How Technocrats Destroy Political Leaders

Owing largely to the abysmal failure of democratic political culture to rapidly improve the welfare of man and society especially in Africa, many have come to hate or distrust politicians with passion. A larger part of the African society now frame politicians as unreliable. Citizens now see politicians as a bunch of unpatriotic, selfish, greedy, and corrupt people. It is mainly for this reason that political leaders who are desirous of writing their names in gold invite tested technocrats to help manage critical sectors of state machinery. Unfortunately however, these technocrats have most times ended up performing far worse than politicians do. One general excuse they usually give for their appalling failure is lack of free hands to operate.

To be fair to political leaders that do not give these co-opted technocrats blank cheques to operate; most of them go into government without the slightest understanding of the workings and foundational essence of democratic governance. They forget that political leadership is far different from the conventional leadership culture. While the later is largely influenced by Naira and Kobo (urge to make profit), political leadership seeks to meet the diverse needs of the governed. Sometimes, this fundamental goal of democratic governance is achieved with state accounts in the red. It is in recognition of this fact that the concept of Foreign Reserves and Sovereign Wealth Fund became popular in many advanced democracies. The idea was to ensure that commercial concerns do not in any way deny citizens the good things of life. After all, democracy is all about the people.
It is not enough to flaunt tittles and labels as most of our professionals do. For a country like Nigeria where a greater percentage of her citizens are living below poverty line, common sense should tell us that our economic experts and fiscal policy formulators will need to be very creative to be able to design practicable fiscal templates that can effectively fight poverty. Somehow, the colourful debate that followed the federal government's decision to stop paying subsidy on imported petrol has brought to the fore one very sad fact: Our nation's economic experts and fiscal policy formulators are overpaid. This is because their output is far below what is expected of them. Apart from their being apathetic, they are clearly drained of practicable ideas to stimulate rapid socio-economic growth. What they do is to sit in front of internet-ready computers and copy the fiscal policies of developed countries. In doing this, they fail to realize that a lot variables such as population, technology, culture, literacy level, unemployment rate, and even religion influences the design and mode of deployment of fiscal policies. The truth is that a fiscal policy that is successful in Europe may not necessarily do well in Africa owing to several factors as enumerated above. Every country is therefore expected to study her peculiar situation and circumstances before designing appropriate fiscal policies to match.

The decision by the federal government to withdraw fuel subsidy is one of the fiscal policies erroneously copied from some developed countries. We must however not forget the fact that in those countries, the purchasing powers of citizens are strong enough to take care of their basic needs such as shelter, food, transport, health care, education, and socials. It is also necessary to point out that in the countries where our anti-subsidy apostles are drawing inspiration from, poverty level is clearly within the limits of a single digit. More than that, unemployment figures are tolerable and their public infrastructures are in excellent condition.
One question that readily comes to mind is: how much percentage of Nigerian workers are able to take care of the basic needs of their families from their legitimate income? Going by the statement of the governor of Nigeria’s Central Bank, Lamido Sanusi; only about 30% of Nigerians can take care of the basic needs of their families. What then happens to the remaining 70%? Your guess is as good as mine.
Like I have, and will continue to insist, President Goodluck Jonathan means well for Nigeria. Unfortunately, just as George Bush was stampeded by faulty intelligence report to invade Iraq in 2003; overzealous anti-subsidy apostles have cleverly misled President Jonathan to support the removal of fuel subsidy in 2012. I am very confident that my position will be vindicated in the very near future. All over the world, political leaders that are known to be very keen in making a difference were more prone to making errors of judgment. The situation is worse with leaders that are mostly surrounded by people who believe a coin has only one side. Of course, President Jonathan has many of them around him. The earlier he realizes this, the better for him and the Nigerian masses.

Apart from the conspicuous fact that Nigeria's present socio-economic framework is too weak to accommodate the pressure of fuel subsidy removal, my opinion is further strengthened by the shallow logic put forward by the two major anti-subsidy apostles: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the minister of finance and economy and Lamido Sanusi, governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. This duo will be quick to remind Nigerians that there is no fuel subsidy in Britain, United States, Germany, Spain Holland, and France. They have however deliberately refused to appreciate the fact that Nigerian workers do not earn as much as their contemporaries do in those named countries. Without doubt, Nigerians will accept to buy a liter of fuel for even N150 if public infrastructures are in excellent conditions and the salaries of public service workers are proportionate with what their contemporaries earn in Europe and America.

