Lessons from Benedict and Francis

Benedict XVI, born Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger on 16 April 1927 served as leader of the Catholic Church and Sovereign of the Vatican City State from 2005 to 2013. Benedict was elected on 19 April 2005 in a papal conclave. Ordained as a priest in 1951 in his native Bavaria, Ratzinger was a highly regarded university theologian and was appointed full professor in 1958. After a long career as an academic, serving as a professor of theology at several German universities, he was appointed Archbishop of Munich and Freising and Cardinal by Pope Paul VI in 1977. From 2002 until his election as Pope, he was Dean of the College of Cardinals, primus inter pares among the Cardinals. He was "one of the most respected, influential and controversial members of the College of Cardinals" and was one of Pope John Paul II's closest confidants. Benedict XVI was elected pope at 78, the oldest person since Pope Clement XII (1730–40). He had served longer as a Cardinal than any Pope since Benedict XIII (1724–30). On 11 February 2013, the Vatican confirmed that Benedict XVI would resign the papacy on 28 February 2013, as a result of his advanced age, becoming the first Pope to resign since Gregory XII in 1415. In modern times, all popes have stayed in office until death. Benedict is the first pope to have resigned without external pressure since Celestine V in 1294. Benedict cited his deteriorating strength and the physical and mental demands of the papacy and declared that he would continue to serve the church "through a life dedicated to prayer". Pope Francis born Jorge Mario Bergoglio on 17 December 1936 is the 266th and current Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, elected on 13 March 2013. A native of Buenos Aires, Argentina, he was ordained priest in 1969. He served as head of the Society of Jesus in Argentina from 1973 to 1979. In 1998 he became the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, and in 2001 a Cardinal. Following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, on 28 February 2013, the conclave elected Bergoglio, who chose the papal name Francis in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi. Besides being the first Jesuit pope, he is also the first to choose the name Francis, and the first from the Americas and the Southern Hemisphere. Jorge Mario Bergoglio was one of five children of Mario José Bergoglio, an Italian immigrant railway worker. Cardinal Bergoglio became known for personal humility, doctrinal conservatism, a simple lifestyle and a commitment to social justice. He lived in a small apartment, rather than the elegant bishop's residence, took public transportation and cooked his own meals, while limiting his time in Rome to "lightning visits". Instead of accepting his cardinals' congratulations while seated on the Papal throne, Francis received them standing, an immediate sign of a changing approach to formalities at the Vatican. During his first appearance as pontiff on the balcony of Saint Peter's Basilica, he wore a white cassock, not the red, ermine-trimmed “mozzetta” used by the previous Pope Benedict XVI and the same iron pectoral cross that he had worn as Cardinal. Francis began his first blessing with "Buonasera" ("good evening"), breaking with the traditional formality at the event and asked those in St. Peter's Square to pray for the pope emeritus, Benedict XVI and for himself before offering his own blessings. At his first audience on 16 March 2013, Francis told journalists that he had chosen the name in honor of Saint Francis of Assisi, and had done so because he was especially concerned for the well-being of the poor. In both his first homily as Pope and in his first address to the Cardinals, Francis talked about walking in the presence of Jesus Christ and stressed the church mission to announce him. He emphasized the concept of "encounter with Jesus" and stressed that "if we do not profess Jesus Christ, things go wrong. We may become a charitable NGO, but not the Church, the Bride of the Lord." He went on to teach that "When we do not profess Jesus Christ, we profess the worldliness of the devil... when we profess Christ without the Cross, we are not disciples of the Lord, we are worldly" (Sources: Wikipedia and news reports). Benedict and Francis offer refreshing and significant lessons in leadership to the world and to our nation. At a time in which people embrace power and high office for its own sake, Benedict walked away from one of the most powerful offices in the world because he recognized his inability to offer his best in that position. All over the world, and particularly in our Nigeria, many would have opted to stay and enjoy the benefits of the position. In a world in which so-called “leaders” do whatever the polls favour (whether its homosexual marriage or legalizing marijuana!!!), these are individuals who retain a moral and spiritual compass, irrespective of what the current liberal fashion is! At a time when many religious leaders are pre-occupied with worldly power and money, Pope Francis’ focus on the poor and shunning of the trappings of wealth and luxury is a positive reminder of the essence of our faith and his counsel against a worldly church (which is more or less a charitable NGO) is timely!

The Notorious Pardon!

