Jonathan Assures International Investors On Security

President Goodluck Jonathan Thursday reiterated his assurance to investors that Nigeria is winning the war against terrorism and the country’s climate is conducive for investments.

He spoke at the opening ceremony of the 14th meeting of the Honorary International Investor Council (HIIC) held at the Banquet Hall of the Presidential Villa.

According to the President, with the declaration of state of emergency in the north eastern states of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa, the country has witnessed tremendous landmark in terms of national security.

President Jonathan said the remarkable support from the local population of the affected states since the emergency rule was proclaimed was an indication that the activities of the terrorists did not enjoy the support of the local population.

Jonathan said what the country has been witnessing in the last few years had nothing to do with religion but activities of internationally backed terror groups determined to destabilise the nation.

While underscoring the importance of security to the attraction of Investments into the country, President Jonathan emphasised that his administration will leave no stone unturned to guarantee safety of lives, property and investments.

He said the nation’s economy is growing, but he would like to see it improved to an appreciable level of double digit growth.

The President informed the Council that his recent presentation of a mid-term report of performance of his administration on May 29 was to correct the misrepresentation being put in the public domain about the regime, adding that government will encourage the growth of micro and medium scale business in addressing the high rate of unemployment in the country.

In the area of education, president Jonathan said the federal government would liaise with state governments to end the menace of high school drop out.

He assured that the federal government would organise a forum of stakeholders from federal and states levels on the problem after resolving the political impasse within the Nigeria Governors’ Forum.

He assured that government will continue to work hard to address the problem of oil theft in the Niger Delta region.

Earlier in her remarks, HIIC Coordinator, Chalker said that government must take pro-active action to address the problem of oil theft which she said was “diminishing income into the treasury”.

She also charged the government to double its drive on the development of infrastructure, roads, rails, power, which she said “are key to solving other problems”.

Minister of Trade and Investment, Dr Olusegun Aganga in his remarks said there was significant increase in foreign direct investment in the economy, adding that the petrochemical sub-sector attracted over 20 billion dollar investments with over 8 billion dollar contribution by the Dangote group.

Aganga said the investments in petro-chemical have encouraged value addition into the oil and gas sector and generate employment.

The minister said that in the last six months, the telecommunication sector had attracted over 6.9 billion dollars noting that there had been influx of foreign investments from Brazil, Canada and Netherland while Turkey had signed an agreement to build an industrial park in the country.

He said some of the investors have, however, been asking for increased incentives to invest in the rural areas, while some complain of skill-gaps.

Aganga decried the situation where many Nigerians were unable to take advantage of the investment opportunities in the country because of lack of access to fund.

He said government must designed programmes for local investors to access long term finance to encourage re-distribution of wealth.

Present at the meeting were Vice President Namadi Sambo, Ministers of Finance, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Aviation, Stellaa Oduah, Power, Prrof. Chinedu Nebo, Agriculture, Dr Akinwumi Adesina, Petroleum Resources, Diezani Allison-Maadueke and Internal Affairs, Abba Moro.

Some foreign investors at the meeting were Hruki Hayashi, Simon Hayford, Olivier Suinat, Guillaume Roux, Jacques des Grottes, Andrew Brown and David Haworth.

Nigerian business men at the meeting include, Aliko Dangote, Emmanuel Ijewere, Femi Otedola, Umar Murtallab and Sam Jonah.

The HIIC which is coordinated by Baroness Lynda Chalker, was inaugurated in 2004 as a Presidential advisory council to attract global financial players in to the Nigerian economy.

The Council is charged with the responsibilities of looking in to Nigeria investment environment, advice on areas to improve on and attract businessmen across the world to take interest in investing in Nigeria.

Allison-Madueke: Jonathan not a weak president

External factors and local impediments tried to scuttle President Goodluck Jonathan’s ambition of repositioning the country in the first two years of his administration, a book edited by the Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Allison-Madueke has stated.

In the book titled, “Goodluck Ebele Jonathan: Champion of Women,” the minister also said Jonathan was neither a weak nor indecisive president.

It said the psyche of Nigerians who held that view had been affected by long years of military rule that made them believe that leaders must be aggressive.

It added that with his consuming passion for the progress of the country, there was no doubt that the President was leading Nigeria to a good place.

The book was presented on Wednesday at a mid-term presidential dinner held as part of activities marking the second anniversary of Jonathan’s administration.

Although the book did not identify the “external factors” that compounded the administration’s woes, it listed the activities of members of the violent Islamic sect, Boko Haram, in the North and kidnappers in the South as some of the local impediments.

It added that it was impossible for the Federal Government to separate the external factors from local impediments.

According to the book, technological advancements including the use of mobile phones contributed to the problems.

It stated that the first two years of Jonathan in the saddle of affairs were full of threatening challenges capable of making the President lose focus.

The book said however, the challenges made the President more inspired to steer the ship of the nation to a safe haven.

The book read, “The first two years of President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s administration were met with tough, even threatening challenges.

“The Boko Haram insurgence in the North and the spate of callous kidnappings in the South could quite easily have shifted all focus away from the President’s clearly outlined transformation agenda.

“Ironically, however, the President seems even more inspired to steer the ship of the state to a safe point where the dignity of every Nigerian is preserved; a point where our right to contribute to productive decision-making is assured, where our balance of payment is no longer in deficit, where we do not consume more than we produce, where every Nigerian can boast a healthy standard of living, where our women take centre stage in the whole process of social and economic transformation.

“While the local impediments to the President’s ambitions are unrelenting, external factors have compounded the matter further, making it impossible to separate one from the other.

“We now live in a world where a click of your mobile phone takes you to the global marketplace. This may seem adventurous and exciting to some, but the impact on the local market is incalculable.”

While reeling out some of the achievements of the administration in two years, the book stated that Jonathan was determined to fulfil all his electoral promises in the lifespan of his administration.

It described the President as an honourable man who had always been reluctant to say in public what he did not plan to put into practice.

According to the book, Jonathan is already on course to deliver in excess of his commitments across all sectors of the economy.

A Case for Strong Institutions

All men of goodwill who look forward to a more progressive and equitable world appreciate the tremendous good Transparency International, TI does with its periodic verdict on nations and institutions across the globe. Sometimes I just wonder what our world would look like without watchdogs like Transparency International that continually reminds us about the way we are.

Recently, TI released the 2013 Global Corruption Barometer, GCB and rated political parties and the Nigeria Police as the most corrupt institutions in Nigeria. TI’s 2013 GCB is a product of interviews with a total number of 114,000 respondents across 107 countries between September 2012 and March 2013. The Berlin-based organisation said the primary aim of the 2013 GCB report was to explore respondents’ personal experiences of paying bribes for government services on one hand and on the other, to gauge perception of the integrity of major public institutions. There is also TI’s desire towards a better understanding of the willingness and disposition of citizens in countries under review to fight corruption.

From TI’s investigation, Nigeria is among the 88 countries where anti-corruption effort is ineffectual. This verdict is ominous. Yet it has not provided leads or talking points in our media. This important issue was merely reported and left alone. I am sure I did not see follow-ups. So why are we not paying the needed attention to this uncomplimentary report which has the capacity of stalling our investment drive and growth efforts?

If corruption is any abuse of a position of trust, either by an individual or an institution to gain an unfair advantage, then this report by TI is incontrovertible. I know corruption has many layers but this report reminds me again of some of our nation’s recent experiences that are not only irritating but reprehensible and regrettable.

Two institutions that characterise the existence and flourishing of democracy in any country are the party system and the institution of parliament. If one of the institutions, political parties carry the moral burden of being the den of corruption, then it is right to conclude that our democracy is sick. The other institution that shapes the growth of democracy is the police which help primarily in the maintenance of law and order in a purely democratic setting. This institution has been described in the TI report as the bastion of corruption with no ray of hope.

If these two institutions (political parties and the Police) that I consider most critical to the growth and survival of democracy and our country Nigeria has been described in such very uncomplimentary terms by TI GCB report, then where lies our hope?

