more amenable, but no less enigmatic and mercurial former Kaduna State governor, Ahmed Makarfi. Though also clearly ambitious, Sen. Makarfi was however seen as a team player, a bureaucrat, and an ideologue. He in fact appeared like a more acceptable face of the embattled party, one who could be trusted to organise a convention without seeking at the same time to hijack it. An elective convention was finally held on December 9 after many backroom deals, leading to the enthronement of a new chairman, Uche Secondus. He is trusted. More, he is an insider. If the party can find a standard-bearer to match the APC’s President Buhari in 2019, and find the wisdom to cobble a great and winning platform to take advantage of the ruling party’s complacency, and also atone for their dismal performance in office in years past, they could give the APC a run for its money, and even challenge its dominance.

    Though less far-reaching in its impact on both politics and the country as a whole, the pro-Biafra separatist group, IPOB, took the country by storm and with more flourish than both the president’s illness and the PDP’s apparent reincarnation. IPOB was of course not the first nor the only pro-Biafra group in the Southeast, but it was led by the more colourful but less cerebral Nnamdi Kanu. In less than one year, he took separatist agitation to a new height. Acerbic, unfeeling, illogical and extremist, Mr Kanu pompously roused the disaffected in the Southeast into a frenzied anti-Nigerian horde. That the IPOB agitation was more popular than its predecessors, particularly the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), was due less to Mr Kanu’s flourish or talent than to the alienation supposedly suffered by the Igbo under the Buhari presidency. That alienation was glaring and indisputable.

    Mr Kanu also cashed in on the lack of closure to the civil war. Virtually none of the issues that engendered the war has been satisfactorily resolved. The Southeast has borne the brunt of infrastructural decay and general developmental stasis. It has also so far been unable to produce a nationally acceptable politician as presidential candidate for any of the two major political parties, and that inability has seemed to accentuate what the region describes as marginalisation. Consequently, and for the foreseeable future, movements like IPOB and MASSOB will continue to agitate, and their agitations will always resonate. Until perhaps a more acceptable political structure is found, one that lessens the value and impact of winning the presidency, and one that devolves power in such a way as to enable the regions achieve political, cultural and social fulfilment, the insane craze for Aso Villa will continue with all its attendant frustrations.

    The IPOB agitations and the manner in which the group was put down have sadly worsened the animosity against the Buhari presidency in the Southeast. The president is now struggling to convince the region that he does not harbour a natural dislike for the Igbo. He is unlikely to be able to dispel the anger in that region. Instead, that anger will morph into politics and be transferred into the dynamics of the 2019 polls, with the Igbo and the South-South region likely to embrace the PDP in overwhelming number. In frustration, the APC government in Abuja will also likely abandon every thought of conciliating the two regions while it concentrates its efforts in holding on to the Southwest, consolidating its popularity in the northern parts of the country, and making those regions impregnable.

    Last year undoubtedly hosted many more events of seismic scale beyond the three events identified on this column today. The events of 2018 and the polls of 2019 will eventually be found to have taken their roots in the three hugely impactful events adumbrated in this place. Next year is unlikely to be as disruptive and earthshaking as 2017; but it will determine what will happen in 2019 and how far the country can go in its effort to reform the polity and transform the economy under the APC government.

  • El-Rufai and his disruptive memo

    Asked to substantiate his allegation that some Senators demanded gratification from him to approve his appointment as minister in former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s cabinet, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai had said God was his witness. Not a few wondered at the time if God would come down from heaven to testify in his case. It was around year 2000. El-Rufai had appeared before the Senate Ethics Committee, which summoned him over the allegation. Some Peoples Democratic Party leaders, particularly then Vice President Atiku Abubakar, had to intervene in the matter to pacify the Senate before el-Rufai was cleared for the ministerial job. He was subsequently appointed Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister by President Obasanjo. He did not leave that office without leaving behind some footprints. El-Rufai did some remarkable things in that office quite alright, but as is his tradition, he ended up a baggage for the Obasanjo government, destroying and demolishing the houses of mostly his critics and political foes under the guise of restoring Abuja master plan.

    The ways of el-Rufai, now Kaduna State governor, have always been puzzling. Attempting a de-construction of the governor in his memoir, ‘My Watch (Vol.2),’ President Obasanjo said el-Rufai was loyal to nobody but himself. “Very early in my interaction with him, I appreciated his talent and brilliance. At the same time, I recognised his weakness,” the former president wrote in the book. “The worst is his inability to be loyal to anybody or any issue consistently for long, but only to Nasir el-Rufai,” he added.

    Nothing can be more accurate than that Obasanjo’s categorization of el-Rufai. This classification of the Kaduna governor has been further exemplified by the way he treated President Buhari recently. Though he called the president his leader and mentor, yet he fired a damaging memo to Buhari, where he took his administration to the cleaners. He said Buhari had failed to meet the expectations of Nigerians and that the nation was drifting away under his watch. Since he had access to the president, would it not have been better for el-Rufai to have sought audience with him and communicated his views directly to Buhari? But that was vintage el-Rufai. That memo was to become a ready tool in the hands of critics and opponents of the Buhari administration to launch a blistering attack on the regime. That move by the Kaduna governor also seemed to have exacerbated the division and dysfunction in the presidency. I shall return to this shortly.

