The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Nigeria’s future

  • Focus on oil blocks as talks on Nigeria’s future hot up

    Focus on oil blocks as talks on Nigeria’s future hot up

    Dickson, MOSOP push for resource control

    Falana: give private oil licences to states

    The debate on Nigeria’s future continued yesterday with more calls for its restructuring  to address development and marginalisation.

    Bayelsa State Governor Seriake Dickson called on the Federal Government to set up an All-parties Committee to formulate the template to streamline issues and views around  restructuring.

    A few days ago, leaders of the All Progressives Congress (APC) resolved to set up an internal committee of the party to work out modalities for restructuring.

    Dickson urged the ruling party to carry other parties along in the process, in addition to allowing civil society organisations and the academia to deal decisively with the matter.

    Besides, he advocated “resource control”.

    He said only an expanded committee would give a sense of belonging to everybody.

    The same position on restructuring was taken by the Movement for the Sorvival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) – the voice of the oil-rich Ogoni ethnic group in Rivers State.

    Its leader Legborsi Saro Pyagbara said with a restructured Nigeria, disintegration would be avoided.

    But eminent lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) believes economic restructuring should be on the front burner.

    Pyagbara said: “MOSOP has been concerned about recent events in the country, which have the ominous potential of triggering national disintegration, if not speedily addressed. The issue of resurgent Biafra separatism and a counter Arewa intolerance expressed in the ultimatum to all Igbo to leave the North.

    “MOSOP categorically and irrevocably rejects the two extremes, neither of which will improve the miserable condition of the people who the antagonists are claiming to represent.

    “Most countries of the world finding themselves in similar situations like us have had to look inwards and search for solutions that are adaptable to their environments and meet the needs of the various centrifugal forces that make up the country.

    “For the Nigerian state to survive, it must be seen to demonstrate equity, justice and fairness by creating political space for the sub-national entities to develop at their own space while ensuring protection for national minorities and Indigenous communities.

    “The Ogoni Bill of Rights (OBR), which is the basis of the Ogoni struggle, emphasises local autonomy for the Ogoni people and other Nigerian communities that are threatened by internal colonialism. Local autonomy applied as a nationwide principle has enormous potential of diffusing grievances connected to perceived ethnic and regional domination.

    “Consequently, MOSOP rejects the call for the reintroduction of a regional structure based on the existing six geo-political zones, as this will revive the inequities and injustice that led to the demand for the creation of states in the First Republic.”

    Falana, in Lagos, canvassed economic restructuring rather than the political one being canvassed.

    Speaking at a colloquium in honour of the late Prof Abubakar Momoh, Falana, said: ”Now that they (leaders) are calling for debate, let us also join by asking them if we can restructure Nigeria’s economy first. We should start by taking over the oil blocks allocated to individuals and giving them to states because Section 16 of the Constitution says the commanding height of the economy shall not be privatised. Those who are getting duty waivers at the port must henceforth cease to get at the expense of others, otherwise, they will continue to claim the title of being the richest Nigerian or African.”

    He added: “After they sold these companies at giveaway prices, (former president Goodluck) Jonathan gave them N300 billion bailout. Now, this current Federal Government two weeks ago, gave them N700 billion. These figures are important because when we are talking about restructuring, we need to ask for figures because what we are talking about is restructuring the economy.

    “This government has set up Development Bank, Agric Bank and all that. Please take time to find out who are taking loans from these banks?”

    Dickson’s position, communicated by his Special Adviser on Media Relations, Francis Agbo, quoted him as saying: ‘‘Nigeria’s unity and indivisibility is desirable but should be negotiated for the good of all.’’

    He said for the restructuring to comprehensively address Nigeria’s unity, the APC- led Federal Government must include Resource Control, Devolution of Power to the federating units and True Federalism in the template.

    He said restructuring along these lines would build confidence and cohesion across the country and place Nigeria on the path of justice and fairness.

    ‘‘For me, as Governor of Bayelsa State, any restructuring that doesn’t include resource control will not make much sense to my people because for us in the Niger Delta, restructuring Nigeria starts with resource control. My understanding of Nigeria is that we all want to remain in one Nigeria but it must be a Nigeria of our dream founded on justice, equity and fairness; a Nigeria where all the people that make up the country are happy and proud to call their country and not a country where any section or race is perceived to be superior or inferior to the other, a Nigeria where we are our brothers’ keepers! With restructuring, all these are possible because when we sincerely restructure, there will be devolution of power, true federalism and every state will have control over its resources and this will make Nigeria to work smoothly.’’