Have our political parties derailed from its lofty objective of seeking to influence or entirely control government course of action, usually by putting forward candidates with aligned political views? Your guess is as good as mine. But I hate to think like a few of our compatriots who are of the opinion that Nigeria is in reverse gear. Of late, I just noticed that some us are becoming more romantic about our past republics, particularly the Second Republic politics. Despite the shortcomings of that era, it still remains one of the most colourful and vibrant republics, that is if the focus is on political parties.

Many still remember principal characters of that era like Augustus Meredith Adisa Akinloye, national chairman of National Party of Nigeria, NPN and how he and his colleagues at the commanding height of NPN leadership held sway on every party issue. At the time, Alhaji Shehu Shagari was a member of NPN and president of Nigeria, yet he submitted himself to party rules and regulations. All that changed with the emergence of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999 and as they say, the rest is history.

Today, political parties are extensions of individuals’ or group’s personal estates. There is complete absence of principles, discipline, solidarity, group interest and camaraderie. A party member could be sanctioned at the flimsiest of excuses. While some have been suspended for their perceived popularity, others have suffered similar fates either for fraternizing with members of other parties or for holding a different view. At the bottom of the scramble we see in our parties is the desire to highjack party machinery for personal and selfish gains, and corruption is always the destination.

Yes, abuse of position of trust is corruption and this is prevalent in our parties. Nigeria’s political parties must therefore look inwards and seek ways of ensuring that there is a level playing ground for every member. And to avoid a repeat of such an unflattering report in future like this one from TI, our parties must return to their traditional roles of seeking to influence government through their members with aligned political views. They must also stop forthwith, all forms of witch-hunt and intimidation against vocal members and perceived enemies.

For the Nigeria Police, I am not under any illusions, it is a long walk. TI’s verdict therefore is something that is already known to Nigerian people.

The police force represents everything but the same purpose it is meant to serve. The problem of Nigeria Police is not all about the quality of persons that populate it or the culture but also of funding which is a creation of the Nigerian state. The state that does not fund its police and yet still expects optimal policing is a misnomer or a fallacy.

For instance, for 2013, the budget of the Nigeria Police is N311, 148, 387,311($1.6bn). This budget is meant to police a population of over 160 million with a force strength of 330,000 officers and men. This contrasts sharply with the budget of Austin, a county in the state of Texas with a population of 843,162 people. The Austin Police Department has a budget of $284.4m which is about N45, 504,000,000 with staff strength of 2,300.

Whereas it cost an average of $123,478 to keep a policeman in Austin, Texas, it cost $5,893 to train and maintain a Nigerian policeman within the same period. It cost 21 times the same amount used for an average Nigerian policeman to train and equip a policeman in Austin, Texas. The implication of this comparative poor funding can be seen in training, moral, conduct, equipment and skill of the average Nigerian policeman. Worse still, an ill-equipped policeman in Nigeria is expected to police about 500 persons whereas a policeman in Austin who is well equipped and has access to modern technology will be policing about 366 persons. Thus it will be sheer madness to expect similar level of performance between a local Austin police and his counterpart federal police in Nigeria.

Every day, one is confronted with a plethora of woes of officers and men of the force. I am aware that more often than not, the individual police officer sources his or her kits from boots to uniforms and other accessories. It is also common knowledge that their take-home pay cannot really take them home in the real sense of that word. In barracks and duty posts, issues of low morale, welfare, training, lack of modern equipment and more echo. I acknowledge the fact that some state governments have done well for the police yet it is not anywhere near the ideal or what our expectation is from the force.

Under these circumstances, corruption will naturally grow and fester. Officers and men of the Nigeria Police live among us and are part of us, with needs and aspirations like any of us. They say every society deserves its police, perhaps our police is a reflection of our reality. But we must halt this reality if we hope to build a virile nation where safety of lives and property, law and order is a national priority.

The political crisis in Rivers State today is direct fallout from failure of the police which is predicated on the many challenges facing the force. We are all witnesses to the flagrant disregard and disrespect of Governor Chibuike Amaechi, an elected public officer by Mbu Joseph Mbu, Rivers State Commissioner of Police. Mbu as confirmed by the Nigerian Senate and House of Representatives has consistently worked at cross-purposes with the governor, thereby compromising the security situation in the state. This is explainable. Mbu and the police he represents will prefer to serve those who have the power to appoint or remove them instead of the Nigerian people as contemplated by the Nigerian constitution. Nigerians also watched the theatre of absurd that played out in Rivers State when five out 32 members attempted to impeach the Speaker of Rivers State House of Assembly. Sadly, while the assembly was on fire, the commissioner of police, like Emperor Nero, fiddled. Nigerians also saw how four Northern governors who were on reconciliatory mission to Rivers State were pelted and held hostage by hired thugs at the Port Harcourt Airport under the watchful eyes of the police. And in Rivers State, most people are of the view that the police high command is exacerbating the crisis in the state because of certain interests that must be protected at all costs.

Corruption therefore is at the root of institutional decadence, dereliction of duty, deficit of professionalism and political meddlesomeness that has characterised the Nigeria Police of today as can be seen in the case of Commissioner Mbu in Rivers State, a classic case of a political policeman who does not know his bounds.

As we consolidate our democratic experience, let me say that we must strengthen our institutions. The police for instance, must be structured to serve the interest of Nigerians and not the selfish and narrow desires of a few. It is a sad commentary that our political parties and the police emerged as TI’s most corrupt institutions in Nigeria. This without doubt, calls for deep reflection. Nigerians therefore must work towards building strong institutions; this is the only way to guarantee justice, fairness, equity, peace and the rule of law.

Hon. Dakuku Peterside, member of House of Representatives and Chairman, House Committee on Petroleum Resources, Downstream represents Andoni-Opobo/Nkoro Federal Constituency

What’s the economist’s business in our business?

 Beyond its strong condemnation of The Economist’s meddlesomeness in what are purely domestic affairs, I believe the National Assembly should, as a matter of national importance, come up with a drastic legislation against the circulation, purchasing, possession or reading of the arrant foreign Satanic Verses being disseminated by publications like the Financial Times and others in our country. If not, these foreign journals will end up corrupting the minds of Nigeria’s laid back, talk-no-evil, see-no-evil, law-abiding citizens — those who have come to accept pervasive corruption and blatant impunity as directive principles of state policy. Come to think of it, these publications are fond of raking up well-interred dirt, crying more than the bereaved. What else must we do to knock it into the empty brains of these neo-colonialists that, as a sovereign nation, we do not need them to tell us how to spend, distribute, preserve or waste our God-given wealth? Shouldn’t they be satisfied that, in our magnanimity, we have embraced democracy and, contrary to their doomsday predictions, all the structures of governance are working at full throttle?

I have often wondered why these foreign journals, with hack writers who know little or nothing about our customary reverence for political office holders, take delight in writing what they are not paid to write. The fact that they get into the living rooms of our leaders at the snap of the fingers should not translate into an abuse of that privilege. Anyway, I don’t blame them. I blame our leaders who would gladly offer an arm and a leg to grace the pages of these foreign magazines or allow themselves to be asked silly questions by correspondents working with foreign cable television stations in the name of international publicity. If only they would keep faith with the local media and its people-friendly mode of grilling the Oga at the top, an unknown quantity like The Economist would not come up with that scandalous verdict that our ‘most distinguished’ Senators and highly revered ‘honourables’ receive the highest salaries and allowances in the world for doing nothing! In fact, I am utterly disturbed that, some three weeks after the publication of this despicable news, the leadership of the National Assembly has not instructed a team of senior lawyers to file a multi-million dollar suit at the International Court of Justice against the economically-dumb The Economist! How could they sit by and watch these people go away with this criminal breach of trust and callous violation of the oath of secrecy in revealing a pay packet that has been shrouded in secrecy for years?