When I first heard rumours that D. S. P. Alamieyeseigha, the disgraced former governor of Bayelsa State, was about to receive, or had actually received a pardon from President Goodluck Jonathan, I initially refused to believe it. Within minutes of confirming the report to be true, I posted the following comment on my facebook page and my twitter handle: “With Alamieyeseigha’s pardon, GEJ reconfirms his non-aversion to corruption; and puts personal and ethnic considerations above the fight against corruption.” Several days later, as I have reflected over and over on the president’s action, the implications of the pardon continue to rankle! It is worthwhile reminding ourselves of the background and circumstances of Alamieyeseigha’s trial, conviction and impeachment. Diepreye Solomon Peter Alamieyesegha was the swaggering governor of Bayelsa State from May 29, 1999 to December 9, 2005. In his time, he loved the appellation “Governor-General of the Ijaw Kingdom”! A former Air Force officer, there were speculations linking his exit from the service to allegations of examination malpractices during a service course. As governor, Alamieyesegha’s state benefitted from huge oil derivation windfalls which he seemed to have no clear plans for, except, of course, illegal self-enrichment and theft. In September 2005, he was detained in London, UK on charges of money laundering. At the time of his arrest, the London Metropolitan Police found £1 million in cash in his London home; and later a total of £1.8 million in cash and bank accounts. He was also discovered to own UK real estate worth £10 million. Subsequently, Alamieyesegha jumped bail in December 2005 allegedly disguised as a woman! He was impeached and removed from office as governor of Bayelsa State on December 9, 2005 and on July 26, 2007, he pleaded guilty to six charges of corruption and money laundering, and was sentenced to two years in prison. He also forfeited assets to the Bayelsa State government. In June 2012, the US Department of Justice executed an asset forfeiture order on $401,931 of funds belonging to Alamieyesegha and there are other proceedings still pending against him. In the UK, his status is of a wanted person, having fled from trial. This is the person President Goodluck Jonathan has just thought it fit to grant a full and unconditional pardon! President Jonathan was deputy to then Governor Alamieyesegha. He became Bayelsa governor as beneficiary of Alamieyesegha’s impeachment and has subsequently had the good fortune of becoming, in quick succession, vice-president and president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. He reportedly owes his entry into politics and high office to Alamieyesegha and, of course, bears an ethnic affiliation to the erstwhile Ijaw “governor-general”! And, of course, there is a new President Jonathan in town who is consumed by the prospect of re-election in 2015 and has seemingly transformed into a “lion” who will devour anything that stands in the way of that eventuality! On the other hand, if returning Alamieyesegha into active politics will enhance his 2015 campaign, Jonathan is evidently prepared to facilitate such return. In short, Alamieyesegha’s pardon is predicated upon base considerations – little-minded political calculations, ethnic and personal affinity and a subjection of the state to narrow interests! Several of Jonathan’s aides have defended the pardon on legal or constitutional grounds and accused opponents of “sophisticated ignorance”! But this is not a legal or constitutional matter. Jonathan clearly has the power to grant pardons. It is not a political matter either, and one of the banes of our democracy and society is how we subject our laws and institutions to petty political manipulations. This is a moral issue … and an issue of leadership; and, quite unfortunately, President Jonathan has with this pardon failed a significant moral and leadership test. In the current circumstances of Nigeria, in which corruption threatens to subvert and destroy the nation, any action that seems to further legitimise public theft and grand larceny is a gross failure of leadership and morality. And that is what our president has done in this matter. This decision was also very poor strategy. As mentioned above, Alamieyesegha’s case was a global matter – he was arrested in the UK; he jumped bail and remains technically a subject of legal proceedings in that country; and there are proceedings against him in the US as well. By his action, President Jonathan sends an unmistakable signal to these nations that he condones corruption and is not committed to the anti-corruption effort. In this globalised world, that signal may yet be an albatross to Jonathan as he seeks to retain his office in two years time. As I mentioned above, this matter coincides with the emergence of a “new” Goodluck Jonathan – the one whose friends and allies are Tony Anenih, Bamanga Tukur and others; the one whose PDP will use underhand measures to try to deny the emerging APC its name; the one that will sponsor a PDP Governors’ Forum to undermine a Nigerian Governors’ Forum which he couldn’t control; and (on a positive note), the one who is less-inclined to appeasing Boko Haram and its sponsors! The pardon of Alamieyesegha (and Bulama) is a gross mistake! President Jonathan undermines his moral authority and leadership credentials by taking that action. My heart wishes he would countenance a reversal of that action, but my head tells me he won’t!