     

    The statement said Dickson teamed up with progressives across the country to found the Alliance for Democracy (AD) in 1998 to address the basis of Nigeria’s unity as well as the teething agitation for resource control and devolution of power/ true federalism. It said that the governor defected from then AD when the party backtracked on resource control, by supporting the Onshore/Offshore Dichotomy suit.

    The MOSOP president also supported devolution of power to states, describing the Nigerian state as overcentralised.

    He said the nation is sitting on a time bomb with youth unemployment and insecurity.

    Former Head of State Gen. Yakubu Gowon cautioned against violence and acts capable of dividing the country.

    The elder stateman said he would not want the present generation of children to suffer what children in the Eastern Region went through during the civil war.

    He pleaded with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and Arewa youths to tone down their rhetoric and embrace dialogue and peace.

    “I will not want Nigerian children to suffer the hunger and deprivation experienced by children in the Eastern part during the civil war,” he said.

    The elder-statesman spoke in Sokoto after a prayer for the country.

    Gen. Gowon maintained that Nigerians should be ready to solve their problems just like they did after the civil war.

    He insisted that no foreign country would solve the problems.

    According to the elder statesman, it took the United States (U.S.) over 150 years to bring about reconciliation after the American civil war.

    Gen. Gowon, the war-time Head of State, who led the country for nine years, said: “I hope if I have anything to do with this, I will never wish to see Nigerians, especially children, suffer the kind of hunger and deprivation that children in the Eastern part suffered during the civil war.

     

  • Inter-Generational Dialogue on Nigeria’s future

    My hypothesis is that most successful nations in history are those who have consciously engaged their elite formation and have tapped into what those elites have been able to offer the nation. Those which have negatively engaged their elites, and driven them into the Diasporas or into exile, have paid very heavy prices in terms of human capital underutilisation.

    Nigeria has a generational capital problem that feeds into her incapacity to facilitate a steady infusion of human capital development into her development process. Generational capital efficiency or deficiency derives from the accumulated utilisation or underutilisation of human capital over decades of a nation’s historical existence. In Nigeria, I have been concerned with three generations. The first consist of those who were present at the moments before and immediately after Nigeria’s independence. These were the “founding fathers” that negotiated Nigeria’s liberation from the colonial yoke. The second generation are those who confronted Nigeria’s postcolonial predicament arising from the booby-traps of colonialism, the volatility of the dynamics of post-colonial state formation and perhaps, the failings of the first generation that degenerated into civil war. That generation did not spare itself. It pronounced itself as a “wasted generation”.  The third generation in line is my generation (those in their late 40s up unto the 60s) which is far removed from trauma, euphoria and disillusion of Nigeria’s independence but which is nonetheless confronted with Nigeria’s protracted inability to build a nation out of its diversity. And we must not dare forget the next generations in line that are barely even managing to connect with the idea of “Nigeria”.

    The proposed inter-generational dialogue I am advocating takes its cue from several points of departure. One, there are the issues having to do with the unconnected historical dots relating one generation to the other in Nigeria’s development trajectory. Two, there are issues resulting from why each generation has failed to impact Nigeria beyond discrete achievements and engagement. Three, there are also issues concerning the relevance of the lessons from the successes and failures of these generations for Nigeria’s future. How are all these to be cumulated into a solid reform dynamics and framework deployed towards Nigeria’s development? An inter-generational dialogue is founded on the need to facilitate an elite alliance and network across and beyond ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious lines. It feeds into the professional but patriotic engagement with the Nigerian state in a manner that emphasises the relevance of an uncontaminated elite factor in national development. It has the singular potential, outside of the constraints of politics and political economy, to not only undermine the centrifugal factors that have kept elite apart and at each other’s throat over the obstacles the state places on their path. There is also the advantage of facilitating a genuine discourse across generations and historical contexts with the solid benefit of an accumulated understanding of what ails Nigeria and how her generational capital can be unleashed. Dialogue, says Jim Maclachlan, “is the oxygen of change.” That is, a dialogue that is motivated by a genuine love for country.

    At the core of this dialogue will be a major inter-generational conference that will unpack and unravel several issues relating to Nigeria’s development from past to present. And the agenda for this major conference will constitute one of the focuses of the dialogue. The least issue in such an agenda is who should facilitate. The answer would be anyone with the right patriotic and organisational wherewithal that cannot be subordinated to the whims and objective of government. I am willing to loan the Ibadan School of Government and Public Policy (ISGPP) to this historic conversation around the future of Nigeria. Indeed, the objectives of the School revolve around making Nigeria work better than it is presently doing for the sake of democracy and development. But the choice should really be left to the decision of the critical mass of stakeholders involved in the dialogue. On methodology, the Dialogue will essentially be constituted around a multidisciplinary professional framework made up of scholars, thinkers, politicians, statesmen, entrepreneurs, young people, writers, professionals in various fields, professional organisations, NGOs, etc.