Okay, I understand that a grumpy spokesperson of the Senate, EnyinayaAbaribe, has condemned the publication, describing it as misleading and incorrect. But is that all he could say to these imperialists who are bent on derailing this smooth-running democratic train? Mr.Abaribe’s counterpart in the House of Representatives, Zakari Mohammed, has even gone further to make clarifications between what is actually earned as salaries and the humongous amount being spent as ‘running costs.’ That, I also say, is begging the question. Whether the figures being bandied are exaggerated or not; whether they are sourced from the data obtained from the International Monetary Fund or any of those ubiquitous transparency agencies or not, it is important to note that these two lawmakers did the nation a great favour by refusing to disclose the real amount that our lawmakers draw from the national till – a reward for obliging us with their largely self-serving services in a nation that a Professor of Economics dubbed the world’s costliest democracy. They have candidly advised those who have no jobs to do other than prying into what our ‘distinguished’ lawmakers earn, to take a stroll to the office of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) where, I assume, a dutiful desk officer would be waiting to hand over copies of the ‘true’ pay package to them with a warm smile etched on her face!

Had it happened in years gone by, the publishers of The Economist could have been charged with treasonable felony and deliberate attempt to incite the people against their patriotic leaders. In fact, they could suffer the pleasure of having their heads shaven with broken bottles!What, for crying out loud, is their business if our legislators earn a basic salary of $189,500 per annum (N30.6m)? Why cry wolf if our “highest paid lawmakers in the world” take home approximately 116 times the country’s GDP per person of $1,600? Shouldn’t Nigeria be commended for its generosity to those who are sacrificing their time in the hallowed chambers, just to earn a measly $189,500 annually, which is estimated to be 52 per cent higher than what Kenyan legislators, who are the second highest paid lawmakers, earn? Oh, were they expecting ordinary Kenya to beat us in this race of official extravagance? Never!

If we must spill it out, it is, to say the least, insulting for anyone to demean the office of the Nigerian lawmaker. And if we don’t stop this trend, the time will come when these guys will take up the Presidency, lampooning it for earning in a quarter what President Barack Obama takes home in a year and wasting billions on owanbe parties! Have they suddenly forgotten that the circumstances are different and, therefore, there should be no basis for comparison? If they had taken the pains to understudy why political office holders get paid what they termed outrageous salaries, I believe they would have called for an increment in the packages.

It is my considered opinion that our lawmakers are grossly underpaid for obvious reasons. First, Nigeria is not Kenya which depends on mere tourism and coffee production to run its economy. We are a major oil producing country that not only flares multi-billion dollar gas but also loses millions of dollars to daily theft of crude oil. Second, politics is an investment here and those who go into it and succeed have a right to expect huge returns on capital. Third, the political class is expected to conform to a tradition of being limitlessly liquid in cash, sassy in outlook and very bohemian in nature.

Even the economic juggernauts at The Economist would agree with me that these expectations require loads of money. That’s why we pamper our lawmakers or any other political office holder for that matter. Unlike Obama whose children attend schools in the United States, our lawmakers’ children need to be properly educated in Ivy Leagues schools abroad. Does that come cheap? Unlike the Queen of England and Prime Minister David Cameron who fly commercial British Airways, our lawmakers either fly presidential jets, chartered flight or buy First Class tickets on routine basis. It doesn’t come cheap either! Unlike Mandela who receives medical treatment in a South African hospital, our lawmakers cannot afford to die in a Nigerian hospital. That demeans their status. If they must die, it has to be in the best hospitals in Germany, United Kingdom or the US. Do the yamheads at The Economist know how important this tradition is? Unlike other leaders who retire to farm houses, our lawmakers must own mansions in, at least, three foreign countries, their states and the Federal Capital Territory! If we don’t close our eyes to the ‘running costs’, oversight functions that come with standard ‘gifts’ and funds budgeted for ‘capacity building courses’ in far flung countries, and a freshly minted life pensions for principal officers that may soon be smuggled into our Constitution, how would they attain the enviable position of being the world’s richest lawmakers? Do these interlopers in our private affairs know how legislatives aides, paramours and numerous jobless citizens who take solace in being hangars-on rely on the crumbs from our legislators’ tables for survival?

Don’t get it twisted. It is not as if we are eternally ungrateful or that we are blind to the yeoman efforts being made by these foreign agencies to open our eyes to the crying rot within. All we are saying is that if official methods cannot take a prize for meeting the needs of the common man, we shouldn’t be prosecuted for coming tops in the area of authorised profligacy. We already have a place in the Guinness Book of World Records! In any case, Naija, as they say in my area, no dey carry last! And so when next The Economist tries meddling in our business, we should ask them: if we don’t take care of our over-pampered fat cats in politics, who will?

US invests $5 million to strengthen Nigeria’s private sector

The US Consul General, Jeffrey Hawkins, said the US government has invested a total sum of $5 million to strengthen the Nigerian private sector, especially the energy sector in recent times.

Hawkins made this disclosure while speaking as a guest in a television magazine programme in Lagos.

According to him, “The idea is to address some of the key problems in Nigeria, five of these have topped the list, we have regional security, transparency and democracy in government, energy and investment, agriculture and food security and the Niger delta region.”

He said that America has so much at stake in Nigeria, as Nigeria is the 2nd largest investment destination in Africa and Nigeria’s success is tied to America’s.

He added that three million dollars has been spent every year to assist law enforcement agencies like EFCC and NDLEA.

Mr. Hawkins maintained that Nigeria is very important to the USA and whether the president makes a stop at Nigeria on his African visits or not is not important to the relationship they have already established

Governance: What is the MIF up to?

  If it is meant to be a joke, then someone should tell the yamheads at the Mo Ibrahim Foundation that it’s one joke carried too far. How can they rub our face on granite and expect us to smile? Even a blind man here knows that there is a ‘transformation agenda’ on stream. It is moving at a frenetic pace and the fever is catching fast. Its impact can be felt in all areas of our economy, sports, politics, and social life and even, in all our homes. When President Goodluck Jonathan assumed power some years back, he took time to outline his vision and even though Nigerians have less than vague perceptions of it, those who are close to him would tell you that he has never wavered on any of those visions. A democrat par excellence, Jonathan, unlike others before him, has allowed the opposition to thrive. He is not one to hound critics out of town, send security forces after them, revoke their plots of land or silence them with subtle threat. You can hardly come across a gentleman with nobler intentions than the Otuoke-born leader of Africa’s largest gathering of the black race.

In case members of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation’s Independence Prize Committee don’t know, they do the continent no good in the yearly ritual of foraging for former African leaders worthy of its $5 million Prize for Excellence in Leadership. What is a mere $5 million to the leader of a country where crude oil worth billions of dollars routinely disappear every week? What is the point when there is an abundance of living legends in government houses scattered across the continent? Okay, maybe it would be difficult to push an argument that the legendary wizard of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, who recently won a moon slide election that may see him die in office, should be given the prize. Of course, he may not have been a success story in terms of changing the fortunes of his people. But no one can deny his first class grade in excelling in all elections he participated in. What riles Knucklehead is the MIF’s statement on the Nigerian nation. It is shocking, to say the least, that in spite of the unprecedented transformation and silent revolution going on in Nigeria, all that the MIF could come up with was a warped rating which places us in 41st position out of the 52 countries it claimed to have rated. If we may ask, what were the parameters used in this assessment? Who sponsored it? Which of the political parties did the members belong to? Was there any ulterior motive to play politics since 2015 is fast approaching? How were the members selected? What marking scheme, if any, did they use? And how truly ‘independent’ were the members of the MIF committee? As usual, Nigerian government must have seen the hands of the opposition in this rating.

If these guys were not specially selected to denigrate the highly respected and infallible office of the Nigerian President, they would have taken time to visit Nigeria in order to have a fair assessment of what is on the ground. Such visit would have afforded them the opportunity to meet one-on-one with our amiable President and experience our rare hospitality. We are a grateful nation and we do not mind doling out huge gifts that will enable assessors see our truly good side.I have no doubt that the story would have been different if they had allowed our Minister of Information to take them on a two-day good governance tour of this construction jungle. In a country where the citizenry’s adrenaline daily gets pumped with excitement about the uncommon leadership acumen of President Jonathan and his team, it is befuddling that the MIF would rather see an infinitesimal increase of 0.8 per cent in governance impact since year 2000 as the only cheering news in that damning report. And as if that was not bad enough, we were ranked 13th out of 16 in the West African region with a score of 43.4 per cent which is even lower than the regional average of 52.5 per cent!

