Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Privatisation and Sector Competitiveness
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Annual Report for 2010 quoting National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) data provides growth rates of sectors in the Nigerian economy. It should surprise no one that the fastest growing sector in 2010 was communications at 34.5 per cent! The sector has in fact sustained above-30% growth since 2001 when the digital mobile license auctions were held becoming 4.6% of total GDP (higher than manufacturing and banking and insurance!). The telecommunications sector vividly demonstrates not just the power of private capital and management in transforming sectors, but also illustrates the role government can play in fostering sector competitiveness and transformation through sensible policy (in this case through the BPE’s telecommunications policy 2001), and effective regulation.
The second fastest-growing sector, solid minerals grew at 12.3% in 2010. Unfortunately mining activity is insignificant relative to total GDP so its high growth rate makes little effect on the wider economy! The other fast-growing sectors are building and construction (12.2%); hotels and restaurants (12%; wholesale and retail trade (11.2%) and real estate (10.4%). Moderately growing sectors include commercial, social and personal services (9.9%); manufacturing (7.6%); transport (6.7%) and agriculture (5.7%). Low growth sectors include crude petroleum (4.6%); finance and insurance (3.9%) and utilities (3.3%). Crude petroleum only recently began to grow after the amnesty programme restored peace in the Niger-Delta allowing increase in crude output; the financial sector has been hobbled by industry turmoil and has not only become slow-growing, but has also declined to 3.6% of GDP; utilities, essentially government-owned are the slowest-growing entities in the Nigerian economy! Certain sectors do not show up in the GDP data including automobiles and steel/aluminium.
Now let’s relate all these to the privatisation data released by BPE and published in the media some weeks back. The data showed that BPE had privatised 122 enterprises in fourteen (14) sectors between 1999 and 2007. The sectors were automobile; cement; steel and aluminium; oil and gas; hotel and tourism; banking and insurance; sugar; solid minerals and mining; paper and packaging; sea ports and terminals; agriculture; aviation; block making; and energy. The data of course puts a lie to the propaganda spread so casually by opponents of privatisation that “80 per cent of privatised companies had failed” and supports BPE’s position that 70% were indeed successful. The list of “performing” companies includes Benue Cement Company; Cement Company of Northern Nigeria; WAPCO; Ashaka Cement; Onigolo Cement, Benin Republic; and Calabar Cement Company in the cement sector. Others are LPG Calabar Depot sold to Sahara Energy; Oando Plc; African Petroleum; Conoil Plc; West African Refinery Company of Sierra Leone and Eleme Petrochemicals all in the oil marketing and petrochemicals sector.
In the hotel and tourism sector, successful privatisations include Golden Tulip Festac; Southern Sun Ikoyi; Le Meridien Abuja (now NICON Luxury); Transcorp Hilton and several others. Banking and insurance privatisations include FSB International Bank (part of the contemporary Fidelity Bank); IMB (part of Finbank); NAL Merchant Bank (Sterling Bank); NICON Insurance and Nigerian Re-insurance. There are many other examples of successful privatisations in solid minerals and mining, ports and terminals, agriculture, block making and energy sectors. The data also reveals that government failed even in sectors in which there were no issues of sector competitiveness-cement; oil marketing; hotels; ports and terminals; banks; energy companies etc!!! A careful analysis of the data in fact suggests that the much-trumpeted privatisation failures especially in automobile and steel sectors establish issues of lack of sector competitiveness, rather than necessarily company-specific performance or lack of it. It is analytically dubious for instance to shout to the rooftops over the “failure” of steel sector privatisations, when it is well known that the sector was a failure (as well as a funding drainpipe) long before the government sold off assets in that sector. Is there a need to review and prescribe a sector strategy and policy framework for steel rather than engage in a useless argument over steel sector privatisations?
A similar argument relates to automobile (actually motor assembly plants) sector. The simple truth as one friend who had the misfortune of working in that sector has shouted himself hoarse explaining is that the auto assembly plants were structurally uncompetitive once Nigeria devalued its previously over-valued currency. Why do we think the technical partners-Peugeot, Volkswagen, and Mercedes etc. abandoned them to us and went back to their countries? Does anyone think these firms would have abandoned their investments if they saw prospect of success? The only factor that interested the foreign partners in those motor assembly plants was the huge exchange rate subsidy provided by the government of Nigeria through its over-valued currency! Once our dollar reserves were exhausted and we were forced to devalue the currency, the absurd logic of transporting completely knocked down vehicle parts thousands of miles to Nigeria was lost, and these “partners” duly walked away. The point again is that Nigeria needs a policy framework that carefully reviews the automobile value chain, decides what role Nigerian firms can be competitive in playing and creates conditions to enable Nigerian enterprises take advantage accordingly.
The point I make is that we may be better off examining the competitiveness of economic sectors in Nigeria and evolving policy to build such where such opportunities exist, rather than a simple-minded lamentation over the “failure” of steel and automobile privatisations.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
100 Unclear Days
I voted for President Goodluck Jonathan, privately supported him, publicly advocated support for him on facebook, and to friends, strategic groups and stakeholders I had access to; and endorsed him on this page. I didn’t do this because of a personal relationship (I’ve never met him); not because (as often happens here) I was paid to do so (I’ve never received payment to endorse or support any public officer, candidate or political party, including Jonathan); not because of ethnic or regional affiliation (I’m neither Ijaw nor “South-South”); and not because I requested or was promised any appointment or patronage (I was not). And I am certainly not a PDP member or supporter! In short, I am one of many Nigerians who “voted Jonathan and not PDP” as I wrote in my endorsement because “I regard Jonathan as the candidate of national unity, a federation of co-equal nationalities and national integration, freedom and openness, power sector reform, education and critical infrastructure”.
And if the election were repeated today, with exactly the same candidates and electoral mathematics, I would vote the same way! Jonathan’s minuses were evident before the elections (and I was clear that we “independents” who supported him would have to “police” him to ensure he didn’t fail!), but those of his principal opponents were also starkly apparent! However in the last 100 days, my emotions have ranged from surprise-when the president mentioned at his pre-inauguration lecture that four years was not enough to achieve transformation; alarm-at the worsening security situation in the country; confusion-when the president appeared to agree with Vice-President Sambo’s view that privatisation had failed; shock-when the president said after the police headquarters bombing that terrorism is a global phenomenon that could happen anywhere; bewilderment-when he began his “campaign” for an extended single tenure; anger-when the president after the UN bombing said maybe its our turn to experience terrorism; sadness-at the resumed killings in Jos; and thankfully hope-at the presence in the cabinet and economic team of a core of reformist-minded ministers.
The most evident character attribute on display has been a certain naïveté about the reality of politics and power, especially in a context of having displaced hegemonic elements with a publicly-expressed stake in his failure. This trait has been displayed in the manner the regime lost the speakership office to anti-regime forces; in cabinet composition where he ceded power over many nominations to state governors; and in the choice of “dialogue” as initial preferred means of resolving the “Boko Haram” bombings. In a sense, the president has allowed some sort of power vacuum and as nature abhors such, all sorts of characters-corrupt politicians, perennial power mongers, ethnic chauvinists and regional jingoists, feudalists and wards of the prebendal state, contractors and rent-seekers, civil servants, closet Jihadists and even his political adversaries (who may already have thoroughly infiltrated his inner circle) have sought to fill the gap!