    One arbitrary process that will creep into the methodology of the dialogue would be the decision on those to deliberate on the event, its agenda, and terms of reference. This will require certain critical set of people whose engagement with the Nigerian state is beyond reproach. I have names at various levels— an Obasanjo/Anyaoku/Joda/Danjuma/Asiodu/Mabogunje/Bolanle Awe as statesmen, Osinbajo in politics, an Utomi in public intellection, Dangote/Elumelu/Atedo Peterside in industry, Chimamanda Adichie in literature, a Jibrin Ibrahim in civil society, a Toyin Falola in academia, a Matthew Kukah, in religion, Soludo in economics, Adamolekun in public administration, Imobighe/Sam Momah/Adekanye in military/defence, Chude Jidenwo in youth, Nkoyo Toyo in gender, Bolaji Aluko/Festus Odimegwu in S&T, Godwin Sogolo in philosophy, Ray Ekpu in media, Odia Ofeimum in poetry, Alex Gboyega in local government, Yemi Kale in statistics, Said Adejumobi in discourse, Osaghae in ethnicity, Suberu on federalism. The list can go on. Once this initial core group is determined, then an agenda can be outlined underpinned by core objectives, significant comparative and historical lessons, expected outcomes, and methodological frameworks around multi-pronged initiatives and programmes that will move the Dialogue forward beyond rhetoric and advocacy to policy imperatives and praxis. The specific outcomes that will be generated by the Dialogue would be sufficiently compelling to snap the government out of any doldrums.

    The initial agenda for the Dialogue and the initial preparatory discourse on the conceptualisation, design and implementation of the Dialogue would be underpinned by several critical items. First, there will be an ongoing population of a database of relevant personalities and organisations that will be relevant to the inter-generational dialogue. The database will be domiciled in a functional and dynamic website dedicated to the idea. Second, there will also be a massive national and diasporic enlightenment and public education programme aimed at different segments of the Nigerian society. The objective of the enlightenment programmes will be to facilitate a significant buy-in from the Nigerian population, as well as from critical policy actors at various levels of governance. Third, there must be a strenuous effort at integrating the Dialogue idea into existing administrative, sociopolitical and cultural institutional platform in a way that facilitate the leveraging of these institutions as critical success factors. Fourth, there must also be a serious research component that allows the Dialogue to connect with significant insights in scholarship and history. Nigeria is due for a radical reconsideration of her development options.

     

    • Dr. Olaopa is Executive Vice-Chairman,

    Ibadan School of Government & Public Policy (ISGPP)

  • America’s petroleum and Nigeria’s future (2)

    America’s petroleum and Nigeria’s future (2)

    Today’s article was first published in 2012. It is being republished today because many of the fears expressed in 2012 have now become real while some of the article’s optimism about willingness of Nigeria’s states to push demands for robust re-federalisation have not become popular, even after the negative effect of slump in oil revenue on the economy and politics of the country has become unmistakable. A political season in which President Buhari and APC as the ruling party are about to commence a regime of change in the country is a good time to join others to rub minds with guardians of the ruling party’s ideology and policy wonks saddled with transforming promises in the party’s manifesto into policies for immediate implementation, especially in respect of APC’s promise to return true federalism to the constitution and enhance the federalist spirit.

    If after 50 years of underdevelopment of the country’s infrastructure despite decades of oil boom, America’s entry into the petroleum and gas market as exporter reduces Nigeria’s revenue from oil and gas, Nigeria may enter a critical phase that will call for new thinking on the part of leaders and citizens. 

    Last week’s conclusion asserts that America’s entry into the international petroleum market as a gas and petroleum exporter (as distinct from its many decades of being an importer) will force Nigerian political leaders and citizens to accept the end of miracles as the solution to national economic and social problems. In other words, the existence in the future of what does not exist now or of what exists now and may not exist in the future in the petroleum market will push trustees or guardians of Nigeria’s politics to accept that the best route to national development and sustainable democracy is an economic culture that encourages citizens to engage in production, the way it was all over Nigeria until 1966.