The MIF buried its teeth deeper into the bones by insisting that its 2013 Ibrahim Index for African Governance (IIAG) indicated that Nigeria performed woefully in three out of the four categories of governance which included safety and rule of law, participation and human rights, sustainable economic opportunity and human development. Thankfully and in spite of the burgeoning youth unemployment, the country was ranked 33 out of the 52 countries rated. It was 42nd in safety and rule of law and 49th in personal safety. Be that as it may, I assume the implication of our rating in the personal safety sub-category is not lost on us. Does it mean that we are still sitting on a tinderbox sans the ‘achievements’ that have been recorded by this administration in the fight against terror? Is that all that we could get from the billions of dollars invested on security in the last three years?

Curiously, those who should speak against this callous, damaging and politically-motivated MIF’s rating appear to have grown cold feet since it was released. Truth is, we have fistfuls of bad news already. So, an additional one can be met with unreserved indifference. Or, could it be that these characters are simply tired of reeling out the President’s achievements to a deaf audience? Or, maybe they have chosen to ignore the snarl of the enemies of the state from outside? Whatever it is, I believe that they need to counter this foul smell oozing out of the chambers of the MIF with the sweet-scented fragrance of those uncommon achievements being baked in President Jonathan’s kitchen. By now, they should be tired of throwing umbrage and launching a rash of abusive languages on local politicians at every drop of a critique of Jonathan’s presumed cluelessness in power. Sometimes, they need to export their atrocious arrogance and atavistic brashness to the backyards of interloping busy-bodies like the MIF and its ilk.

The other day, those poor folks at the Transparency International attempted to cry more than the bereaved by claiming a total failure in the fight against corruption. But we shouted them down that we were on top of the situation. Today, the MIF, frustrated that no African leader (dead, living or even serving) is working towards winning its miserly prize of $5 million, has turned its focus on Nigeria. Does the MIF think anyone gives a hoot about that ‘princely’ prize when it is what most domestic aides in some government houses package as birthday gift to their paramours? It rates us low on safety, rule of law, economic development, participation and human rights. It says that Liberia (a country that we saved from the ravages of war and poverty) and Angola have improved rapidly since 2000. Do they expect us to swallow this bitter, demeaning pill and pretend that all is well?

Don’t get it wrong. I have lived in this country long enough to understand that things are not that rosy. I know that, as I write this, government tertiary institutions have been under lock and key for 110 days due to lecturers’ strike. I know that the uncommon and gargantuan corruption in Nigeria has been wrestled into submission by largely indifferent government officials who claimed to have entered the ring with it. I know that the standards of medical facilities have improved tremendously, now that we spend a meagre N250bn on medical tourism annually. I know medical doctors are on strike, seeking improved pay package. I am also conversant with the billions of dollars that have been spent on the provision of megawatts of darkness across the nation. How could I have forgotten how the more than 70 per cent of our poor citizens forage for faith in the most agonising circumstances? I have heard countless stories of deferred dreams and broken promises in the face of uncommon existential challenges. I read about the millions who are out of school and the millions who have certificates but couldn’t get jobs anywhere. Everywhere you turn, there is always that large image of the stupendously rich trampling on the poor. All this has become the routine of daily living in Nigeria.

But, it is not all bad news. If it were that bad, then saintly people like Dr.DoyinOkupe would not be sticking out their necks for Jonathan or any other ‘leader’ for that matter. This is why their silence on this MIF’s killer punch is deleterious to the wellbeing of all of us. Okupe and all those who hold the many files of the President’s countless achievements would be doing him a world of good by barking back at the MIF people now! The attack should be swift and rash! They need to show them that this latest report may jeopardise the works of a man who, in less than three years in government, has done more than what the past winners did in their respective countries. They include the likes of President JoaquimChissano of Mozambique (2007), President Festus Mogae of Botswana (2008), President Pedro Pires of Cape Verde (2011) and President Nelson Mandela of South Africa. These men were, no doubt, icons of good governance. We do not begrudge them. But we insist that what we have in Nigeria is an extraordinary leader that deserves praises from the MIF not such knocks and questionable governance index that pushes him down under!

Thankfully, Okupe has the facts at his fingertips. It is his responsibility to make those facts available to the MIF’s committee in order to stave off this national embarrassment. Were they aware that this government has spent over N453.8 billion from the Subsidy Reinvestment Programme (SURE-P) on the complete turnaround of roads? Did they have the figures of our humongous spending on education, health, housing, welfare and youth empowerment, amnesty programme for Niger Delta youth, power, energy and infrastructures? Have they been told about how all parts of the country now enjoy a minimum of 20-hour electricity supply daily? Were they kept abreast of the valiant fight against corruption and the engagement of incorruptible aides, ministers and hangers-on by the President? Lest I forget, we should also remind these Mo Ibrahim Foundation jokers that all the ministers in charge of various sectors of our economy have acquitted themselves creditably well in the eyes of the common citizen that they now spend millions of naira buying bullet proof vehicles, flying in private jets or living in heavily-fortified mansions! By the time we bombard the MIF’s office with these and many other monumental achievements too numerous to mention here, those guys would indeed feel the impact of a choking breath of fresh air that has turned otherwise right-thinking persons into high-decibel praise-singers! Will the president’s accredited official megaphones take up the challenge now?

National Conference debate: Between Jonathan, Tinubu

 Two days ago President Goodluck Jonathan used the occasion of his goodwill Eid el-Kabir message to Muslims in the country to respond to those who have dismissed his decision to hold a national conference as diversionary and self-seeking. “Those who continue to say that our initiative is diversionary or aimed at promoting certain political agenda,” he said, “are in error.”

Of all the critics of the President’s new found conversion to holding a national conference – until his announcement of the initiative during his October 1 Independence Day speech, the man had been decidedly cool, if not completely hostile, to the idea – the presidency seemed to consider Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, former governor of Lagos State, putative leader of the South-West and leading chieftain of the new opposition party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), as the most intolerable.

On arrival in Lagos two weeks ago, fresh from his extended medical trip abroad, he had dismissed the President’s initiative as impractical and insincere. “Where,” the Asiwaju had asked, obviously rhetorically, “is the capability, where is the sincerity?” The President’s initiative, he said, was a “Greek gift.”

That the President probably had the Asiwaju foremost in his mind of all his critics became apparent when his bellicose spokesman, Dr. Doyin Okupe, singled out the Asiwaju for his now characteristic diatribe within hours of the President’s Sallah message.

“The APC leader,” he said at a press conference he addressed on the issue, “as usual, is completely off target. Desperate politicians and self-seeking political leaders tend to believe that their quest for power or insatiable appetite for wealth accumulation through politics is superior to the genuine desires and innate aspirations of ordinary Nigerians.”

The “Bola Tinubus of this world,” he said, are concerned only with the 2015 elections whereas “most patriotic ordinary Nigerians” were more concerned with how to build a united Nigeria “based on equity and justice to all its component parts…” This, presumably, was the President’s motive for agreeing at last to holding a national conference.

So instead of criticising the President, Okupe said, the man should be praised not just for acceding to what most Nigerians, he claimed, have always demanded. His principal should be praised because for the first time in the country’s history a leader has said he will hold a national conference “without the obnoxious ‘no-go areas.’”

As usual, Okupe’s defence of his oga was pure wind. First, every Nigerian, except the big man himself and his handlers like Okupe, knows that the man had long ago made up his mind to contest and win the 2015 presidential elections whatever it takes. The evidence stares us in the face daily from the cloak and dagger games that have been going on over the control of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) between him and the internal opposition.

However, the dead giveaway was his denial in his September 29 Presidential Media Chat that he signed any paper or said he would not contest the elections. “I did not,” he said, “say that I will not contest in 2015. In Addis Ababa, that was when I advocated single term of seven years…I said if Nigerians agree to that I may not be involved. I did not say I will contest or not. Those who said I have signed an agreement should show the agreement.”

Because of the double-speak obvious from these words – you cannot say you may not be involved in a thing and at the same time insist you have not made up your mind on the thing one way or the other – and again because Nigerians have rejected his condition of a seven-year single term presidency for keeping out of the elections, it is not unfair to conclude that he has since felt obliged to contest and will do so.