The biggest significant policy and leadership gap in the last one hundred days is that President Jonathan has not articulated and communicated a grand vision and direction for Nigeria and (until the last few days) yet to provide policy content to his “transformation agenda” with the consequence that the words “transformation agenda of Mr President” remained an undecipherable mantra! What kind of country does Jonathan want to create? What does he want to “transform”? What does he think is wrong with Nigeria? What does he want to change? Does he want accommodation with Nigeria as it is, or does he really want to change it? How will he “transform” Nigeria? When? How will he measure success?
Let me summarise what I think has not gone well so far-non-articulation of a clear and compelling vision and non-definition of the “transformation agenda”; squandering of goodwill over the extended tenure distraction; often inexplicable display of insufficient presidential firmness and conviction; initial confounding response to the Boko Haram bombings and other cases of terror and insecurity; the naivety with which the zoning matter was handled and the subsequent displacement of the South-West from national leadership; the questionable quality of some critical personal and regime appointments; unduly large composition of the National Economic Management Team (NEMT)-when there were twenty-eight persons, I worried that it better resembled a “consultative forum” rather than an economic “management” team, and more members have since been added; the Petroleum Industry Bill is yet to re-appear in parliament; resumption of violence in Jos, with seeming connivance of some military and security officials; most importantly action was slow to commence on substantive policy and governance challenges of the Nigerian nation.
But the outlook may be more encouraging! The cabinet has a small core of strong reformers-Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Akinwunmi Adesina, Barth Nnaji and Olusegun Aganga in charge of critical portfolios-finance, agriculture, power, and trade and investment; while NEMT composition is bloated, the real work may get done by the more-focused implementation team; Ambassador Ashiru is very strong in foreign affairs and I strongly support the recognition of the Libyan Transitional National Council as a bold and proactive measure consistent with Nigeria’s interests and values; Finally the power sector road map is proceeding in spite of all obstacles. I expect the next 100 days to have many more positives!!!
And if the election were repeated today, with exactly the same candidates and electoral mathematics, I would vote the same way! Jonathan’s minuses were evident before the elections (and I was clear that we “independents” who supported him would have to “police” him to ensure he didn’t fail!), but those of his principal opponents were also starkly apparent! However in the last 100 days, my emotions have ranged from surprise-when the president mentioned at his pre-inauguration lecture that four years was not enough to achieve transformation; alarm-at the worsening security situation in the country; confusion-when the president appeared to agree with Vice-President Sambo’s view that privatisation had failed; shock-when the president said after the police headquarters bombing that terrorism is a global phenomenon that could happen anywhere; bewilderment-when he began his “campaign” for an extended single tenure; anger-when the president after the UN bombing said maybe its our turn to experience terrorism; sadness-at the resumed killings in Jos; and thankfully hope-at the presence in the cabinet and economic team of a core of reformist-minded ministers.
The most evident character attribute on display has been a certain naïveté about the reality of politics and power, especially in a context of having displaced hegemonic elements with a publicly-expressed stake in his failure. This trait has been displayed in the manner the regime lost the speakership office to anti-regime forces; in cabinet composition where he ceded power over many nominations to state governors; and in the choice of “dialogue” as initial preferred means of resolving the “Boko Haram” bombings. In a sense, the president has allowed some sort of power vacuum and as nature abhors such, all sorts of characters-corrupt politicians, perennial power mongers, ethnic chauvinists and regional jingoists, feudalists and wards of the prebendal state, contractors and rent-seekers, civil servants, closet Jihadists and even his political adversaries (who may already have thoroughly infiltrated his inner circle) have sought to fill the gap!
The biggest significant policy and leadership gap in the last one hundred days is that President Jonathan has not articulated and communicated a grand vision and direction for Nigeria and (until the last few days) yet to provide policy content to his “transformation agenda” with the consequence that the words “transformation agenda of Mr President” remained an undecipherable mantra! What kind of country does Jonathan want to create? What does he want to “transform”? What does he think is wrong with Nigeria? What does he want to change? Does he want accommodation with Nigeria as it is, or does he really want to change it? How will he “transform” Nigeria? When? How will he measure success?
Let me summarise what I think has not gone well so far-non-articulation of a clear and compelling vision and non-definition of the “transformation agenda”; squandering of goodwill over the extended tenure distraction; often inexplicable display of insufficient presidential firmness and conviction; initial confounding response to the Boko Haram bombings and other cases of terror and insecurity; the naivety with which the zoning matter was handled and the subsequent displacement of the South-West from national leadership; the questionable quality of some critical personal and regime appointments; unduly large composition of the National Economic Management Team (NEMT)-when there were twenty-eight persons, I worried that it better resembled a “consultative forum” rather than an economic “management” team, and more members have since been added; the Petroleum Industry Bill is yet to re-appear in parliament; resumption of violence in Jos, with seeming connivance of some military and security officials; most importantly action was slow to commence on substantive policy and governance challenges of the Nigerian nation.
But the outlook may be more encouraging! The cabinet has a small core of strong reformers-Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Akinwunmi Adesina, Barth Nnaji and Olusegun Aganga in charge of critical portfolios-finance, agriculture, power, and trade and investment; while NEMT composition is bloated, the real work may get done by the more-focused implementation team; Ambassador Ashiru is very strong in foreign affairs and I strongly support the recognition of the Libyan Transitional National Council as a bold and proactive measure consistent with Nigeria’s interests and values; Finally the power sector road map is proceeding in spite of all obstacles. I expect the next 100 days to have many more positives!!!
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
The Role of the State
There are numerous activities which can ONLY be carried out by governments. Take defence and national security-maintaining disciplined and effective armed forces and intelligence agencies; defending the country and its citizens from external aggression or internal insurrection and protecting its territorial integrity; maintaining security agencies, carrying out covert operations to protect vital national interests; gathering information and “intelligence” regarding matters of military, security or economic interests etc. Intelligence agencies often work in concert with diplomatic services-another activity exclusively undertaken by the state. Governments maintain foreign relations, operate embassies, employ diplomats and ensure protection of the nation’s external interests.
The state ensures law and order, and administration of justice, maintains police forces, civil courts, enforcement of criminal justice, including prosecution of offenders, maintain prisons and rehabilitation centres and employs court bailiffs and other people and processes that ensure the ultimate sanction of law. The court system is maintained by the state, and judicial officers are employees of the state. The state organises the Civil Service-maintaining the continued operations of the state and delivering services to the public-land administration, town and country planning, traffic management etc-supporting elected public officials in executing their agenda and maintaining the integrity of the state.
The state is responsible for most public infrastructure-most roads, rail infrastructure, airports and maritime services are owned by government though services such as airport management or train shuttles may be private sector operated. I am not aware of any country in the world (even the most capitalist) in which up to ten percent of public road network is owned by any interests other than the state. Most social services are delivered by the state-public education and health, urban mass transportation, public libraries, city halls etc. The state is responsible for virtually all aspects of the investment climate and economic competitiveness-registration of companies; registration of title to land; effecting dividend remittances; security and law and order; enforcement of contracts; building approvals etc.
