The Nation Newspaper

Tag: President Goodluck Jonathan

  • Fed Govt plans $1.1b Euro bond

    Fed Govt plans $1.1b Euro bond

    • Seeks Senate’s approval for $200m loan

    The Federal Government is set to issue $1billion Euro Bond as well as $100 million Diaspora Bond.

    The government is also seeking Senate’s approval to borrow additional $200 million to fund pipeline projects.

    These are contained in a letter President Goodluck Jonathan wrote to the Senate.

    The letter entitled: Amendment to the 2012-2014 Medium Term External Borrowing Plan, was dated November 7, 2012, and read on the floor by Senate President, David Mark, yesterday.

    The letter is coming few weeks after the Presidency sought the approval of the Upper House to borrow $7.9 billion for pipeline projects.

    President Jonathan said the $1billion Euro Bond is in “continuance of the programme initiated under the administration of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua as well as a $100million Diaspora Bond.”

    He explained that $200 million out of the $500 million would be expended on provision of water supply, while $300 million would be swapped with the proposed guarantees for the power sector in the draft borrowing plan.

    The letter reads in part: “I wish to refer to my earlier letter in respect of the above subject and to inform you of two amendments to the 2012-2014 Medium Term External Borrowing Plan.

    “First, we would like to include a $200million water supply project being planned for Rivers State.

    “This project would be financed by the African Development Bank and shall provide potable water supply to residents of Rivers State.

    “Secondly, the Federal Government is currently developing a low-income housing finance facility to support the provision of affordable homes for Nigerians.

    “This scheme will be financed using a $300million credit facility from the World Bank. We would like to swap this new $300million facility with the proposed guarantees for the power sector in the draft borrowing plan, thereby ensuring that we do not increase the overall size of loans proposed in the external borrowing plan.

  • Bayelsa versus Rivers

    Bayelsa versus Rivers

    The land dispute is a scandal and smacks of feudal politics

    Boundary disputes are, thankfully, envisaged by our laws. That is why the constitution created the National Boundary Commission inured with powers to intermediate in such disputes. Unfortunately, the dispute between Rivers and Bayelsa states has been elevated because of the value of oil lying within the bowels of the disputed land. But even more unfortunate is the attempt to foist a feudalistic intermediation, (some insinuate) simply because President Goodluck Jonathan, who is from Bayelsa State, is currently the President. Yet we are in a democracy and the disagreement between the states is already before a court.

    In our view, and we guess that of many Nigerians, the resort to primordial sentiments instead of constitutionalism on this issue, belittles the integrity of our democracy. In this case, the President has unwittingly taken over a matter that is sub judice, and is gregariously seeking to use his official status as the head of the executive to determine same. This development is not good for the image of the President and is not tenable in a democracy either. What is right is for the boundary commission to diligently exercise its constitutional responsibilities and forward its findings to the court, which is empowered to weigh the evidence and make profound pronouncements as the facts of the matter dictate.

    To do otherwise is to engage in the abuse of due process. The President and governors who are attempting to foist their stature and personal disposition on the matter need to be reminded to retrace their steps, and allow the unfettered intermediation of the law. The courts must also rise up to their constitutional responsibilities of enforcing the rule of law, in this matter. If truly the courts sanctioned that the money realised from the oil derived from the disputed land should be kept in an escrow account, the officials of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) that released it to Bayelsa State must be sanctioned.

    If the decision to keep the money in an escrow account since 2000 when the dispute arose was administrative, then the President needs to explain who ordered the commission to hand over the money to his home state government. Without a plausible explanation by the commission why the money in dispute was released to one of the claimants, the accusation of bias and undue influence levelled against the President may stand. The President stands accused because he is from the benefitting state, Bayelsa; and many would argue that if not for his influence, the commission would not suddenly get into an overdrive to pay Bayelsa State the money kept since 2000, when the matter is yet to be resolved.