Financialism

The book “Financialism: Water from an Empty Well” is an unusual book. The topic is unusual; the word is unusual; and the authors are unusual- Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Governor Emeritus of Lagos State and political juggernaut and Brian Browne, former senior African-American diplomat who served as US Consul-General in Nigeria. And many of their ideas are bold and unorthodox. They are willing to challenge contemporary financial and economic convention as they carry out their joint-mission of explaining “how the financial system drains the economy”. Reverend Jesse Jackson in his foreword describes the book as both enlightening and entertaining, and apart from its volume (over 450 pages), it’s a very interesting book! The book’s audience, not surprisingly given the background and personalities of the authors, are “policy makers and opinion leaders in Nigeria and the black American community” and their objectives are to offer different perspectives on the role of government in management of the financial sector; how the financial sector allocates capital; and a critique of American capitalism which the authors assert has mutated into something they call “financialism” So what is this specie called “Financialism”? Across the book you see attributes, if not a precise definition of this phenomenon-on page 11 – “a system in which money is not a sign of wealth, but wealth itself. People no longer make things to make money; they make money to make more money”; on page 131-“… Financialism is but the quadrangular marriage of individualism, opposition to government, the mistaken concept that money is wealth, and torrential greed”; on page 297-“capitalism stood on the importance of the factory and assembly line. Financialism is defined by the dominance of banks and money houses”; on page 325-“thus a strong connection existed between the rise of financialism and the weakening of labour and the middle class. Financialism instigated a subtle process of pauperising and shifting money from the middle class to the financial houses”; on page 332-“wherever financialism takes root, the impetus towards production erodes. When production wanes, employment ebbs by necessity.”; on page 335-“Financialism has become so powerful that government subsidization of the financial sector is a tenet of economic policy”; And bringing it home to Nigeria, on page 339-“Nigerian banks have been the prime culprit in the establishment of financialism. Traditionally, most Nigerian banks were not focused on providing normal commercial services, such as business loans and consumer loans. Their forte was currency arbitrage” These are statements which are unlikely to be uncontroversial! Yet in the wake of the global financial crisis and its Nigerian equivalent, few will deny that contemporary financial and capitalist systems are in need of reforms. Nobel Laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka agrees in his foreword that “the skewed world of economics needs to be challenged”. Chapter 1 chronicles the roots and evolution of the global crisis, while the second reviews the Nigerian version. The authors appear to endorse the actions of CBN Governor Lamido Sanusi, while predictably given their abhorrence of large, powerful and “too big to fail” financial institutions, frowning on his predecessor Professor Soludo’s creation of a “financialist” banking system in Nigeria through the banking consolidation exercise. It may be said however that perhaps the critique of SLS’s era at the CBN will be deferred until he is also out of the CBN. The book provides philosophical and theoretical foundations which more intellectually minded readers will be interested in-philosophy, economic theory, sociology and political science in chapters 3,4, 5 and 6 before launching into how financialism has “trumped” capitalism and providing views on how “financialism” may be defeated-focus on productivity and industry; education; reform of the financial sector to re-instate Glass-Steagall (the US laws which separated investment banking, commercial banking and insurance); limiting the size of banks; and instituting stronger financial sector regulation, including over derivatives. In the fiscal space, they advocate more accommodative and “pro- poor” fiscal policies. The ideas of Tinubu and Browne may naturally be subject to questions and critiques-is this not simply be a call for financial sector reform rather than scaremongering over a demon called “financialism”? The need for curbing speculative excesses of Western (and Nigerian) banking systems and disavowing extreme right wing desire for unbridled and unregulated capitalism are fairly straight forward-do we have to invent “Financialism” to make this point? Might over-regulation of financial sectors which the authors seem to advocate, not lead to another extreme in which government controls banks and capital leading to more sub-optimal conditions? Given Nigeria’s experience in the 1970s, 1980s and 19990s with government control of the financial sector and reckless printing of money by the Treasury and Central Bank, should we be in a hurry to recreate such a situation? Isn’t the global financial community already dealing with the worst aspects of financial sector abuses and reforms? Isn’t there something to be said for strong and robust, but competently and professionally-regulated financial systems? With this book, Nigerians are reminded of the Bola Tinubu who worked as Corporate Treasurer at Mobil Nigeria (and not the politician) and a Brian Browne in the mold of radical black civil rights leaders (and not the diplomat)!!! Tinubu and Browne have undoubtedly made a bold and unconventional, but commendable effort to examine and seek to illuminate policy in relation to capitalism and the financial sector. Financial sector experts will certainly not accept many of their conclusions, but the debate they may inspire is well worth having.