The state controls the entry and exit of goods (customs and excise), people (immigration), capital importation (central bank and banks); public debt management (ministries of finance, budget offices and debt management agencies); narcotics and restricted products; the state even controls entry to the world (birth registration) and exit there from (registration of deaths)!!! In the economic sphere, the state manages macroeconomic stability and fiscal operations, currency, exchange rates, inflation and financial sector supervision, taxation, sovereign savings etc. Indeed the entire job of regulating the private economy can ONLY be carried out by the state-aviation and airlines; banks and financial institutions; telecommunications and utilities; industrial safety and standards, food and drugs, environmental standards, weather and meteorological services, etc. The state is charged with ensuring free competition and absence of monopolies and anti-competitive behaviour. The list of exclusive state services and activities runs long!!!
How has the Nigerian state fared in these EXCLUSIVE and CRITICAL responsibilities it carries out (or is supposed to carry out?) Government’s report card will note that it has been unable to preserve public order or prevent armed robberies, kidnappings, militancy and communal crisis-leading to the deaths of thousands of Nigerians since our return to civil rule. In Warri, Aguleri-Umuleri, Sagamu, Niger-Delta, Jos, Kano, Maiduguri, Bauchi, Kaduna, Kano etc, lives were lost in hundreds and thousands to crises-over elections, Danish cartoons, beauty contests, communal differences, religion, land and other matters that should normally be resolved by a competent state. Administration of justice has basically broken down! Torture, summary executions, bribery and rampant corruption pervade our policing system-the police is NOT your friend, and the courts are slow and ineffective! Most recently our Chief Justice and Court of Appeal President have accused each other of corruption! Our intelligence agencies have demonstrated how easy it is to throw bombs-on Independence Day and at the police and UN headquarters! Niger-Delta militants, Northern Almajiri, Boko Haram and just about anyone who is angry have often fought the state to a stand-still!
Our most important highways-Sagamu-Benin, Lagos-Ibadan are totally derelict; Government abandons major middle-belt highways-Lokoja, Abuja, Nasarawa etc to armed robbers who routinely kill citizens including members of the ruling elite; South-East land is casually lost to erosion; Government could deliver only 470,000 telephone lines and less than 4,000 MW of electricity to 150 million people in fifty years; Ministries and agencies reportedly pay bribes to secure release of statutory allocations; Immigration officers openly beg visitors for bribes and customs officers are the biggest smugglers; The federal and state governments can’t manage their finances; Fake drugs and substandard goods are pervasive; Government has totally destroyed public education, and our Presidents travel abroad for medical treatment; The nation relies on a rail network built by colonialists almost a century ago; The state taxes probably less than ten per cent of its citizens; We send 25 and 28 year-olds to under 17 and 20 football competitions; The state has been subverted by corruption, ethnic and religious bigotry, nepotism and complete absence of altruistic behaviour and sense of common good!!!
Why would anyone want such a dysfunctional state to run airlines, banks, telephone companies, hotels, factories, or businesses of any sort? I may understand if Chinese, Japanese, UAE citizens or Singaporeans ponder the role of the state in business, but Nigerians? We’ve got to be joking…or worse!!!
The state ensures law and order, and administration of justice, maintains police forces, civil courts, enforcement of criminal justice, including prosecution of offenders, maintain prisons and rehabilitation centres and employs court bailiffs and other people and processes that ensure the ultimate sanction of law. The court system is maintained by the state, and judicial officers are employees of the state. The state organises the Civil Service-maintaining the continued operations of the state and delivering services to the public-land administration, town and country planning, traffic management etc-supporting elected public officials in executing their agenda and maintaining the integrity of the state.
The state is responsible for most public infrastructure-most roads, rail infrastructure, airports and maritime services are owned by government though services such as airport management or train shuttles may be private sector operated. I am not aware of any country in the world (even the most capitalist) in which up to ten percent of public road network is owned by any interests other than the state. Most social services are delivered by the state-public education and health, urban mass transportation, public libraries, city halls etc. The state is responsible for virtually all aspects of the investment climate and economic competitiveness-registration of companies; registration of title to land; effecting dividend remittances; security and law and order; enforcement of contracts; building approvals etc.
The state controls the entry and exit of goods (customs and excise), people (immigration), capital importation (central bank and banks); public debt management (ministries of finance, budget offices and debt management agencies); narcotics and restricted products; the state even controls entry to the world (birth registration) and exit there from (registration of deaths)!!! In the economic sphere, the state manages macroeconomic stability and fiscal operations, currency, exchange rates, inflation and financial sector supervision, taxation, sovereign savings etc. Indeed the entire job of regulating the private economy can ONLY be carried out by the state-aviation and airlines; banks and financial institutions; telecommunications and utilities; industrial safety and standards, food and drugs, environmental standards, weather and meteorological services, etc. The state is charged with ensuring free competition and absence of monopolies and anti-competitive behaviour. The list of exclusive state services and activities runs long!!!
How has the Nigerian state fared in these EXCLUSIVE and CRITICAL responsibilities it carries out (or is supposed to carry out?) Government’s report card will note that it has been unable to preserve public order or prevent armed robberies, kidnappings, militancy and communal crisis-leading to the deaths of thousands of Nigerians since our return to civil rule. In Warri, Aguleri-Umuleri, Sagamu, Niger-Delta, Jos, Kano, Maiduguri, Bauchi, Kaduna, Kano etc, lives were lost in hundreds and thousands to crises-over elections, Danish cartoons, beauty contests, communal differences, religion, land and other matters that should normally be resolved by a competent state. Administration of justice has basically broken down! Torture, summary executions, bribery and rampant corruption pervade our policing system-the police is NOT your friend, and the courts are slow and ineffective! Most recently our Chief Justice and Court of Appeal President have accused each other of corruption! Our intelligence agencies have demonstrated how easy it is to throw bombs-on Independence Day and at the police and UN headquarters! Niger-Delta militants, Northern Almajiri, Boko Haram and just about anyone who is angry have often fought the state to a stand-still!
Our most important highways-Sagamu-Benin, Lagos-Ibadan are totally derelict; Government abandons major middle-belt highways-Lokoja, Abuja, Nasarawa etc to armed robbers who routinely kill citizens including members of the ruling elite; South-East land is casually lost to erosion; Government could deliver only 470,000 telephone lines and less than 4,000 MW of electricity to 150 million people in fifty years; Ministries and agencies reportedly pay bribes to secure release of statutory allocations; Immigration officers openly beg visitors for bribes and customs officers are the biggest smugglers; The federal and state governments can’t manage their finances; Fake drugs and substandard goods are pervasive; Government has totally destroyed public education, and our Presidents travel abroad for medical treatment; The nation relies on a rail network built by colonialists almost a century ago; The state taxes probably less than ten per cent of its citizens; We send 25 and 28 year-olds to under 17 and 20 football competitions; The state has been subverted by corruption, ethnic and religious bigotry, nepotism and complete absence of altruistic behaviour and sense of common good!!!