    We also ponder why the courts have been dillydallying over this matter, or were they hamstrung by the failure to procure facts from the administrative agencies to resolve the dispute? Considering the potent power of the dispute to disrupt the national economy, we are surprised that more than a decade after, there is no concerted effort to resolve an ordinary boundary dispute. Again, if the boundary commission accepted in a letter that the last official map, unlike the previous maps, wrongly situated the land in Bayelsa State, why didn’t it as a matter of priority do a fresh map since 13 years ago, to save the country the hiccups?

    If there should be a descent into anarchy over this dispute, will it not be right to hold the commission culpable for dereliction of duty? To avoid unpleasant consequences, considering the previous history of the region, it is important that the boundary commission is encouraged to quickly do the right thing. The ongoing resort to influence peddling and mudslinging by officials of the two states should be stopped. Our country cannot claim to be practising democracy and availed of modern capabilities in the field of survey and area mapping, yet we prefer anachronistic tendencies of the big man syndrome.

    In this respect if truly as alleged by the Rivers State Government, political permutations over the 2015 election are underlining the dispute, that must be condemned. If the allegation is correct, we remind those involved that they are playing games with the lives of the neighbouring communities, who may resort to violence to settle the dispute. If such disingenuous calculation is at play, then those using the influence of President Jonathan today, would be sure to regurgitate the money paid once a president beholden to the interests of the people of Rivers State gets into Aso Rock. As we have stated, a land dispute is not a rocket science, and can be fairly resolved based on historical fact as can be proved in the courts. To avoid unnecessary rancour among the Ijaw brothers of Bayelsa and Rivers states, their elites must raise law over illogic and the sentiments of feudalism.

  • Honoured today, dishonoured tomorrow

    Honoured today, dishonoured tomorrow

    It is better to scrutinise awardees’ credentials before honouring them

    “Prevention”, we have always been told, “is better than cure”. In line with this wise saying therefore, one would have expected that the Federal Government would have sifted the wheat from the chaff before announcing people to get the national honours. But the wise saying was inverted with President Goodluck Jonathan’s announcement at the presentation of the awards to recipients last Monday when he said undeserving people who were given the awards would lose such whenever the government finds reason to withdraw it from them. “In the light of the foregoing, I have directed that the National Honours Committee compile a list of persons conferred with the national honours but that their current credibility is questionable. If they are found wanting, our prestigious honours will be withdrawn.” This is not good enough.

    Granted that it is possible for some people to misbehave after being honoured, the fact remains that we do not need any special committee to know that some of the recipients did not merit it. And we would have expected the government to know that. Or, do we need foreign countries to help us select people who merit national honours as they have done with the cases of some of our big thieves who used to be walking our streets free but who are now languishing in some foreign prisons? How, for instance, could we have honoured people that were suspected to have swindled the country through fuel subsidy? Yes, we might argue that suspects are deemed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, the fact remains that the awards are not running away. They are too many to go round. So, why must we rush to give people with question marks against their names? Why can’t such people wait till sometime in the future?

    The honour, unless we are being told otherwise, is supposed to be conferred on people who have contributed meaningfully to the country’s development and who are of impeccable character. It is an annual event; that presupposes that it should not be a ‘fire brigade’ thing. If the awards are truly important, there should be sufficient time for selection and screening of the nominees such that by the time the list is released, it would be accepted by a wide spectrum of Nigerians and there won’t be need for the kind of medicine after death that President Jonathan has in mind. But the kinds of confusion that trailed the event, especially last year, and even the last exercise, did not show that even the government that is conferring the awards appreciates its essence. Last year, the medals did not go round. This year, accommodation and other arrangements were shoddy as many of the recipients had to make personal arrangements for their stay in Abuja last Sunday, on arrival for what was supposed to be a major national event. Or, is the shoddy preparation part of the statement that the thing has become more of an annual ritual that no one thinks should warrant any especial care for essential details?