Second, the President’s timing – less than 18 months to the 2015 elections – raises questions about his motive. Never mind the insecurity situation in the land, or the incredible oil theft going on, in spite of – some would say indeed because of – the multi-million-dollar contract he gave to a favoured clique of former Niger Delta militant leaders, or the on-going ASUU strike, etc, the President has enough work before him organising credible, free, fair and peaceful elections in 2015.

To add a national conference to all this against the historical background of a general lack of sincerity by our leaders in summoning similar conferences since 1967 cannot but raise questions about the President’s own sincerity.

Going back to February 1966, Major-General J. T. Aguiyi-Ironsi set up the equivalent of the President’s panel on how to organise the conference under Chief FRA Williams but before the late legal giant could sit down to work, the head of state, apparently at the prompting of his narrow-minded clique of advisers, went ahead to enact the ill-motivated Unification Decree.

After him General Yakubu Gowon had his own ad-hoc constitutional conference which eventually ended in a fiasco in Aburi, Ghana. After the civil war which followed ended in 1970, he promised to go in 1976. In 1974, however, he said 1976 was unrealistic and tried to elongate his stay in office. He was overthrown in July of 1975.

The next regime under General Murtala Mohammed promised to leave in 1979 and kept its word even though the man was assassinated in an abortive coup in February 1976. The Constitution Drafting Committee he had set up under Chief Williams suggested a change from the Parliamentary democracy of the Second Republic to an American type Presidential system.

The mostly elected Constituent Assembly accepted the change but its sitting ended in a near fiasco. Then General Olusegun Obasanjo who succeeded General Mohammed made 17 amendments to the CA draft before he enacted it into the supreme law of the land in 1979.

The Second Republic, which started in October 1979 under President Shehu Shagari, was overthrown in December 1983. Between then and the beginning of the current dispensation in 1999, we’ve had four military heads of state – Generals Muhammadu Buhari, Ibrahim Babangida, Sani Abacha and Abdulsalami Abubakar. Except for Buhari, all of them summoned a constitutional conference whose outcome received mixed reactions mainly because of widespread suspicions that the leaders were interested in succeeding themselves, in the case of Babangida and Abacha, or in imposing another general on the country, in the case of Abdulsalami.

The Third Term Agenda of General Obasanjo who took over from Abdulsalami is too fresh in our memories to waste space dwelling over.

Clearly, President Jonathan is merely treading the familiar paths of past leaders who tried to remain in power by the subterfuge of a manipulated constitutional conference. Virtually all of them failed. However, the lesson seems clearly lost on President Jonathan as he tries to use the same strategy.

Still on the issue of sincerity, it is evident to all but Okupe who says his boss should be praised for summoning a national conference without “no-go areas” for the first time in the country’s history that this is fiction. The fact is that what the President is summoning is anything but sovereign. Not only did the President not use the word sovereign anywhere in his speech, everything he said took the unity of the country for granted. His conference, he said, among other things, is to provide a platform that will “reinforce the ties that bind the country’s many ethnic nationalities and ensure that Nigeria’s immense diversity continues to be a source of strength and greatness.”

There may be many people who doubt his commitment to the country’s unity, unless he remains its president beyond 2015 but anyone who thinks the man is ready to surrender his sovereignty to any conference would surely be in for a big surprise.

Thirdly, as Tinubu has said, apart from the question of sincerity, there is also that of the capacity of the Jonathan presidency to hold a national conference when so far he has failed to demonstrate the capacity to resolve the nation’s myriad of problems.

Fourth and lastly, but most importantly, flawed as our Constitution is, it is the least of the country’s problems. The fact is that there is sufficient good in it to make our country great if only our leaders will keep good faith with its provisions and with the good but suffering people of this country.

This lack of good faith explains why we have had about 12 constitutions since the first one in 1922 and we are still blaming them for our problems. As the English would say, it is bad workmen who always quarrel with their tools.

Compare the American constitution, which is 226 years old and which we have copied, with ours and it’s easy to see that that the difference between the two countries is the good faith the Americans have, by and large, kept with the provisions of theirs.

Compared to ours, it is concise and brief; the copy I have is all of 34 pages with an average of 27 lines each and eight words per line. A simple arithmetic gives you less than 7,500 words, including all the 27 amendments to the constitution the last of which was ratified in 1971.

Ours is 235 pages with an average of 29 lines per page, each line having an average of nine words. This comes to over 61,000 words! Yet we still think we have not captured enough in it to serve as a guide to good governance.

From all this, it should be clear that our Constitution with all its flaws is the least of our problems. The sooner our politicians accept the fact they and not our Constitution are the main problem with our country, the sooner we will begin to solve those problems

What quick way to abort a National Conference!

 That the definition of the political reality of Nigeria by the North is starkly different from that of the South indicates that the division in the country is very deep.

President Jonathan’s most recent statement on the national conference he proposed about two weeks ago has almost thrown the idea back in the ocean of doubt that had characterised the efforts of those who tried the idea before him. More importantly, the president has himself applauded Senator Bola Tinubu as an infallible analyst of Nigerian party politics and as the prophet whose assessment of Jonathan’s presidency must not be missed. The worrisome part of Jonathan’s assurances to his visitors on the occasion of the just concluded Muslim festival is his taking back with the left hand what he offered with the right hand just two weeks ago.

While several commentators on the announcement of a committee to work out modalities for a national conference “to provide a platform that will reinforce the ties that bind the country’s many ethnic nationalities and ensure that Nigeria’s immense diversity continues to be a source of strength and greatness,” have, despite their awareness of the problems with governance of the country in the last four years, been pleading that the message be separated from the messenger, President Jonathan himself assured Nigerians on the last day of this year’s Eid-El-Kabir that it is more appropriate to conflate the message and the messenger. What an easy way for a ruling president to confirm the prescience of his opposition leader!

But the emphasis today is not on President Jonathan’s attempt to pre-empt a committee he set up only fifteen days ago nor to castigate him for quickly confirming Senator Tinubu’s fears. He will not be the first president in recent times to make nonsense of his advisers. President Olusegun Obasanjo said when he was swearing in his Special Advisers a few years ago that he did not appoint them because he wanted to take their advice and that they should always remember that he was under no obligation to take their advice. The advisers still accepted to be sworn in, even when the person who appointed them told them upfront that the game was over. President Jonathan does not have the brusqueness of Obasanjo, but by announcing his intention to send the outcomes of the conference to the national assembly as part of items for amendment, he too has shown that he is ready to do the job of the committee whenever he chooses to do so. The purpose of today’s piece is to let the president and his advisers know that opting to send the outcomes of the national conference to the legislators that have been talking about amending the 1999 Constitution for over two years is a quick way to abort the conference before its due date.

It is necessary to discuss the implications of following President Jonathan’s new route to “providing a platform to reinforce the ties that bind the country’s many ethnic nationalities and ensure that Nigeria’s immense diversity continues to be a source of strength and greatness.” To believe that the national assembly, as presently structured, can transform conference outcomes to amendments during the life of the current assembly is unrealistic. The assembly has not been able to agree on items that grew up within its chambers in over two years; it is not likely to be able to digest new constitutional provisions arrived at by a conference that may not include members of the national assembly.

In addition, the national assembly itself is part of the problem that a national conference is to address, particularly the lop-sided nature of the House of Representatives in favour of the North, the site of the longest and loudest opposition to calls for sovereign national conference or a constitutional conference to craft a people’s constitution. This approach is, as I said in a recent book: Federalism and the Yoruba Character, similar to attempting to cure drunkenness with more drunkenness. Nigerians have since its inception challenged the accurateness of the census upon which the proportional representation that created the current national assembly was made. Leaving the outcomes of the conference to the national assembly to ratify is making the conference to be dead on arrival, as people say in popular language.