Why would anyone want such a dysfunctional state to run airlines, banks, telephone companies, hotels, factories, or businesses of any sort? I may understand if Chinese, Japanese, UAE citizens or Singaporeans ponder the role of the state in business, but Nigerians? We’ve got to be joking…or worse!!!
Thursday, September 1, 2011
A Call for a Second Dialogue Committee!!!
Religious Harmony
The Yorubas of Western Nigeria offer the world lessons in forging societal harmony in spite of being of different faiths. In virtually all Yoruba families you find Christians, Muslims and adherents of traditional and alternative (Grail, Eckankar, Rosicrucian etc) faiths. All my four grandparents were Muslims, indeed Alhajis and Alhajas. My parents were born Sikiru and Raliatu and only became Christians, thus Solomon and Margaret, as young persons, as the combination of Christian evangelism and education persuaded many to the Christian faith. Yet some of my parents’ brothers and sisters remained Muslims, so I have uncles, aunties, cousins, nieces and nephews who are Muslims. To the best of my knowledge, my grandparents never objected to their children’s adoption of Christianity, yet never wavered in commitment to their Islamic faith till their death.
I remember once observing my mother, herself now late, feeling quite unhappy. She, a committed Christian was apparently concerned that her mother who earnestly desired to, had not been able to observe the Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca. She was determined to remedy that situation, yet the cost of our education did not readily yield space for the expenses of the obligatory trip to Mecca! Well whatever sacrifice it would have required, the next year, my maternal grandparents went to Mecca, and we found the money to welcome them with an “Alhaji and Alhaja Kaabo” owambe party in typical Yoruba fashion! I may be known as Opeyemi Agbaje, but my grandparents duly gave me a Muslim name (which shall not be revealed in this column!) and indeed there were those who would only call me by that name!!!
As a teenager, the best time to visit my beloved “Alhaja” (as my maternal grandmother became known), was during Ramadan when I could eat my cake, and have it! Alhaja would wake you up to break the fast with her (even though you had not really fasted!); you could then go back to sleep and wake up late morning to a “regular” breakfast; have a normal lunch with the non-fasting and/or Christian members of the large household; “break fast” again early evening; and again enjoy dinner within the nightly fast-breaking window. I recall also joining the local boys as they took “Ileya” rams for head-butting contests during the bigger Islamic festival season! In Yorubaland, there is no telling, except for insiders, who is a Christian or Muslim during religious ceremonies, as everyone joins in the gaiety and celebrations.
This multiple religious heritage accounts for why Yoruba society has been largely immune to religious politics and why the people remain by-and-large unaffected by religious differences. Any politician, who tries to import religion into politics in Yorubaland, is likely to receive a shocker as Christians, Muslims and even traditionalists are likely to turn against such a person. In this season of Ramadan, I commend this approach to people of faith all over the world.
A Call for a Second Dialogue Committee!!!
Last Friday evening, I posted the following comment on facebook-“Boko Haram has bombed the UN office in Abuja killing at least 18 people and injuring several others. I urge President Jonathan (as usual) to set up a committee to dialogue with Boko Haram. In the spirit of reconciliation, the members of the dialogue committee may include Tanko Yakasai, Ibrahim Babangida, Muhammadu Buhari, Adamu Ciroma, Abubakar Atiku and Nasir El-Rufai! Troubled Country!!!” The post attracted interest and comments from “my friends and I” and we unanimously adopted the suggestion as a “vigorous and robust” response to the “dastardly” bombing. Some important modifications came from my friend “T.O” (any educated Nigerian newspaper reader must know who that is!) who noted that the proposed membership did not reflect “federal character”. Accordingly he recommended that we include my friend Femi Fani-Kayode to represent the Yoruba Council of Elders!
T.O also highlighted the need for a committee spokesperson proposing either Kazeem Afegbua or Senator J. K. N Waku. I deemed Waku rather old for the “onerous assignment”, so I chose Afegbua who has adequately demonstrated the “vigour and robustness” required for this critical national responsibility! Another Facebook friend, Chigozie wondered why I had excluded the (in his words oh!) “Almighty Gusau” I agreed to redeem this omission, but the resourceful T.O pointed out again that Gusau would be a good fit for the position of “Coordinating Member of the Boko Haram Dialogue Committee”!!! One fellow suggested including Tunde Bakare in the committee.
I am not sure this recommendation was accepted! On my part, I wondered which constituency Bakare would represent, not been from Borno or Bauchi States or anywhere in the precincts from which Boko Haram originated, and not been a known apostle of dialogue! We are undergoing “further consultations” on that particular nomination! Meanwhile in place of Bakare’s controversial nomination, I suggested Mallam Yahaya Kwande, which was unanimously accepted. Finally Benjamin nominated the Sultan of Sokoto, who we all agreed should serve as Chairman.
“My friends and I” agreed that “the perpetrators of this heinous act must be apprehended” in order that after their apprehension, we can explain the importance of dialogue and peaceful nation-building to them. We also disagreed with Christian Purefoy who claimed on CNN that “after this kind of thing, nothing gets done” noting that setting up a dialogue committee is not “nothing”.
The Yorubas of Western Nigeria offer the world lessons in forging societal harmony in spite of being of different faiths. In virtually all Yoruba families you find Christians, Muslims and adherents of traditional and alternative (Grail, Eckankar, Rosicrucian etc) faiths. All my four grandparents were Muslims, indeed Alhajis and Alhajas. My parents were born Sikiru and Raliatu and only became Christians, thus Solomon and Margaret, as young persons, as the combination of Christian evangelism and education persuaded many to the Christian faith. Yet some of my parents’ brothers and sisters remained Muslims, so I have uncles, aunties, cousins, nieces and nephews who are Muslims. To the best of my knowledge, my grandparents never objected to their children’s adoption of Christianity, yet never wavered in commitment to their Islamic faith till their death.
I remember once observing my mother, herself now late, feeling quite unhappy. She, a committed Christian was apparently concerned that her mother who earnestly desired to, had not been able to observe the Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca. She was determined to remedy that situation, yet the cost of our education did not readily yield space for the expenses of the obligatory trip to Mecca! Well whatever sacrifice it would have required, the next year, my maternal grandparents went to Mecca, and we found the money to welcome them with an “Alhaji and Alhaja Kaabo” owambe party in typical Yoruba fashion! I may be known as Opeyemi Agbaje, but my grandparents duly gave me a Muslim name (which shall not be revealed in this column!) and indeed there were those who would only call me by that name!!!
As a teenager, the best time to visit my beloved “Alhaja” (as my maternal grandmother became known), was during Ramadan when I could eat my cake, and have it! Alhaja would wake you up to break the fast with her (even though you had not really fasted!); you could then go back to sleep and wake up late morning to a “regular” breakfast; have a normal lunch with the non-fasting and/or Christian members of the large household; “break fast” again early evening; and again enjoy dinner within the nightly fast-breaking window. I recall also joining the local boys as they took “Ileya” rams for head-butting contests during the bigger Islamic festival season! In Yorubaland, there is no telling, except for insiders, who is a Christian or Muslim during religious ceremonies, as everyone joins in the gaiety and celebrations.