    In the 29-page memo, el-Rufai scoffed at the president, saying he surrounded himself with inexperienced and clueless officials. After the memo went public, the Kaduna governor claimed his secret correspondence to the president was leaked ‘from the Villa,’ apparently suggesting that the same people he had labelled inexperienced had leaked the memo. With that squabble, the battle line seems to have been drawn between those ‘inexperienced’ officials and el-Rufai and the Kaduna governor appeared to have been crushed by the same ‘inexperienced’ men in the seeming power tussle at the Villa.

    El-Rufai’s memo reeks of hate. He claimed the memo was not ill-motivated but he gave himself away when he cast aspersion on the group he called the Lagos group led by Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. He claimed the contribution of the group to Buhari’s victory in the 2015 election was exaggerated. This is how he put it on Page 23 of the memo: “The Lagos group more or less led by Asiwaju Bola Tinubu is the most organized and proactive. This group made a key contribution in our electoral success, but like all groupings it naturally exaggerates its role in order to increase its influence in the coming administration”. To put down such in a memo to the president clearly reinforces the depiction of el-Rufal as a disloyal, divisive, ungrateful and unappreciative person who recognises only himself and his interests in the scheme of things.

    El-Rufai was being mischievous when he sought to create the impression that Tinubu’s only contribution to APC’s victory at the centre in 2015 was in influencing the party’s victory in the South-west. Yes, this was crucial, indeed vital, to the outcome of the election. This is because in Buhari’s three previous failed attempts at the presidency, he never enjoyed the support of a South-west mistrustful of his perceived ethno-regional parochialism and Islamic extremism. But the truth is Tinubu’s contribution to the displacement of a sitting president at the centre goes far beyond what el-Rufai describes as the South-west support. Tinubu and the South-west galvanised the entire nation to back the candidacy of Buhari, leading the way for others to follow.

    The former Lagos governor has one of the strongest relationships with key elite groups across the North. It is on record that he criss-crossed the North and worked hard to win over many influential elites in that region who were suspicious and distrustful of Buhari to support him in 2015.  In his three previous abortive attempts at the presidency, Buhari had considerable grassroots support in the North but at best only very lukewarm acceptance among the region’s influential elite. Jagaban Borgu was a crucial factor in helping to build the very vital support for Buhari among critical power centres in the North that also played a major role in the outcome of the election. This is not to mention Tinubu’s ceaseless and clearly incomparable intellectual, tactical, strategic, organizational, logistical and material contributions to Buhari’s victory. And of course his leading strategic and organizational role in moulding the APC into the awesome political coalition that it became.

    Ironically, the same el-Rufai was in the fence-mending delegation led by Buhari to Tinubu’s Bourdillon, Ikoyi home to plead for another alliance with his ACN after the CPC bungled the earlier one in the build-up to the 2011 election. Buhari’s arrogant CPC had unilaterally picked Pastor Tunde Bakare as presidential running mate without consultations with the then ACN with which it had an alliance. Of course, ACN opted out. The result: Buhari lost to President Jonathan with all the states in the South-west except Osun voting for Jonathan.  At that fence-mending meeting at Bourdillon, which also had Bakare in attendance, el-Rufai was on record to have said that the delegation knew that without Tinubu, Buhari was going nowhere with his presidential ambition. The former FCT minister specifically told Tinubu that “you have been proved right too many times for us to refuse to listen to you”.

    Therefore, to insinuate that Tinubu- led ‘Lagos Group’ was exaggerating its contributions to Buhari’s victory in the 2015 election and on that basis seeking to clinch plum and financially-viable positions in the Buhari administration also shows that el-Rufai is one of those principally responsible for poisoning relationships within the APC and sowing the seed of the mistrust, disharmony, fractionalization and ill-will that has plagued the party till date. This perhaps must have been responsible for the way Buhari constituted his cabinet alienating key groups responsible for his victory in the election particularly Tinubu and his close supporters. It is obvious that even beyond not rewarding Tinubu’s nominees in his cabinet, Buhari also ensured that the Tinubu group had no meaningful influence or input whatsoever in the policy direction of the administration. Buhari’s stance towards the Tinubu group, after that el-Rufai’s memo, became markedly different from his attitude both after the presidential primaries in Lagos and after his victory in the election proper. In the immediate aftermath of the primaries, during the campaigns and after the election, Buhari, on several occasions, publicly acknowledged Tinubu’s invaluable contribution to his victory. That he could be so easily swayed to adopt a thinly-disguised hostile attitude to Tinubu appears to be a reflection of the quality of Buhari’s leadership and character trait.