Nigeria in 2013

Oil prices oscillated within the $90-110 band in 2012 posing no apparent danger to Nigeria’s budget oil price benchmark of $72 per barrel. Longer term trends-US shale gas and “fracking” technology which dramatically improves North American oil supply; the increase in African countries with significant oil finds; easing off of geo-political tensions in the Middle-East and North African (MENA) region (at least for a season!) and the cessation of new investment in Nigerian upstream sector, all mean that Nigeria’s dependence on oil and gas resources for 85% of national revenue may yet come home to roost, sooner or a little later! Global economic recovery by all accounts is sluggish-the world according to the IMF grew by 3.3% in 2012, well below pre-2007-9 levels. The structure of divergence in GDP growth rates between the developed and developing/emerging economies in which the rich nations struggle to find growth, while the poor, less-poor and emerging rich grow around 5-6% (with outliers China reaching 8%!) persisted into 2012 and promises to subsist even beyond. Europe remains the global economic laggards-their resort to austerity appears to have back-fired, but perhaps longer term rewards lie ahead, while America which has deferred fiscal and budget reforms may yet pay a price in the medium term. The IMF projects global growth of 3.6% in 2013. In this context, Nigeria has passed a N4.9trillion budget predicated on oil prices at $79 per barrel against the finance ministry’s preference of a slightly lower $75. The argument is over signals since the difference is only $4! The National Assembly by raising the benchmark sends a message that it does not yet appreciate the significance of the medium to long term oil industry trends stated above. The country compounds the error by writing a Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) which is unattractive to investors-opting quite irrationally to keep the oil in the ground rather than generating investments, jobs and resources to bridge our infrastructure deficit!!! Oil investors will choose to spend their money elsewhere! Meanwhile our GDP growth slowed to 6+% in 2012 against 7+% in the three previous years. It is rational to ascribe the slowdown to insecurity, financial sector conditions including high interest rates (and private sector access to credit especially at SME levels), economic disruptions in Q1 2012 due to oil price disturbances and declines in oil sector GDP growth. Our star growth sector remains telecommunications which continues to grow over 30%, with mid-growth sectors consisting of hotels and restaurants, building and construction, real estate, wholesale and retail and solid minerals growing between 10 and 12%. The weak growth sectors include agriculture and manufacturing while the worst performers are financial sector and oil and gas. The pre-amnesty output declines were caused by militants while current output problems relate to policy and the absence of fiscal and other industry regimes acceptable to the oil majors. The financial sector continues its slide as a generator of growth (and jobs!) since 2009!!! In terms of our economic structure, we retain the dysfunctional characteristic of having four sectors generating 80% of GDP-agriculture, wholesale and retail trade, crude oil and gas and telecommunications! The structure and attributes of these four sectors explain our poverty and unemployment! They don’t generate jobs in large numbers and they have severely limited linkages with the domestic economy. And domestic value-added is minimal!!! My position remains that given this economic structure, GDP growth even at 15-20% may not significantly improve the welfare of the average person! I am surprised I have not heard any of our policy makers express worries over the 1% drop in our GDP growth rate! What are the causes and is this a new trend? If we don’t discuss the drop, how can we be sure we understand the drivers of our economic growth? Perhaps our 6-7% GDP growth is less the outcome of policy than the economy’s natural rate of growth! I am also totally convinced that Nigeria’s policy makers ought never to mention GDP as evidence of the improvement in human conditions within the country! They may refer to it when talking to external audiences, but internal discussions on economic development must now focus almost exclusively on poverty, jobs, human development and social indices. And then politics! Events in the first two months of 2013 already confirm that the 2013-2015 election season has commenced! The key questions are whether President Jonathan will secure the re-nomination of his PDP, and if so whether he will win the presidency in 2015. The underlying sub-theme will of course be the issue of Northern presidency. The only possible game-changer on the horizon is the fortunes and prospects of the emerging opposition coalition, the All Progressives Congress. Whatever the scenarios, Jonathan faces an uphill task in staying on as president beyond 2015! The problem of insecurity persists! As politicians scheme and posture for 2015; as Jonathan deploys the instruments of power in order to retain his position; as elite groups jostle for power and position within the corrupt system, Boko Haram continues to kill thousands of its usual victims-Northern Christians, Southerners, security personnel and occasionally even hostile Islamic clerics and traditional rulers while the country looks on helplessly. So-called “Fulani herdsmen” also slay victims virtually everywhere in the country while we all pretend not to notice, so we won’t have to do something about it! Wherever there’s no Boko Haram, kidnappers, armed robbers and sundry gunmen fill the space!