This multiple religious heritage accounts for why Yoruba society has been largely immune to religious politics and why the people remain by-and-large unaffected by religious differences. Any politician, who tries to import religion into politics in Yorubaland, is likely to receive a shocker as Christians, Muslims and even traditionalists are likely to turn against such a person. In this season of Ramadan, I commend this approach to people of faith all over the world.
A Call for a Second Dialogue Committee!!!
Last Friday evening, I posted the following comment on facebook-“Boko Haram has bombed the UN office in Abuja killing at least 18 people and injuring several others. I urge President Jonathan (as usual) to set up a committee to dialogue with Boko Haram. In the spirit of reconciliation, the members of the dialogue committee may include Tanko Yakasai, Ibrahim Babangida, Muhammadu Buhari, Adamu Ciroma, Abubakar Atiku and Nasir El-Rufai! Troubled Country!!!” The post attracted interest and comments from “my friends and I” and we unanimously adopted the suggestion as a “vigorous and robust” response to the “dastardly” bombing. Some important modifications came from my friend “T.O” (any educated Nigerian newspaper reader must know who that is!) who noted that the proposed membership did not reflect “federal character”. Accordingly he recommended that we include my friend Femi Fani-Kayode to represent the Yoruba Council of Elders!
T.O also highlighted the need for a committee spokesperson proposing either Kazeem Afegbua or Senator J. K. N Waku. I deemed Waku rather old for the “onerous assignment”, so I chose Afegbua who has adequately demonstrated the “vigour and robustness” required for this critical national responsibility! Another Facebook friend, Chigozie wondered why I had excluded the (in his words oh!) “Almighty Gusau” I agreed to redeem this omission, but the resourceful T.O pointed out again that Gusau would be a good fit for the position of “Coordinating Member of the Boko Haram Dialogue Committee”!!! One fellow suggested including Tunde Bakare in the committee.
I am not sure this recommendation was accepted! On my part, I wondered which constituency Bakare would represent, not been from Borno or Bauchi States or anywhere in the precincts from which Boko Haram originated, and not been a known apostle of dialogue! We are undergoing “further consultations” on that particular nomination! Meanwhile in place of Bakare’s controversial nomination, I suggested Mallam Yahaya Kwande, which was unanimously accepted. Finally Benjamin nominated the Sultan of Sokoto, who we all agreed should serve as Chairman.
“My friends and I” agreed that “the perpetrators of this heinous act must be apprehended” in order that after their apprehension, we can explain the importance of dialogue and peaceful nation-building to them. We also disagreed with Christian Purefoy who claimed on CNN that “after this kind of thing, nothing gets done” noting that setting up a dialogue committee is not “nothing”.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Giving Privatisation a Bad Name!!! (2)
For over fifty years, Nigeria had a telecommunications monopoly, most-recently called Nigerian Telecommunications Ltd (NITEL) by the time of the Digital Mobile License auctions in 2001. In spite of a large underserved market and extremely high prices, NITEL refused or was unable to exploit the market opportunity providing only about 470,000 lines across the whole country! It cost over N200,000 to obtain a telephone line and a Nigerian Minister for Communications was reported to have proclaimed that telephones are not for the poor! As an upwardly mobile manager in a leading bank, I recall having to go through a friend, whose uncle was federal permanent secretary simply because I wanted an analogue mobile phone!!!
According to Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) data, there were 117 million connected lines, 90.5 million active lines and installed capacity of 160.9 million lines with tele-density of 64.7% as at April 2011. Given current installed capacity, the industry now has capacity to provide a telephone line for every Nigerian, rich or poor! Beyond sector transformation, the impact on government revenue (corporate and employee taxes), import duties, employment and GDP growth has been phenomenal. The telecommunications sector has grown to just under 5 percent of GDP in just 10 years-higher than manufacturing!!! Meanwhile the state-owned NITEL has virtually disappeared from the industry radar due to a combination of corruption, incompetence, bureaucracy and sabotage.
The domestic airline industry has also been transformed due to sector liberalisation leveraging private capital and management. I recall the bad old days of Nigerian Airways when you could not get around Nigeria in less than one week! The airline frequently oversold tickets and prospective passengers risked getting on the plane to find all seats taken, except of course you had a powerful government official or Airways official to secure your seat. Ex-president Obasanjo has frequently lamented how Nigerian Airways fleet of over thirty airplanes was depleted to just one in a space of twenty years due to corruption, mismanagement and greed. While there are still problems with private airlines, air travellers can get to and from Abuja, Port-Harcourt, Enugu or Lagos in one single day! The difference is that you have a choice between Air Nigeria, Arik, Aero Contractors, DANA, IRS and whoever else is able to muster capital and requisite regulatory approvals to set up an airline.
Government ownership was also disastrous for the financial services industry in the 1980s and 1990s. No one who has read the case study of the old International Merchant Bank (IMB) as contrasted with the Guaranty Trust Bank case both written at the Lagos Business School will countenance the return of government ownership of banks in Nigeria (unfortunately as the CBN has just executed!) Hopefully that will be a short-term intervention. Government ownership meant that promotions, employment, lending and credit decisions and board and management composition in banks were subject to political interference and abuse. Most federal and state government-owned banks did not survive that era-Continental Merchant Bank, Allied Bank, Nigerian Merchant Bank, Nigerian Arab Bank, National Bank, Progress Bank, Lobi Bank etc. Private banks are not free of mismanagement (as we have recently being reminded), but the difference is that owners of private banks are more likely to be allowed to suffer the consequences of mismanagement than government!!! Had government control of our leading banks-First Bank, UBA, Union, Afribank, Federal Savings Bank etc continued for just a few more years, it was virtually inevitable that those banks would also have gone the way of the others.
I find it curious that journalists and activists are often opposed to privatisation, not recognising that they are important beneficiaries of private sector investment. When government controlled the “commanding heights” of the Nigerian economy, most newspapers, radio and television stations were owned by federal and state governments-Daily Times, New Nigerian, Radio Nigeria, Lagos Television, OGBC, Radio Lagos, Sketch, Observer, Nigerian Tide, Herald, Triumph etc. Government media ownership was a major constraint on civil liberties, especially freedom of expression and the press, and only very few media organisations such as Chief Awolowo’s Tribune offered an alternative to official propaganda. Journalism and civil society flourished with media entrepreneurship making it impossible for schemes such as “third-term” or “self-succession” to succeed in Nigeria.
Activists and commentators freely offer alternative, often anti-government views on various privately-owned media platforms-STV, Channels, THISDAY, Guardian, Trust, Businessday etc. It was their self-employment in private professional practices that enabled activists like late Kanmi Ishola-Osobu, Tunji Braithwaithe, Alao Aka-Bashorun, Beko Ransome-Kuti, Gani Fawehinmi, Bamidele Aturu and Femi Falana to survive the intimidatory powers of the Nigerian state! Associated with growth in private media is the marketing communications industry (advertising, public relations, branding, outdoor marketing etc) which have blossomed as private media expanded.