In fact, the most worrying aspect of the arguments in support of the removal of fuel subsidy has to do with how it will help curb cross-boarder smuggling of petroleum products and the curbing of corruption in NNPC. It is sad that both Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi are convinced about the existence of corruption at the nation’s boarder posts and oil sector but not interested in going after those eating fat from it. The best they could do in fighting those stealing our common heritage is to punish the poor masses by increasing the price of petrol through the removal of fuel subsidy. Why are they afraid of the so-called "cabal" and not the masses? The masses are still largely ignorant. All of these must bother President Jonathan. This is because should anything funny happen today, both Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi will be on the next flight to the headquarters of World Bank or IMF for immediate engagement. We should not forget our past too quickly.

While speaking at the 5th Annual Microfinance Conference and Entrepreneurship Award in Abuja, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Lamido Sanusi informed the whole world that a staggering 70% of the Nigerian population is living below poverty line. It was therefore shocking when one heard the same Sanusi turn around to argue that 70% of poor Nigerians who are already living below poverty line could withstand a further weakening of their purchasing power when fuel subsidy is removed. Who is not aware that the removal of fuel subsidy will translate to an increase in the pump prices of petroleum products? In the same vein, the prices of goods and services that has direct or indirect link with petrol will jump. I do not know of any good or service in Nigeria that has no link with petrol.

To make the Nigerians look stupid, the anti-subsidy apostles have been arguing that the poor do not benefit from the fuel subsidy regime. My not having a car does not mean I will trek to the farm, office, market, hospital, school, or church. We all know that transporters fix their fares based on how much they buy petrol. I therefore consider it as an insult for anyone to argue that it is those who own jeeps and SUVs that enjoy the benefit of fuel subsidy. The rich actually enjoys more of the subsidy but the truth must not be sacrificed on the platter of insensitivity. They only want to play to the gallery by attempting to paint the picture that government is against Nigerians living above their income. Let me remind the anti-subsidy apostles that millions of hairdressers, bar owners, restaurateurs, taxi drivers, internet café owners, ferry operators, bakers, and technicians etc spread across the country all benefit from the fuel subsidy regime in their own little way.

With an increase in the pump price of petrol, the prices of goods and services will jump. This will force more Nigerians into poverty as their purchasing power will be weakened. Families that for instance survived on N10,000 monthly will need between N20,000 and N25,000 for same purpose. Those that are already deep inside the mud of poverty will in this circumstance have no better options than to either starve to death or take to crime or prostitution in order to survive. While governments in advanced countries are busy designing policies that will strengthen the purchasing power of their citizens, the direct opposite is the case in Nigeria.

No one is arguing the fact that money saved from the removal of fuel subsidy can be ploughed into creating new jobs. It will however turn out to be a case of one who cares more about quantity and not quality. Of what good is it for government to produce a poor and wretched working class? I am referring to a working class that cannot rely on their legitimate earnings to take care of the basic needs of their families. This is one reason why corruption is gaining ground in Nigeria. Apart from the unemployed, even the working class citizens are so poor that everybody wants to raise extra money to meet the basic demands of life. Corrupt practices are the usually the best bets.

Furthermore, let me remind the anti-subsidy apostles that the new roads, health care facilities, schools, and rail lines that will be built with proceeds saved from the removal of fuel subsidy will not offer free services. Frankly, these projects will make very little or no sense if the citizens are too poor to pay for the services they offer. I am challenging the governor of the Central Bank, Lamido Sanusi to tell Nigerians what it means to live below poverty line. He and his co-travelers believe a coin has only one side. That is the only reason why they can afford to reason the way they do. After all, they do not fuel their official jeeps and generators from their salaries.

Sanusi had last week warned the masses that Nigeria will collapse in two years if fuel subsidy was not removed. To me, this is the greatest lie of the century. The lie was only aimed at instilling fear and stampeding unsuspecting masses to surrender their conscience to a bunch of unfeeling technocrats that have cleverly misled the presidency to accept to remove fuel subsidy. Their real intention is to blindfold and rob poor Nigerian masses to pay a few rich ones like them in the corridors of power. I am convinced that they will not clamour for the removal of fuel subsidy if their salaries were between N18,000 and N50,000 monthly. 70% of Nigerians earn just this much. My only consolation is that the masses are no longer as ignorant as they were ten years ago. President Jonathan must not allow any person, no matter his or her pedigree to put a hedge between him and the electorates.