    It is important for the country’s economic planners to replace platitudes with policies that can meaningfully diversify the country’s economy, without allowing current inflow of petrodollars to distract them from going back to the fundamental law of culture: no distribution before production. Since General Gowon was reported as saying that money was not Nigeria’s problems in the 1970s, Nigeria has been preoccupied with distribution without production. This is why it has not been easy for the country to invest in infrastructure that can fuel development: energy, rail, road, water, etc. Nigeria has been dependent on the 57% of revenue from oil that accrued from oil sale for several decades. This culture of Sadaka, Awuufu, Ifa or Saraa (culture of free loading) is best captured by the name of one of the country’s foremost agencies, Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission, most graphically in the emphasis on assembling and making ready for use that mobilisation suggests.

    If after 50 years of underdevelopment of the country’s infrastructure despite decades of oil boom, America’s entry into the petroleum and gas market as exporter reduces Nigeria’s revenue from oil and gas, Nigeria may enter a critical phase that will call for new thinking on the part of leaders and citizens. Many things that have been taken for granted since 1966 will call for review, especially the country’s political structure.

    Once the flow of funds to the central government declines (as surely it will once the percentage of oil and gas it can sell to other countries goes down), existing states will aspire to become development centres, rather than distribution centres that they have been since military dictators initiated the culture of creating states and sustaining them with funds from the federation account.  The existing 36 states and 774 local governments will certainly have difficulties meeting their monthly bills: salaries to civil servants and other sectors of public service in particular. Retrenchment or downsizing the public sector will become imperative at the beginning for most states. But leaders that are unlucky to be in office when revenue decline occurs will have to adopt the maxim: necessity is the mother of invention. Otherwise, they may be chased out of office by angry citizens, the way it happened in many Arab countries a few years back. They will have to move from the ingrained culture of profligacy and corruption made possible by cheap oil money to providing infrastructure and support for a productive private sector.

    The sudden shift of attention from the federal government as the dispenser of funds to states and local governments to states and local governments as laboratories and factories for production will renew calls for restoration of functional federalism. No state will be prepared to pass gains from the sweat of its citizens to the federal government to share among states and local governments in the name of even development. States and local governments will have to compete with each other, just as they will also cooperate with each other in their efforts to respond to the new development challenges to be thrown up by decline in oil revenue.

    States that are currently calling for people’s constitution, restructuring of the polity, and devolution of power will be more aggressive in their demands, more so when the easy monthly or quarterly allocation from the federation account ceases to be useful to sustain the appearance of governance and government that most states have enjoyed since 1975. As each state struggles to produce what its citizens consume, it will need to have full supervisory power over its economy and polity.

    The mantra that only the federal police can keep Nigeria united will be challenged more forcefully by states that require efficient and dedicated police to enforce laws and sustain public order. States will resist the usual practice of collecting VAT and fees for driving licence and vehicle registration for the federal government to share among states on the basis of land mass and population estimate. States with ports will aggressively ask for compensation for port facilities in their states, rather than beg for special financial support or special status from the federal government. For example, the demand on the federal government to give Lagos a special status that will require additional funds from the federal government will be replaced by demands for a percentage of revenue from use of Lagos ports. Other states with port facilities, such as Delta, Cross River, and Rivers, will make similar demands for revenue sharing with the federal government from port revenue.

    Regionalism or regional integration will become a common model of development across the country once the easy flow of revenue from petroleum and gas ceases or reduces considerably in the years beyond 2020. The current competition among states on exhibitionism in the use of public funds will give way to cooperation in design and execution of projects that can advance development in contiguous states. The reality of scarce resources that may result from revenue decline from the federation account funded largely from proceeds from oil and gas will stimulate the culture of prudence in states that do not want to go bankrupt. Citizens whose taxes become the largest source of revenue for the government will demand an end to low-class self-promotion of political leaders and their family in newspaper adverts at the expense of public funds.

    The sections of the country that have sworn not to allow the country’s post-military federal government to devolve power to states will become more realistic about the imperative of restructuring, once the oil and gas revenue that has been lubricating the country’s chain of unity goes south. Such leaders will have no choice but to accept that it is only parasites without a sense of self-preservation that will depend on an emaciated host. Such states will loosen their grip on the federation and cooperate with those calling for true federalism, not out of altruistic interest but out of the need to have control over their own hard-earned resources in the years beyond today’s bountiful harvest from oil and gas.

    However, the years of less revenue from fossil energy will strengthen the territorial unity of Nigeria. No state or region of the country (not even the Niger Delta) will feel strong enough to want to opt out of Nigeria. A country that has since 1966 seen itself as one united by oil will start to see itself as needing to stay together in order to grow out of poverty. But the country’s unity will cease to be nominal or symbolic; it will be one with a purpose. The country will morph into a site for what Ben Nwabueze once called ‘diversity in unity’.  Proper fiscal federalism stridently called for by Senator Bola Tinubu during the Obasanjo regime will become a major aspect of the country’s architecture of governance.