The transformative impact of private capital and management has been felt in other sectors-hotels and hospitality, information technology, cement, oil marketing, professional services, food logistics etc. Is it a coincidence that the areas in which our people suffer-electricity, refineries, water and public utilities, transportation, public health and education-are state-owned? I don’t think so!!! The Nigerian public sector has more than enough to do in maintaining security and public order, building regulatory institutions, investing in education, health and social services, providing roads and public infrastructure, administration of justice and stamping out corruption.
According to Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) data, there were 117 million connected lines, 90.5 million active lines and installed capacity of 160.9 million lines with tele-density of 64.7% as at April 2011. Given current installed capacity, the industry now has capacity to provide a telephone line for every Nigerian, rich or poor! Beyond sector transformation, the impact on government revenue (corporate and employee taxes), import duties, employment and GDP growth has been phenomenal. The telecommunications sector has grown to just under 5 percent of GDP in just 10 years-higher than manufacturing!!! Meanwhile the state-owned NITEL has virtually disappeared from the industry radar due to a combination of corruption, incompetence, bureaucracy and sabotage.
The domestic airline industry has also been transformed due to sector liberalisation leveraging private capital and management. I recall the bad old days of Nigerian Airways when you could not get around Nigeria in less than one week! The airline frequently oversold tickets and prospective passengers risked getting on the plane to find all seats taken, except of course you had a powerful government official or Airways official to secure your seat. Ex-president Obasanjo has frequently lamented how Nigerian Airways fleet of over thirty airplanes was depleted to just one in a space of twenty years due to corruption, mismanagement and greed. While there are still problems with private airlines, air travellers can get to and from Abuja, Port-Harcourt, Enugu or Lagos in one single day! The difference is that you have a choice between Air Nigeria, Arik, Aero Contractors, DANA, IRS and whoever else is able to muster capital and requisite regulatory approvals to set up an airline.
Government ownership was also disastrous for the financial services industry in the 1980s and 1990s. No one who has read the case study of the old International Merchant Bank (IMB) as contrasted with the Guaranty Trust Bank case both written at the Lagos Business School will countenance the return of government ownership of banks in Nigeria (unfortunately as the CBN has just executed!) Hopefully that will be a short-term intervention. Government ownership meant that promotions, employment, lending and credit decisions and board and management composition in banks were subject to political interference and abuse. Most federal and state government-owned banks did not survive that era-Continental Merchant Bank, Allied Bank, Nigerian Merchant Bank, Nigerian Arab Bank, National Bank, Progress Bank, Lobi Bank etc. Private banks are not free of mismanagement (as we have recently being reminded), but the difference is that owners of private banks are more likely to be allowed to suffer the consequences of mismanagement than government!!! Had government control of our leading banks-First Bank, UBA, Union, Afribank, Federal Savings Bank etc continued for just a few more years, it was virtually inevitable that those banks would also have gone the way of the others.
I find it curious that journalists and activists are often opposed to privatisation, not recognising that they are important beneficiaries of private sector investment. When government controlled the “commanding heights” of the Nigerian economy, most newspapers, radio and television stations were owned by federal and state governments-Daily Times, New Nigerian, Radio Nigeria, Lagos Television, OGBC, Radio Lagos, Sketch, Observer, Nigerian Tide, Herald, Triumph etc. Government media ownership was a major constraint on civil liberties, especially freedom of expression and the press, and only very few media organisations such as Chief Awolowo’s Tribune offered an alternative to official propaganda. Journalism and civil society flourished with media entrepreneurship making it impossible for schemes such as “third-term” or “self-succession” to succeed in Nigeria.
Activists and commentators freely offer alternative, often anti-government views on various privately-owned media platforms-STV, Channels, THISDAY, Guardian, Trust, Businessday etc. It was their self-employment in private professional practices that enabled activists like late Kanmi Ishola-Osobu, Tunji Braithwaithe, Alao Aka-Bashorun, Beko Ransome-Kuti, Gani Fawehinmi, Bamidele Aturu and Femi Falana to survive the intimidatory powers of the Nigerian state! Associated with growth in private media is the marketing communications industry (advertising, public relations, branding, outdoor marketing etc) which have blossomed as private media expanded.
The transformative impact of private capital and management has been felt in other sectors-hotels and hospitality, information technology, cement, oil marketing, professional services, food logistics etc. Is it a coincidence that the areas in which our people suffer-electricity, refineries, water and public utilities, transportation, public health and education-are state-owned? I don’t think so!!! The Nigerian public sector has more than enough to do in maintaining security and public order, building regulatory institutions, investing in education, health and social services, providing roads and public infrastructure, administration of justice and stamping out corruption.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Giving Privatisation a Bad Name!!!
When you want to hang a dog, first give it a bad name! Evidently some powerful constituencies in Nigeria viscerally dislike privatisation and the notion of private-sector led development. They prefer the prebendal, statist, semi-feudal development (actually underdevelopment!) model in which banks, refineries, telecommunications companies, electricity generation and distribution utilities, hotels, airlines, newspapers, television and radio stations etc are controlled by Abuja and bureaucrats, politicians, traditional rulers, government contractors and sundry patrons and wards of the state control all economic resources and determine who gets rich or stays poor! This coalition and their agents hate privatisation as it takes away their control over the destinies of our nation and its peoples.
But they can’t say this, can they? So instead they focus on persuading us it has failed! That privatisation is over-rated and state-owned enterprises are better after all. It doesn’t bother them that massive corruption is endemic in state-owned enterprises, but they carefully scrutinize privatisations for opportunities to call the kettle black! And they succeed in persuading some naïve or hypocritical “comrades” (who own private professional practices; carry three mobile phones; work for private banks and telecommunication companies; and appear regularly on private broadcast stations!!!) to their cause!!! The current leader of this “Anti-Privatisation Coalition” is Vice-President Namadi Sambo, who ironically as Chair of the National Council on Privatisation (NCP) presides over privatisation. In Sambo’s view, “80percent of privatised firms moribund” (Thisday May 13, 2011) and “the process of privatisation has been going on for about ten years but has not been successful due to obvious non-performance” (Peoples Daily May 12, 2011). Meeting with the Russian Ambassador, Sambo re-stated that “many of the privatised companies have not met been able to meet the aspirations of government” (Punch June 28, 2011).
Unfortunately Sambo may have persuaded President Jonathan! The Nation newspaper’s screaming headline proclaimed “Privatisation has failed, says Jonathan”!! This at the inauguration of NCP!!! Jonathan’s late boss, Umaru Yar’adua reversed the privatisation of Refineries which were concluded just before ex-President Obasanjo handed over to him. Yar’adua also refused to proceed with the expected privatisation of unbundled Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) entities; and later formally outlined a policy championed by Rilwanu Lukman which rested the private sector electricity model in favour of state control. Should we then expect that Jonathan will abandon the Power Sector Roadmap and Electric Power Sector Reform Act 2005 both of which are based on privatisation of electricity generation and distribution, while transmission is billed to be concessioned to the private sector? Is the power road map dead on arrival, since we can logically expect Namadi Sambo to frustrate expected privatisations?