Given the vitriolic nature of opposition from the North to calls for sovereign national conference or constitutional conference, expecting the current national assembly to ratify any recommendations from Jonathan’s national conference is over-sanguine. For example, some northern governors have been reported to refuse to send people from his state to any conference. Some leaders from the North have started singing war songs, to counter calls for national conference.Pundits from the North have argued that our constitution is not the problem and that it is the people that use the constitution that need to be upgraded. Just as President Jonathan was assuring his visitors that the final destination of the conference outcomes is the national assembly, the spokesman for the most authoritative socio-cultural organisation from the North Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) said unapologetically: “The ACF does not believe that the problem with Nigeria is the structure of the country or the pattern of governance….For now, we do not have any position to present to them [the Advisory Committee] because we did not ask for a conference in the first place.”

On the contrary, Ohaeneze Ndigbo has agreed to meet on Saturday to produce a position for the Committee’s visit to the former Eastern Region while Chief Reuben Fasoranti’sAfenifere and the Afenifere-Renewal Group have completed position papers to take to the Committee’s first meeting in the former Western Region in Akure. That Nigeria is a divided country does not need the expertise of rocket scientists to decipher. Two of the three regions that agreed to go into one Nigeria at independence in 1960 are ready to send delegates to attend the preliminary fact-finding meeting of the Committee set up by President Jonathan with spokespersons for federating units, the unity of which the proposed conference is designed to reinforce while the third region has already announced a boycott.

Offering to send the outcomes of the conference to the national assembly on the same day that ACF indicated its intention not to be bothered by any zonal meeting in Jos or Minna, can possibly be interpreted to mean an attempt to assure the North that there is nothing to worry about. Everybody in the country knows that without any cooperation from northern members in the national assembly, there can be no two-thirds to alter one sentence in the current constitution, even after years of conference deliberations. That the definition of the political reality of Nigeria by the North is starkly different from that of the South indicates that the division in the country is very deep. And this situation should worry anyone that cares about Nigeria. The claim that President Jonathan has not suggested any No-Go areas is countered by his most recent decision to use the national assembly, a body that has, like the country’s 774 local governments, grown out of decades of political re-designing of Nigeria by military dictators. Given the new confusion created by the president’s latest decision, it is advisable for president Jonathan to let his advisory committee members give him some advice on how to proceed. Pre-empting the committee in any way is likely to dampen the spirit of the millions of Nigerians who want a platform to provide ideas that can reinforce the ties that bind Nigeria’s ethnic nationalities together over the years and ensure that the country’s immense diversity becomes a source of strength and greatness for the parts and the whole of the ‘Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

FG spends N609bn to settle labour liabilities

Director General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises, Mr. Benjamin Dikki, has revealed that the Federal Government spent about N609,398,074,485.63 between 2000 and 2013 in settlement of labour liabilities in privatised public enterprises.

Speaking during an interactive session with newsmen, in Abuja, after a meeting with the Energy Working Group of the Nigeria-Germany Bi-National Commission, Dikki noted that sectoral break-down shows that a chunk of the money was spent in the settlement of labour liabilities in the power sector, which gulped over N384.062 billion so far, representing 63 per cent of the N609 billion payout.

Power sector, he said, was closely followed by the telecommunications sector, and principally, the settlement of labour issues in NITEL/M-TEL, with a total sectoral spend of N126, 716,111,589.00

According to him, the Federal Government had further spent N67, 780,039,618.52 in the settlement of labour liabilities in the transport and aviation sector with bulk of it used for settlement of liabilities of the workers of Nigeria Ports Authority (NPA).

The steel sector consumed another N10, 733,347,712.53 while the government spent about N8, 950,510,491.00 in the settlement of labour issues in privatised enterprises in the agro-allied sector.

Others beneficiaries of this huge public sector expenditure include: Insurance N4,700,000,000.00; Sugar companies N3,527,095,184.00; Paper mills N417,447,000.00; Hospitality N1,262,708,633.60; and Cement companies with N636,324,705.00; On the other hand, media enterprises N505,874,001.23; and petrochemicals N106,615,529.87.

On the labour issues in PHCN successor companies, he said government had shown tremendous goodwill and commitment to resolving all the labour issues in the power transaction, adding that it was the only singular transaction that all the proceeds realised from the sale of power assets were committed to settling labour liabilities.

“Payment of all the workers entitlements is on-going and money set aside to pay all those that have been duly cleared”, he added.

The Federal Government has demonstrated great commitment in resolving labour issues in the power sector reform and privatization. Apart from committing the entire proceeds realized from the sale of power assets to the payment of the workers’ terminal benefits, government had at the initial stage of the transaction, released N57 billion to take care of the workers pension.

This came after the government had increased the workers’ salary by 50 per cent and regularized some of the casual workers.

Jonathan and the Burden of Transformational Leadership

 On assumption of office, President Goodluck Jonathan committed himself to the delivery of transformational leadership to the people of Nigeria. Well, it is true to say that he did not use these words exactly, but when a man describes his plan for the country as a “transformation agenda”, I think it would be pretty safe to conclude that such a man intends to provide some measure of transformational leadership.

The idea of transformational leadership was first pronounced by American political scientist and leadership expert, James Macgregor Burns. According to him, transformational leadership is when “leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation.” He goes further to say that such leaders possess the strength to inspire followers to change expectations, perceptions, and motivations and work towards common goals. Very importantly, transformational leaders are trustworthy, role models who lead by example. I truly believe that our current President is capable of living up to these expectations in spite of the public opprobrium against his administration.

The reasons for my optimism are manifold. The first is that my faith—Christianity—teaches me to be positive, to hope for the best and believe the best of people at all times. My faith goes further to insist that I confess positive things about everyone and everything which means anything to me, my country inclusive. And so even if just for the enormous power of positive confession, I want to trust that Jonathan is able to provide this kind of leadership for Nigeria although Christianity also speaks about the place of capacity and effort even as faith works

Apart from the above, I also do not think that this federal administration is as unproductive as a lot of Nigerians say. I think that a lot of the contempt and distrust which Nigerians have for the Jonathan administration stem from two main factors, which are not necessarily indicative of how much of transformational leadership the government could provide. One of the reasons why many Nigerians cannot stand the President, in my opinion, is his uncharismatic, almost colourless nature. Every now and then, I hear many of our compatriots lament on how a country with so much articulate and competent people came up with a President like Jonathan. Some of our people get so upset that you feel like they would break down in tears the next minute, especially when they compare Jonathan with the Obamas and Camerons of this world. But experience has shown me that oratory or the lack of it has nothing to do with effectiveness. In actual fact, taciturnity could foster effectiveness if properly channelled. Speaking about Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman, two former American Presidents, Biographer David McCullough wrote: “Perhaps, the greatest difference is that TR is a showman. He really loved the theatre of politics. Harry Truman was never that; he never had a shred of glamour or, to use the overrated word ‘charisma’” Yet, Truman remains one of the most impactful American presidents in history; so, the lack of charisma is no hinderance to effective governance.

The very effective propaganda machinery of the opposition is another reason why it seems that this government is not performing and does not have the ability to perform. Honest observers of the polity would however agree that the opposition has itself not shown any sparkling example at transformational leadership in the states and local governments that they govern. At best, the glitter of performance that we have seen is like that of a one-eyed man becoming king in the community of the blind.

Just as well, it would be dishonest to suggest that the Jonathan administration has not shown some signs of purposeful leadership in the past two years. We at least see some progress in the attempt to reform the power sector; we see concerted effort in the drive towards improving agricultural practices (I pray every day that the statistics we hear on this front are correct). One is happy that the Federal Road Maintenance Agency is coming back to life and that the Nigeria Railway Corporation is putting trains back on the tracks. Then the massive rehabilitation and expansion work going on in the aviation sector cannot pass unnoticed. This, apparently, has been followed up with investments in infrastructure as the current performance of the Accident Investigation Bureau has shown in the aftermath of the recent crash of the Associated Airlines plane in Lagos

However, the Federal Government must realise that transformation can never just be about bricks and mortar. As a matter of fact, the transformation of a nation lies more in the transformation of the minds of those who inhabit the country, than in the building that they live or in the roads that they drive on. And when we make the mistake of investing more in infrastructure than we do on building a responsible citizenry, we risk the destruction of the entire infrastructure that we build in no time at all. Would that not be the reason why our entire infrastructure is so dilapidated in the first place?