Without doubt, President remains the most widely accepted Nigerian head of government since independence. For the first time, Nigerians ignored religious, tribal, and party sentiments to vote for a man the electorates believe has answers to the problems of the country. Unfortunately, he has allowed some persons to poison the trust and confidence the masses had for him.

While the west, through the World Bank and the IMF will make us believe that subsidy regime is unhealthy, critical sectors of American and European economies are subsidized to protect their citizens. As you read this piece, the EU is subsidizing agriculture and fisheries. Other developed countries subsidize housing, health care, education, or transport. It is left for each country to choose critical areas to intervene. These interventions, in the form of subsidy are aimed at protecting the purchasing power of citizens.

History will hold the anti-subsidy apostles responsible if Nigerian masses are forced to go out on the streets to protest government’s insensitivity. With the little I know about Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi; it will be difficult for them to swallow their pride. This is because they have invested the whole of their pride and ego in the subsidy campaign. The truth is that, Nigeria is bigger than every individual. I therefore urge them to make the noble choice by retracing their steps and join minds with the masses.

In the first place, we do not have any good reason to import fuel. The federal government, like is in other OPEC countries should ensure that our refineries are operating at maximum capacities. With this, the pump price of petroleum products will drop. At N65 per liter, there are already credible insinuations that Nigeria’s petrol is overpriced. Among all the OPEC countries, it is said that the pump price of petrol is highest in Nigeria. This has left a huge question mark on the mangers of our oil industry. While insiders will not want the president to give a thought to all of this information, he must not stop asking salient questions such as: why are our refineries not working at optimum capacities? Why is petrol cheaper in other OPEC countries? He can get genuine answers from his lieutenants. There is therefore the urgent need for him to assemble stakeholders from the private sector to proffer solutions to the lingering crisis bedeviling the nation’s oil sector.
In order not to see fuel subsidy removal as a do-or-die thing, government should look for alternative means of raising money to service its budget. It can do this by reducing the number, salaries and allowances of government officials and their over-bloated aides. In addition to strengthening the anti-corruption agencies, a Wealth Verification (WV) legislation should be put in place to compel citizen to disclose their sources of wealth. Whoever that wants to build or buy any property worth N5m and above should first be compelled by legislation to file documents with the anti-graft agencies detailing the sources of the fund. This will make the job of the anti-graft agencies easier.

While in the developed countries, the rich make major contributions to the development of national economy, same cannot be said of Nigeria. All of the nation's transformation agendas have been built on the frail backs of poor Nigerian masses. The time has come for the rich among us to contribute to the transformational agenda of the present administration. From henceforth, a 5% annual national development tax should be placed on every luxury car, water craft, or mansion costing N5m and above. Local and foreign air tickets and accommodation in 3/5 star hotels should also attract a 5% national development tax. Through this way, the wealthy among us can be specifically targeted to contribute to national development. I have no doubt that Nigeria will save more than N1.3 trillion annually if the above suggestions are embraced. Poor and unemployed Nigerian should be spared further hardship that will arise from the planned fuel subsidy removal. Those in government must learn how to appreciate the feelings of the masses.
In advising the president, co-opted technocrats must bear in mind all that were promised the electorates during the campaign season. In case they do not know, the president promised to stand with the masses-not the rich, Okonjo-Iweala, Lamido Sanusi, World Bank, or IMF. This is one simple way most technocrats destroy political leaders. We must not stand by and allow them destroy President Jonathan! If we do, we would end up hurting ourselves.

The art of misleading a president

While it is not criminal for a magistrate or judge to err in law, same cannot be said of a president when he or she errs in democracy. In law, an appellate court will simply correct the error which is also seen as “mistake of law.” In a presidential democracy, the electorates will correct an erring president by voting him out of office if he or she is seeking re-election. On the other hand, the electorates are easily persuaded to embrace the opposition if the erring president is not seeking re-election. This has happened several times in American presidential democracy.