Interestingly a replay of Yar’adua’s strategy of stalling Obasanjo’s power reforms, (as Engineer Foluseke Somolu recently pointed out), through public disinformation that $16billion had been wasted on power; and Ndudi Elumelu’s House of Representatives Power Committee probe appears ongoing! The Senate has commenced its legislative agenda with an adhoc committee investigating privatisation!!! Senate President David Mark while inaugurating the panel declared that privatisation has not achieved the desired objectives and actually blamed privatisation for loss of jobs, financial deprivation and loss of revenue to the federal government!!! If the Senate had already reached these conclusions, why did it bother setting up an investigation? I urge Nigerians to be calm and circumspect in responding to the “alarming revelations” emerging from the Senate probe!!!
By all means, any clear infractions must be dealt with based on law and due process. Indeed this columnist has long identified conditions which make for successful privatisations-an independent technical agency overseeing the process; proper valuations of assets being disposed of; open, competitive and transparent bidding by all participants; a process that first establishes technical qualification of bidding firms before proceeding to competitive financial bidding; and the absence of corruption and political interference, except in cases of national security and overriding national interest. The industry structure must ensure existence of a competent regulator; and privatisation must not result in private monopolies. Where specific transactions breached these principles, that is not a failure of privatisation but the corruption and political irresponsibility that afflicts our nation!
But the bigger picture is that the private sector has been vastly more successful than government in Nigeria. Can anyone compare Oando and Conoil to Unipetrol and Nolchem? Would First Bank and UBA have survived (remember Continental Merchant, Allied Bank, IMB, NMB etc) government ownership? Can you compare Federal Palace Hotel, Golden Tulip Festac, Ikoyi Southern Sun, Notore and Eleme Petrochemicals to their rotten pre-privatisation predecessors? Does anyone miss the scandal-plagued, massively corrupt, pre-privatisation African Petroleum or NAFCON? Aren’t Nigerians aware that military rulers and bureaucrats used Aluminium Smelter Company and Ajaokuta Steel to enrich themselves? Can’t we see what difference private capital and management has made in telecommunications, financial services, aviation, newspapers, radio and television broadcasting, private universities, hotels etc? Do we miss the days when Nigerian Airways, Daily Times, New Nigerian, NTA, Radio Nigeria and inefficient and politicised government-owned banks were our only alternatives?
Does anyone want a return to the days when state-owned parastatals consumed billions of Naira every year without returning a kobo to the treasury? I don’t!!!
But they can’t say this, can they? So instead they focus on persuading us it has failed! That privatisation is over-rated and state-owned enterprises are better after all. It doesn’t bother them that massive corruption is endemic in state-owned enterprises, but they carefully scrutinize privatisations for opportunities to call the kettle black! And they succeed in persuading some naïve or hypocritical “comrades” (who own private professional practices; carry three mobile phones; work for private banks and telecommunication companies; and appear regularly on private broadcast stations!!!) to their cause!!! The current leader of this “Anti-Privatisation Coalition” is Vice-President Namadi Sambo, who ironically as Chair of the National Council on Privatisation (NCP) presides over privatisation. In Sambo’s view, “80percent of privatised firms moribund” (Thisday May 13, 2011) and “the process of privatisation has been going on for about ten years but has not been successful due to obvious non-performance” (Peoples Daily May 12, 2011). Meeting with the Russian Ambassador, Sambo re-stated that “many of the privatised companies have not met been able to meet the aspirations of government” (Punch June 28, 2011).
Unfortunately Sambo may have persuaded President Jonathan! The Nation newspaper’s screaming headline proclaimed “Privatisation has failed, says Jonathan”!! This at the inauguration of NCP!!! Jonathan’s late boss, Umaru Yar’adua reversed the privatisation of Refineries which were concluded just before ex-President Obasanjo handed over to him. Yar’adua also refused to proceed with the expected privatisation of unbundled Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) entities; and later formally outlined a policy championed by Rilwanu Lukman which rested the private sector electricity model in favour of state control. Should we then expect that Jonathan will abandon the Power Sector Roadmap and Electric Power Sector Reform Act 2005 both of which are based on privatisation of electricity generation and distribution, while transmission is billed to be concessioned to the private sector? Is the power road map dead on arrival, since we can logically expect Namadi Sambo to frustrate expected privatisations?
Interestingly a replay of Yar’adua’s strategy of stalling Obasanjo’s power reforms, (as Engineer Foluseke Somolu recently pointed out), through public disinformation that $16billion had been wasted on power; and Ndudi Elumelu’s House of Representatives Power Committee probe appears ongoing! The Senate has commenced its legislative agenda with an adhoc committee investigating privatisation!!! Senate President David Mark while inaugurating the panel declared that privatisation has not achieved the desired objectives and actually blamed privatisation for loss of jobs, financial deprivation and loss of revenue to the federal government!!! If the Senate had already reached these conclusions, why did it bother setting up an investigation? I urge Nigerians to be calm and circumspect in responding to the “alarming revelations” emerging from the Senate probe!!!
By all means, any clear infractions must be dealt with based on law and due process. Indeed this columnist has long identified conditions which make for successful privatisations-an independent technical agency overseeing the process; proper valuations of assets being disposed of; open, competitive and transparent bidding by all participants; a process that first establishes technical qualification of bidding firms before proceeding to competitive financial bidding; and the absence of corruption and political interference, except in cases of national security and overriding national interest. The industry structure must ensure existence of a competent regulator; and privatisation must not result in private monopolies. Where specific transactions breached these principles, that is not a failure of privatisation but the corruption and political irresponsibility that afflicts our nation!
But the bigger picture is that the private sector has been vastly more successful than government in Nigeria. Can anyone compare Oando and Conoil to Unipetrol and Nolchem? Would First Bank and UBA have survived (remember Continental Merchant, Allied Bank, IMB, NMB etc) government ownership? Can you compare Federal Palace Hotel, Golden Tulip Festac, Ikoyi Southern Sun, Notore and Eleme Petrochemicals to their rotten pre-privatisation predecessors? Does anyone miss the scandal-plagued, massively corrupt, pre-privatisation African Petroleum or NAFCON? Aren’t Nigerians aware that military rulers and bureaucrats used Aluminium Smelter Company and Ajaokuta Steel to enrich themselves? Can’t we see what difference private capital and management has made in telecommunications, financial services, aviation, newspapers, radio and television broadcasting, private universities, hotels etc? Do we miss the days when Nigerian Airways, Daily Times, New Nigerian, NTA, Radio Nigeria and inefficient and politicised government-owned banks were our only alternatives?
Does anyone want a return to the days when state-owned parastatals consumed billions of Naira every year without returning a kobo to the treasury? I don’t!!!
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
The Extended Tenure Distraction
President Goodluck Jonathan was reported to have stated at the Presidential Inauguration Lecture delivered by Professor Ladipo Adamolekun just before his inauguration on May 29 that in his view, four years was too short to achieve transformation. The statement was unexpected from a president just elected overwhelmingly on a mandate of “transformation” and upon whom Nigerians had invested hopes for national renewal. Jonathan has now in effect launched a campaign to persuade the National Assembly, the political elite, State Governors and legislatures on the desirability of a constitutional amendment to extend the tenure of the President and Governors from the current four to between five and seven years with no prospect of second terms.