Now, the building of a responsible citizenry must start from the leader who is serious about transformation. As Albert Einstein said, “Setting an example is not the main means of influencing others, it is the only means.” This is where I am worried about leadership in Nigeria. Let us agree that President Jonathan is indeed interested in moving Nigeria forward, does he realise the need to place emphasis on the moral rejuvenation of the national soul and that he, alongside all his cabinet members, must lead the nation by example?

Just before the break of the scandal on the outrageous purchase of two bulletproof BMW cars for the aviation minister, Stella Oduah, President Jonathan had told the whole world that corruption was not Nigeria’s worst problem. Although I suspected that the President, like most of those in the political class, would get defensive when the issue of corruption is raised (apparently assuming that complaints about corruption only referred to political corruption), I wonder why anyone would say what the President said in a country where it is possible to obtain a driving licence for a suckling babe.

Just some days before the President waved away the devastating and pervasive effect of corruption on Nigeria, there was the plane crash that killed about 15 people in Lagos. Immediately after the crash, nearly every authority in the country’s aviation industry rushed to town to tell us that the aircraft was airworthy since a certificate said so. My instant reaction was to wonder how anyone, who lives in Nigeria, could so confidently pass such judgment when almost every Nigerian is ready to compromise at anything for pecuniary gains. How could we so trust a certificate? Preliminary reports from the AIB has since revealed that all was not well with that aircraft and that the crash would never have happened if certain laid down procedures were followed , yet the President says corruption is not our worst problem!

How then would he understand the current outrage on the purchase of those cars by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority? One thing must be clear to President Jonathan however. Unless he starts to take bold steps to address every official infraction, financial or otherwise, it would be impossible for him or any government coming after him to sustain any infrastructure achievement he may have been able to make at the end of his tenure. As Roosevelt said: “…if this world of ours is ever to become what we hope someday it may become, it must be by the general recognition that the man’s heart and soul, the man’s worth and actions, determine his standing.” Moving Nigeria forward is a transformation that must come from us inside out and I daresay that transformation should start with the President and his men and women

N1tn spent on vehicle importation in 2012 –NAC

The Director-General, National Automotive Council, Alhaji Aminu Jalal, said on Tuesday that the country spent about N1.2tn on the importation of various brands of vehicles last year.

He said the vehicles ranged from fairly used cars, otherwise known as tokunbo, to brand new cars, excluding tractors and military vehicles.

Jalal, who led an eight-member Board of the NAC to the Peugeot Automobile of Nigeria in Kaduna, noted that the vehicles were imported by the three tiers of government, private corporate organisations as well as individuals.

According to the DG, the breakdown shows that N550bn worth of vehicles; N500bn spare parts and N150bn worth of tyres were brought into the country.

This, he added, had over the years stifled the economy as the country’s vehicle assembly plants lost patronage.

Jalal said, “I want to tell you that last year alone, this country spent N550bn on the importation of cars, buses and trucks. But that does not include tractors and military vehicles. Again, we also spent around N500bn on spare parts. In fact, on tyres alone, we spent N150bn. And this year, the same trend is showing.

“This is not good for our country. With the new policy, we are going to support our car plants to produce very standard cars at globally competitive prices. This is going to greatly add to our local content. For example, to assemble a car here, you need about 2,500 parts.

“If many cars are produced and sold here, then it would encourage the local manufacturing of these parts, creating more wealth here and driving down the cost of the vehicles. By the time we start implementing this policy, you will see a very impressive positive change in just six months.”

The Chairman, NAC, Alhaji Abdulkadir Saleh, gave an assurance that the new board would strictly implement the new automobile policy to ensure that locally assembled vehicles were patronised.

He said the government had no option than to fully implement the new policy and ensure that all tiers of government patronised locally assembled vehicles.

Saleh added that under the new policy, Toyota and Nissan would build plants in Nigeria.

Earlier, the Managing Director, PAN, Alhaji Ibrahim Boyi, had told members of the NAC Board that the company, with 4,000 permanent workers and producing no fewer than 90,000 cars in 1985, was now producing 3,000 cars annually with a staff strength of 250.

Boyi argued that with the full implementation of the New Automotive Policy, the company would bounce back.

He appealed to members of the Board of NAC not to relent in the full implementation of the new auto development plan in order to protect the current and future investments by local manufacturing plants in the country.

The PAN managing director also urged the NAC to support the location of one of the proposed automotive suppliers parks and Clusters within the premises of the company in order to optimise existing resources and fast track the implementation of the local content development plans.

Boyi said, “In the mid 1980s and early 1990s, we were doing very well. In 1985, we produced 90,000 cars. Government policy was very favourable then. But after that, the environment became very bad as all kinds of vehicles started coming into the country.

“Today, we produce between 25 and 30 cars only during working days. Our workforce of 4,000 in the 1980s is now 250. We are hoping that the situation will change because we have put in every modern facility and forged the right international technical partnership to succeed.”

Jonathan writes Reps, presents 2014 budget

President Goodluck Jonathan wrote the House of Representatives on Tuesday seeking to present the estimates of the 2014 budget to a Joint Session of the National Assembly.

In the letter read by the Deputy Speaker, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha, the President sought to be allowed to present the estimates on November 12.

Part of the letter read, “I write to crave your kind indulgence to grant me the slot of 12:00 noon on Tuesday, November 12, 2013 to enable me to formally address a Joint Session of the National Assembly on the 2014 Budget.

“While thanking the Honourable Members of the House of Representatives of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for the constancy of their support, please accept, Rt. Hon Speaker, the assurances of my highest consideration.”

However, Ihedioha, who presided over Tuesday’s sitting, also read the riots act to standing committees of the House over their slow pace of work.

He directed them to submit their oversight reports on the 2013 budget to the House on Thursday.

The House had adjourned twice since September to give the committees enough time to conclude their oversight visits to ministries, departments and agencies of the Federal Government.

Lawmakers had said that they would use the reports of the oversight as a guide in considering the 2014 budget.

Members only reconvened on October 22.

But, on Tuesday, Ihedioha disclosed that only 10 out of over 90 standing committees had submitted the reports of their findings on budget performance.

He warned that the leadership would be forced to name any committee that failed to produce its report by Thursday.

In a related matter, a member from Edo State, Mr. Rasaq Bello-Osagie, complained that the House was being portrayed in bad light by committees that failed to execute assignments referred to them.

Jonathan’s dialogue: protecting President’s interest

Predictably, the Femi Okurounmu National Conference Committee has been moving round the country to seek the views of Nigerians on what they would want discussed when President Goodluck Jonathan’s proposed national dialogue comes on stream.

Predictable because numerous other similar committees in the past had gone round the country to seek and collate public opinions on what the problem is with Nigeria and how to solve it with little or nothing near the solution being found. Nothing in the horizon suggests that the current exercise would be any different.

In fact there is every likelihood that the Okurounmu committee might even be worse than its predecessors and be too eager to dance to the tune of the presidency; Jonathan’s presidency.

Just like most of our past and even present leaders, President Goodluck Jonathan is deficient in integrity as not a few Nigerians have lost faith in his promises and words. Talk about saying one thing and doing another.

Even his promise of making his proposed conference the “mother” of all such conferences in terms of covering vast areas of our national problems and proffering solutions to them has not dampened the cynicism of critics who believe nothing good can ever come out from this national dialogue. At best, they contend, it would be a rehash of the reports of similar committees in the past that had been gathering dust on the shelf somewhere in the presidency. That such reports are there in Abuja and we are still where we are today, talking of another conference suggest that we have either not learnt from our history or this type of conference is not the solution to our problems.

The cynicism is not helped by the president’s decision to subject whatever became the report of the conference to scrutiny by the National Assembly, with implied powers to either accept, reject or even amend to suit whatever interest they represent.

But by far the clearest indication yet that the report of the Okurounmu committee and that of the National Conference expected to follow soon could just be a rubber stamp of what the presidency wants was given in Benin, Edo State recently, when the Committee held a public forum to hear and collate the views of the South-south people on the up coming national dialogue.