    El-Rufai’s memo to Buhari also betrays the fact that he has been the arrowhead of the ceaseless and vigorous efforts to create a wedge between Tinubu and Buhari within the APC and whittle down the influence of Asiwaju within the party. This obsession with marginalizing Tinubu’s group in the APC first manifested itself in the fiasco that was the National Assembly leadership elections, with the then el-Rufai-led Abuja cabal of the party spearheading the bungling of the process with the Buhari administration shooting itself in the foot with negative and costly implications for the cohesion of the ruling party in the National Assembly, for harmonious Executive-Legislative relations at the centre and particularly for the president’s anti-corruption war. This ultimately self-defeating anti-Tinubu obsession also played itself out in the Kogi governorship election impunity that has done incalculable harm to the moral integrity of the APC as well as the controversial and fraudulent handling of the APC governorship primaries in Ondo State.

    El-Rufai’s all too well-known opportunistic antecedents make it obvious that his mischievous antics have absolutely nothing to do with any genuine affection for President Buhari as a person or interest in the wellbeing of the APC as a party. All that el-Rufai cares about is el-Rufai’s selfish interest. Unfortunately, this exceedingly egotistic politician, whose extremist belief in Fulani supremacy compounds the intractable crisis in Southern Kaduna, has been caught and incapacitated in the web of his own intrigues. El-Rufai has been outwitted and sidelined by a far more wily inner power circle around Buhari, thus utterly neutralizing his subtle and insidious agenda of exploiting his purported closeness to Buhari to surreptitiously build up a power base around himself within the APC with which to achieve his now clearly-doomed higher political aspirations. Those who know him so well have seen between the lines and have openly lambasted him for his infantile memo. His seeming smartness has caught up with him. But if truth must be told, the frustrations he so bitterly and desperately expressed in the memo suggest that his assumed political astuteness and sagacity are even far less impressive than his diminutive physical presence.

     

    • Balogun, a public relations expert, writes from Abuja.

     

  • Disruptive strategy to fighting corruption

    SIR: I reckon that about 90% of Nigerian institutions in the private and public sector have the words Integrity or Transparency listed as one of their corporate values, yet Nigeria is still listed among the most corrupt countries in the world. And if the recent statements of the President and the Vice President are anything to go by – we are very corrupt. I would therefore be stating the obvious to say that most people just put up those fancy value statements to fulfil all righteousness, tick boxes or perhaps to even create the false impression that they should be trusted.

    Another school of thought suggests that our values are not necessarily who we are just yet, but who we aspire to be, and that they refer to the things we are striving to live by. Regardless of whatever school of thought you belong too, something needs to be done urgently about the decaying values in our society, and I am not confident that the current “war” against corruption and the judicial structures that exist are enough, nor am I sure that the “change begins with me” campaign is exactly working for us right now. So, something more DISRUPTIVE needs to be done

    Some will argue that every society has their own corruption scandals and that perhaps fighting against corruption isn’t the issue. After all, many developed nations like Japan, South Korea, and Italy have had corruption scandals in the past, and therefore looking for a complete elimination of corruption is utopian and perhaps amounts to chasing the wind. Some have argued that corruption in Nigeria can only be dealt with when we give it the high prominence it deserves and when we acknowledge how pervasive it has been. Proponents of this school of thought argue that since corruption has become so pervasive, that every attempt to fight corruption will always have a political connotation – unless of course whoever is fighting is willing to cleanse the Augean stables of his own political party first – which in reality has never happened (and is unlikely to happen given our current electoral culture). Even when the military took over from civilians in 1983, it did not fight the corruption within the military with the same tenacity with which it fought the corrupt politicians, leading ostensibly to another coup in 1985 perpetrated by the corrupt elements that it had failed to flush out.

    So, if corruption has been that pervasive, then may be the right response to it will be to elevate it to the status of a national disease and deal with it the same way other national diseases have been dealt with in the past.  Perhaps rather than try to hunt down and persecute the seemingly never ending list of corrupt public officers and their private sector cronies and end up being accused of witch-hunting because they belong to the opposition, perhaps we should have a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission or Oputa Panel that exposes all the acts of corruption since Independence, gives perpetrators an opportunity to come forward and be forgiven after they have confessed to the public, returned the stolen fortunes and received the public humiliation they deserve. This will deliver a much bigger impact than the current cat and mouse approach that still ends up with plea bargains and plenty of “political” undertones that take away the credibility of the exercise, and still leaves us with a national psyche that is not yet ready to do away with corruption.

    As with all strategies, we can debate the pros and cons, and there are those that will argue that this “soft” approach may not work or yield the desired results. Unfortunately, we have gone beyond the years of military alacrity, and have embraced democracy with its inherent flaws, so at best we should be seeking the most genuinely democratic way of co-creating a culture of discipline in our country and killing the pervasive culture of corruption and indiscipline.

    Overall, I do not think that we should pretend that corruption doesn’t exist and just focus on fixing our economy. When the economy gets better, the canker worm of corruption will destroy it again. So, we have some choices, let’s be DISRUPTIVE about corruption and everything else.

     

    • Omagbitse Barrow, FCA

    Abuja.