I have since been bewildered as I pondered how the president and his advisers considered this issue his most important policy and legislative priority? Even though I would prefer to believe the president’s assertion that he doesn’t intend benefitting from the proposed change, the question remains why this matter occupies such elevated position on the president’s agenda? And the wisdom, from the point of view of strategy, of the president personally making the case; the consequence been that Jonathan has squandered political capital so early in his term on a debate of at best doubtful value! This column, as well as many other commentators and stakeholders have spent time articulating an agenda for the Jonathan administration covering power, transportation, infrastructure, economic diversification, unemployment and poverty, education and health, housing mortgage and land reform etc-did anyone identify extended presidential and gubernatorial single tenures as an important national imperative?
Beyond misplaced priorities, the case being made for longer tenures appears shallow and simplistic!!! The logic advanced is that extending presidential and governorship tenures would reduce cost and ferocious competition associated with four-year electoral cycles and allow office holders focus on performance without re-election worries. These arguments do not stand much scrutiny! The 2007 elections, probably the worst in Nigeria’s chequered democratic history was conducted by ex-President Obasanjo who wasn’t a candidate. Yet it was a “do-or-die” matter because like all incumbents, Obasanjo was interested in his succession! So were ex-Governors Gbenga Daniel, Bukola Saraki and Ali Modu Sherriff of Ogun, Kwara and Borno states respectively in the last governorship elections even though they weren’t contestants, having served mandatory two terms. The point is, in corrupt political systems (particularly), departing incumbents and parties remain interested in succession irrespective of whether specific individuals are running!
The prospect of exclusion from political power for five to seven years may in fact have the unintended consequence of making intra and inter-party competition for political power a more deadly fight-to-finish! The knowledge that another opportunity is only four years away moderates desperation to win elections at all cost. I worry also about the consequences of electing a wrong governor or president! The electorate is condemned to five, six or seven years of drift and stagnation once it makes the error of electing a wrong leader. Given that most Nigerians regard most of those they have elected as failures in office, I wonder whether they have any reason to project that giving longer non-renewable terms will make a positive difference. The more likely consequence is that a corrupt, incompetent or irresponsible leader with has no prospect of re-election will become totally irredeemable, lacking no incentive to attempt better performance. In my view, six or seven years of mis-governance may amount to a generational calamity!!!
In a yet-developing democracy, rife with corruption, self-aggrandisement and unaccountable leadership, this proposal is likely to weaken, rather than strengthen our democracy! Leaders will get more insulated from the voters; the electorate will further lose “power” over their rulers; and elected officers will become near monarchs! The proposal assumes that the over-riding motivation for seeking political office in Nigeria is the quest for service, with the political system and elections being a distraction rather than the other way round! Most Nigerians will for good reason, contest such an assumption. The truth appears to be that many seek office for pecuniary gain, and may simply appropriate the gains of longer tenures in cash, rather than focused service. A truly committed leader would excel in four years, and the voters will reward him with a second term as they did for Fashola in Lagos.
I concede however that there may be need to debate the more comprehensive proposals contained in the draft 1995 Constitution (which never became law) which recognised six geo-political zones; created the offices of President, Vice-President, Prime-Minister, and Deputy Prime Minister; created five-year single terms for president and governors; recognised the principles of zoning and rotation of political offices among geo-political zones and senatorial districts; created a 30-year transition period for such zoning and rotation to operate; created a process to ensure succession from the same zone in the event of succession or death of an incumbent; and recommended proportional “all-party” governments to eliminate the “winner-takes-all” system which is the real cause of deadly political competition. Even though these proposals emerge from the “national cake sharing” paradigm of the Nigerian nation, they are worth re-examining to see if they offer any value.
I have since been bewildered as I pondered how the president and his advisers considered this issue his most important policy and legislative priority? Even though I would prefer to believe the president’s assertion that he doesn’t intend benefitting from the proposed change, the question remains why this matter occupies such elevated position on the president’s agenda? And the wisdom, from the point of view of strategy, of the president personally making the case; the consequence been that Jonathan has squandered political capital so early in his term on a debate of at best doubtful value! This column, as well as many other commentators and stakeholders have spent time articulating an agenda for the Jonathan administration covering power, transportation, infrastructure, economic diversification, unemployment and poverty, education and health, housing mortgage and land reform etc-did anyone identify extended presidential and gubernatorial single tenures as an important national imperative?
Beyond misplaced priorities, the case being made for longer tenures appears shallow and simplistic!!! The logic advanced is that extending presidential and governorship tenures would reduce cost and ferocious competition associated with four-year electoral cycles and allow office holders focus on performance without re-election worries. These arguments do not stand much scrutiny! The 2007 elections, probably the worst in Nigeria’s chequered democratic history was conducted by ex-President Obasanjo who wasn’t a candidate. Yet it was a “do-or-die” matter because like all incumbents, Obasanjo was interested in his succession! So were ex-Governors Gbenga Daniel, Bukola Saraki and Ali Modu Sherriff of Ogun, Kwara and Borno states respectively in the last governorship elections even though they weren’t contestants, having served mandatory two terms. The point is, in corrupt political systems (particularly), departing incumbents and parties remain interested in succession irrespective of whether specific individuals are running!
The prospect of exclusion from political power for five to seven years may in fact have the unintended consequence of making intra and inter-party competition for political power a more deadly fight-to-finish! The knowledge that another opportunity is only four years away moderates desperation to win elections at all cost. I worry also about the consequences of electing a wrong governor or president! The electorate is condemned to five, six or seven years of drift and stagnation once it makes the error of electing a wrong leader. Given that most Nigerians regard most of those they have elected as failures in office, I wonder whether they have any reason to project that giving longer non-renewable terms will make a positive difference. The more likely consequence is that a corrupt, incompetent or irresponsible leader with has no prospect of re-election will become totally irredeemable, lacking no incentive to attempt better performance. In my view, six or seven years of mis-governance may amount to a generational calamity!!!
In a yet-developing democracy, rife with corruption, self-aggrandisement and unaccountable leadership, this proposal is likely to weaken, rather than strengthen our democracy! Leaders will get more insulated from the voters; the electorate will further lose “power” over their rulers; and elected officers will become near monarchs! The proposal assumes that the over-riding motivation for seeking political office in Nigeria is the quest for service, with the political system and elections being a distraction rather than the other way round! Most Nigerians will for good reason, contest such an assumption. The truth appears to be that many seek office for pecuniary gain, and may simply appropriate the gains of longer tenures in cash, rather than focused service. A truly committed leader would excel in four years, and the voters will reward him with a second term as they did for Fashola in Lagos.
I concede however that there may be need to debate the more comprehensive proposals contained in the draft 1995 Constitution (which never became law) which recognised six geo-political zones; created the offices of President, Vice-President, Prime-Minister, and Deputy Prime Minister; created five-year single terms for president and governors; recognised the principles of zoning and rotation of political offices among geo-political zones and senatorial districts; created a 30-year transition period for such zoning and rotation to operate; created a process to ensure succession from the same zone in the event of succession or death of an incumbent; and recommended proportional “all-party” governments to eliminate the “winner-takes-all” system which is the real cause of deadly political competition. Even though these proposals emerge from the “national cake sharing” paradigm of the Nigerian nation, they are worth re-examining to see if they offer any value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)