    These are some of the things that President Jonathan does that attract criticisms from Nigerians. With due respect to the president, many of these policies were hardly well-thought out. That is why, unfortunately Nigerians protest when such are made public. It has nothing to do with whether they like the President’s face or dislike it. But, as I have always argued, if the same Nigerians who voted overwhelmingly for him last year now find his policies reprehensible, then he should know that there must be reasons for that. And it would be better for him to see it from this point of view rather than keep assuming that it is the handiwork of some political detractors as he tried to rationalise last week on the fuel subsidy protests that rocked the country in January. Were these same detractors not around when Nigerians voted for him last year? President Jonathan has to wean himself off this misconception and change for better. Has the President seen any child that is being flogged that would not cry? That was what removal of fuel subsidy amounted to; it is what also the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) plan to introduce N5000 note amounts to; any wonder then that Nigerians cried foul before they were dispatched to untimely graves while some fat cows keep ripping them off in the name of fuel subsidy, or before the country embarks on a journey of no return if the N5000 note had seen the light of day? It is good that the President has seen sense in what Nigerians are saying by asking the CBN to forget about this poison! President Jonathan would do well by not taking, hook, line and sinker, the advice of so-called experts on such a serious matter because they have wider implications. He should not allow himself to be bamboozled by high-sounding theoretical assumptions that would fall flat in the face of reality or our peculiar socio-cultural circumstances.

    I am not someone to be fanatical about all things foreign. But I believe we should copy whatever is good from any part of the world. What stops us from copying a country like the United States of America which has given, in its 200 years of existence, national honours to less than 500 people, whereas Nigeria has in less than 40 years of the awards, given to more than 30,000 people? If the awards truly have meaning, that is if it is all about patriotism and contributions to national development, Nigeria may not be as developed as the United States today, but it also has no excuse to be in this sorry pass. What this tells us is that the so-called awards are not worth more than the pieces of paper on which the awardees are listed. The thing has become too cheap, such that it is even believed it is sometimes sold to people with the means.

    For the awards to have meaning, we have to depart from the past. And that we can start by drastically reducing the number of honorees and giving it to those who actually merit it. It doesn’t make sense that people get award just for being made Senate President or Speaker, House of Representatives. As a matter of fact, being elected President should not be automatic qualification for the award. Neither should one’s fat bank accounts. Contributions to the country should be the essential prerequisite. President Jonathan can start the revolution because it can only take a revolution to do that, and he would see that Nigerians would stand solidly behind him. The important thing is that the thing should be fair and should be seen to so be. This is in line with his view that “… holders of national honours are truly worthy representations of our national values and honour, and especially are patriotic Nigerians or real friends of Nigeria.”

    We have to recognise and reward good deeds, but the way we have carried on with the national honours is apparently not the way to go. Giving honours to 155 Nigerians and friends of Nigeria in just one year is rather unwieldy. That explains why some eminent Nigerian have rejected the ‘honour’ over the years. The honours need not be debased as we have many chieftaincy titles.

  • Youths urge Jonathan to fulfil jobs promise

    Youths urge Jonathan to fulfil jobs promise

    A group, Great Nation Global Youth Organisation (GNGYO), has urged President Goodluck Jonathan to fulfill his campaign promise of proving three million jobs for youths as part of the transformation agenda.
    It urged unemployed youths to acquire skills to earn a living, to shun violence and to work towards strengthening the country’s unity.
    In a communiqué issued at after its national working committee meeting, signed by the President, Charles Omini; National Secretary, Mohammed Tukar and National Organising Secretary Kingsley Udoh, the group said more jobs are needed to alleviate the suffering of the Nigerian masses.
    The group sued for peace, urging religious leaders to promote peace and non-violence among their members, and parents to be good examples and leave worthy legacies to their children.
    Omini praised the President for compelling his cabinet members to sign a performance agreement, saying it would help speed up the country’s transformation.
    He said GNGYO was ready to partner the Federal Government in all areas of the economy, especially security and job creation in order to boost the living standard of Nigerian youths.