  • Why Nigeria’s future is tied to the girl-child

    The quest for women’s advancement in Nigeria can only begin with a closer look at the prospects of the girl-child with regards to her worth in society. To  underscore its importance, the status of the girl-child was one of the critical issues discussed at the 4th United Nations conference on women, Beijing in 1995 with over 186 countries in attendance, and after which nine strategic objectives were outlined to galvanise governments to uphold the rights of the girl-child and ensure her protection.

    It may seem trite to say every woman was once a girl-child and that every girl-child is a potential woman and mother. But these assertions take on added significance when   their place in society is considered. Every great woman celebrated today was once a girl-child who had access to education that qualitatively shaped her transition from childhood to adulthood; from  obscurity to prominence and from days of small beginnings to a future of great accomplishments. Hence, concealed in every girl-child is a potential Mother Teresa, a future Margaret Ekpo, a possible Fumilayo Kuti, a Gambo Sawaba.

    If education is indeed a key determinant of favourable outcomes in life and the pathway for a girl-child to become self-actualized as a woman; a national asset and a raiser of future nation builders, then girl-child education in Nigeria deserves priority attention. Indeed surveys have shown that educated girls become better mothers and educated mothers insist on their girl children being educated which implies more girls going to school and the progression continues towards a more gender compliant system.

    In spite of the strategic role the girl-child plays in the development of a nation, and the transforming impact that education has in the empowerment of the girl-child, United Nations statistics show that a vast percentage of them either do not go to school at all, or drop out at a certain level due to adversities like child-marriage, child-labour and trafficking, terrorism and sexual exploitation. Indeed the girl-child has continued to confront enormous challenges militating against her educational progress.

    According to a 2014 UNICEF report, Nigeria has 10.5 million children out of school,  the highest number in the world with about 60 per cent of those children being girls. It also stated that “almost one of three primary age children is out of school, and roughly one of four junior secondary age children is out of school.” What this implies is that the Nigerian girl-child is one of the most disadvantaged in the world suffering from neglect in all its ramifications especially in the northern part of Nigeria.

    It was in view of such challenges that the convention on the rights of the child was framed in 1989, which gives every child irrespective of gender, a right to education. Furthermore, the United Nations designated October 11annually as International Day of the Girl Child and  which was first observed globally in October  2012. The objective of this day is for everyone to reflect on the dwindling prospects of the girl-child and her overwhelming but surmountable  challenges. It is designed to provoke global interventions  at all levels and to protect every girl child regardless of their geographical location.  Nigeria is marching in lockstep with the rest of the globe. She is a signatory to that UN convention on the Rights of the Child since 1999, and is also a signatory to the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. But there is clear need for more concerted action regarding the protection of the rights of the girl child in Nigeria.

    In response to the growing challenges of the girl child in Nigeria, and to commemorate this year’s United Nations International Day for the Girl Child, the reinvigorated National Centre for Women Development under the leadership of Lady Onyeka Onwenu is leading the charge. Under the inspiration of the First Lady, Patience Jonathan and in collaboration with an NGO, Friends Africa, the centre is convening a 2 -day Women and Girls summit with the theme: Reinforcing the Agenda for Girl Child Education on October 13-14 and is expected to witness a convergence of diverse key stakeholders in girl child education.

    According to the First Lady, “educating the girl-child is educating a nation”and“access to education is a fundamental human right, whether a child is physically challenged or disadvantaged.” Indeed, educating the girl-child is one of the most important investments any country can make for its future. It empowers girl-children and women with the ability to insist on their rights, and become more profitably integrated into the society.

    Lady Onwenu  visualizesthe  Women and Girls Summit as a “game changer” and designed to midwife concrete changes in the society. On a television programme recently, she spoke of the brazen neglect of the girl-child in Nigeria over the years and said this was why the summit would not be the usual talkshop which often masquerade as action but would have  a concrete and sustained follow up plan of action that will be meticulously implemented to tackle identified issues head-on. This she said is  in a bid to reposition the girl-child as a national asset beginning with  free access to quality education.

    If such an  outcome is realised, then the convocation of the women and girls summit will be a true game changer and coming at a time when the fiendish threat of Boko Haram to the dignity and self-actualization of women occupies centre stage.

     

    . Archibong is an Abuja-based public analyst.