A member of the Committee, Colonel Tony Nyiam (of the Orkar coup fame, remember him?) verbally descended on Edo State governor, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole just because of the Comrade Governor’s belief that the conference is a waste of time and would not get us anywhere. His outburst was made more insulting as it came while Oshiomhole was making his personal views known at the forum. Nyiam would have none of this and not only did he shout the governor down, his action also invited some hoodlum who disrupted proceedings which was hurriedly called off by the organizers.

The rest of the story I am sure you know, including the fact that the Committee Chairman not only reprimanded Nyiam but also apologized to the governor. But surprisingly, Nyiam found nothing wrong with his action and not only did he defend it but also explained that he did so in reaction to what he called insults being poured on President Jonathan and other Edo leaders by Governor Oshiomhole over the conference. He similarly justified his outburst because such ‘insults’ on the person and office of the president by Oshiomhole and others like him were getting too much.

While Nyiam action (his outburst) is condemnable, I would rather leave that to the public to judge, the same way I would leave the public to make up their minds on Oshiomhole’s purported insult on the president. My concern here is the reasons given by Nyiam for his action. Could that be one of the secret directives (if any) given to the Committee by the president? Or rather one of the directives given to Nyiam to protect the interest of the president? How many of such directives were given to him or other members of the Committee? These we may never know now, but read my lips, if a member could say such things openly, then one could imagine what he would say or do behind closed doors when the Committee writes its report and recommendation to the president.

How many of the Committee members hold this same or similar view about the person of President Jonathan as Nyiam? It is necessary for us to know to prepare our minds for whatever report they are going to come out with. If all or majority of them are similarly inclined then we should be prepared for a report written in the Villa, prepared by the President’s men and handed over to Okurounmu for representation to the Presidency as the views of the Nigerians the Committee met in the course of its jamboree round the country. By the way I wonder, when would they go to Damaturu or Maiduguri to hold the public forum on the conference for the North east zone? I am only being curious.

But could the Committee be secretly working on a hidden agenda for the president but using the public forum as a decoy? What could this hidden agenda be? Some say it could be tenure elongation for the president or a third term in disguise; that the Committee is just shopping for relevant views to arrive at the answer/report already prepared by the presidency. More like what we call ‘wuruwuru to the answer’ here.

But whatever it is, the Okurounmu committee has to be very careful and not tamper with the views of the majority in presenting its report because it’s credibility is already at stake, right from the beginning and now made worse by the unnecessary and unwarranted outburst of Nyiam on Oshiomhole.

For Colonel Nyiam, it is a big disappointment. Here was somebody that participated in the Major Okah led coup purportedly to rid Nigeria of ethnic and religious sentiments that have been militating against our wholehearted oneness as a nation and a people, now pandering towards that same ethnic sentiment to defend President Jonathan who hails from the same South south geo-political zone as the former Army officer. It is well known that Nyiam has a very soft spot for the president on account of this zonal kinship, nothing is wrong with that you may want to say. But to allow that to becloud his sense of reasoning and duty to the nation is highly unfortunate.

If people abuse or insult the president in airing their views how is that his business and where is the offense there? If it is or was an offense to say uncomplimentary things about the president or any of our leaders then our jails would have been filled to the brim during President Olusegun Obasanjo’s regime. The former president was unarguably the most criticized and abused Nigerian leader in recent times, yet he took all on his chin. And where he felt so bad or annoyed he simply abused or insulted the other party in return and we all laughed over it. Criminalizing insults on the president (Jonathan) as Nyiam’s outburst is suggesting would make Obasanjo a saint or in retrospect looked a tolerant person. But we all know he wasn’t.

Could Nyiam’s ethnic or regional sympathy for Jonathan account for his jettisoning of his earlier stoic support of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) as opposed to the ‘ordinary’ National Conference (oNC) that the president is proposing? If that was the case, it would only be disappointing to hear that, but he wouldn’t have done anything illegal. Everybody has the right to change his/her mind anytime. After all, the committee chairman, Dr Okurounmu was once a staunch advocate of SNC as the only solution to Nigeria’s problems. He, like Nyiam, has now been converted to evangelizing for oNC. Hmmmmm, time will tell.

This is also a test for Okurounmu as a person and his committee. The signs of imminent failure are there already. The boycott of the regional forum to collate views in some regions by the A-list leaders in those areas has not only created a credibility problem for the committee’s report but also a window of opportunity for these leaders to lampoon Okurounmu and his group if the committee’s report fell short of public expectations or was tampered with by the president.

It would do Okurounmu and his committee a lot of good if the President is advised to allow a referendum on the report of the oNC as against passing the report over to the National Assembly. This will put all those ‘enemies of progress’ to shame

2015: INEC to spend N92.9b

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) may require N92.9 billion for the conduct of the 2015 elections, it was learnt yesterday.

Elections may not hold in some parts of the Northeast, if insecurity persists, according to INEC Chairman Prof. Attahiru Jega, who spoke at a stakeholders’ forum organised by the Senate Committee on INEC, in collaboration with Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC), Abuja and the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) Nigeria.

Jega, who spoke on “Preparations and challenges ahead of 2015 general elections”, said it was not true that the cost of the 2011 general elections was high.

He noted that in preparing for the 2015 elections, one guiding principle for the Commission had been to make elections more cost-effective and to give Nigerians better value for money.

He added: “Our estimate is that the cost of the election per voter, which is an international standard for viewing the cost of election, is coming down in Nigeria.

“We project that for the 2015 elections, this would come further down by almost $1- from $8.8 in 2011 to $7.9, representing almost a 10 per cent drop.

“This compares favourably with some other African countries. However, we are anxious about getting all our funding requirement being met well in advance of the 2015 general elections.”

Jega said Ghana spent $10 per voter during its last election while Kenya spent between $8.5 to $9 per voter.

Nigeria has about 73.5 million registered voters.

The INEC boss assured that “preparations by INEC for the 2015 general election are very good and proceeding in earnest”.

He added: “As far as INEC is concerned, the 2015 general elections will see Nigeria take its rightful place in the global comity of nations where electoral democracy is being consolidated.

“However, bringing this about and ensuring a free, fair, credible and peaceful elections is not a task that INEC alone can actualise.

“All stakeholders have important roles to play; we must change attitudes and mindsets, as well as strengthen partnerships and collaborative endeavours to bring this about.

“Learning from the experience of 2011, especially regarding the need for early preparations, the Commission has undertaken the task of fundamental restructuring of the Commission, established new policies to guide its work and embarked on far reaching planning of its activities through strategic plan, an election project plan and an election management system.”

On security challenges, he noted that if there was a generalised systemic insecurity in the country, it may be difficult to conduct a free and fair election in 2015.

Jega listed specifically insurgency in the Northeast, armed robbery and kidnapping as part of the systemic challenges the Commission would like the Federal Government to address and resolve before the 2015 election.

He said, “We hope the present security challenges in parts of Northeast will be overcome before the 2015 general elections. But if it persists, we may be compelled to postpone or cancel elections in the affected areas.

Jega spoke of a vacancy for a House of Representatives seat in Yobe State, but he said INEC had not conducted an election because of insecurity.

The INEC boss said the Commission, he said, is concerned about widespread absence of moderation among politicians because “even if the management of elections meets the highest standards, insofar as the contestants are unwilling to play by the rules, there will be problems.”

He said: “The Commission remains deeply concerned about growing conflicts within parties and between contestants.

“The use of language is in most cases indecorous, encouraging supporters to follow suit with even more intemperate language and ultimately fueling violence.

“Parties even find it difficult to select candidates, creating a situation in which practically every nomination process in Nigeria ends in a court case.

“In most instances, the Commission gets either directly or vicariously involved in these conflicts and court cases.

“Indeed, some of the pre-election court cases in the past threatened to derail preparations for elections.

“Of particular note is the spate of ex parte injunctions that have been issued the Commission.

“It seems to me that a primary source of the problem here is lack of internal party democracy, resulting from lack of commitment to party rules.”

On the review of the Electoral Constituencies and polling units, Jega hoped that Nigerians would support INEC’s efforts to successfully complete the exercise.

TO him, “the prospects of having remarkable much better elections in 2015 are very bright”.

“But we habour no illusion that we have accounted for all issues that could pose challenges for the elections. In fact, there are still a number of key challenges,” Jega said