There is an emerging line of reasoning that sound political leaders can never be misled by their lieutenants in a democracy. This is not true. It must be noted that different people are in government for diverse reasons. While some are for service, others for personal gains. There are still some who seek power just to protect the interests or agendas of third party organizations. Of greater worry are those who stay in government to deliberately give counsels that will pitch the people against government. In most cases, those who prime themselves to deliberately mislead political leaders wear honourable personalities and also parade very attractive credentials that can flatter anybody. They are the ones I term “false patriots.” This is what Jesus Christ said of such people in Matthew 24:24-25, “For false Christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand.” There are very many “false patriots” in the corridors of power in Abuja. The only way to survive this minority but influential clan of “false patriots” is for the president to stand with the masses.

One question that readily comes to mind at this point is: why are political leaders easily misled by “false patriots” even in the light of all the deliberate designs put in place to protect the culture of democracy and promote good governance? Specifically, political leaders are misled due to the peculiar template of democratic bureaucracy, where internal independence is usually granted some specialized sectors such as military, economy, agriculture, science and technology. For instance, current and past global economic crisis are products of internal independence granted some specialised agencies of governments in the West. To be more specific, former president George Bush of the United States was misled into ordering the invasion of Iraq in 2003 owing to false intelligence. It has now become clear that internal independence gives too much room for administration officials to mislead political leaders and heads of national government.
As part of efforts to effectively tackle this problem, most legislatures in the developed climes have responded by showing deeper interests in critical national issues that are traditionally left in the hands of the executive arm of government. The aim is to safeguard national security and economy. In almost all advanced democracies today, national security has been elaborated to consciously identify causes of dissent arising from unpopular government policies. Members of the legislature and the media play a major role in this regard.

It is in realization of this important fact that the fanatical anti-subsidy apostles in Nigeria have now shifted their battle to the sacred floors of the National Assembly in Abuja. The aim is to lure lawmakers to endorse plans by the federal government to remove fuel subsidy next year after stiff opposition from NLC, TUC, NUPENG, NBA, and other pro-masses organizations. Nigerian masses have come to the conclusion that the promised palliative measures cannot adequately compensate for their already feeble purchasing power that will be further weakened by the increase in the prices of goods and services that have direct and indirect link with petrol. This writer does not know of any product or service that does not have direct or indirect attachment to petrol.

One basic fact need to be highlighted here. The nation’s economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators are lazy and non-creative. They are merely “copying and pasting” foreign fiscal policies. An economic strategy that works in country A may not necessarily do well in country B. This is because population, literacy level, culture, religion, science and technology determines which policy works where and when. The IMF and World Bank have all accepted this fact. Sadly however, both the IMF and World Bank are quick in advising developing economies to devalue their currencies and abandon subsidy regimes. But unknown to many, the United States, Canada, and members of the European Union subsidize critical sectors of their economies in order to protect their citizens cum national security. High unemployment, poverty, and hunger pose great threats to the national security of a country.

In 2010, the European Union spent €57 billion on agricultural development programme. Of this amount, €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. Who is fooling who? The West is indeed fooling Africans. They are however using some of our willing intellectuals to do so. It is the duty of every government to identify the critical sector in its economy to intervene. Frankly, it would be wide of the mark for Nigeria to remove fuel subsidy because Britain or the United did so. It is so sad that our fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers have become so lethargic that they have relegated themselves to merely copying and pasting foreign fiscal policies that do not fit with our peculiar circumstances.

For months now, our nation’s “false patriots” have been fighting dirty to win the subsidy removal battle. It is extremely absurd for anyone to remind Nigerian masses of the pump price of petrol in the United States, Canada, or Europe all in a bid to buttress their campaign for the removal of fuel subsidy. Apart from the fact that unemployment figures are low in those climes, they also have cheap and efficient mass transportation systems, discounted housing and health care programs. These are just a few of the safety nets put in place by governments in developed democracies to protect the welfare of their citizens. These safety nets were not deployed in four or eight years. For instance, it would take up to a decade to build an effective national transportation infrastructure. That is one reason why those who are in a position to appreciate what it would take government to put in place safety nets to cushion the effects of withdrawal of fuel subsidy suspect government’s sincerity. For the avoidance of doubt, it would cost government more than what it spends on fuel subsidy to deploy effective safety nets to cushion the effects of increase in the price of petrol. Government should not make the mistake of tying the deployment of new and the rehabilitation of existing national public infrastructure to the removal of fuel subsidy. It is something government owes the citizenry.

It will also be necessary to remind the minority clan of anti-subsidy campaigners that Nigerians would be too willing to buy a liter of petrol for even N150 if public and private sector workers earn as much as their contemporaries do in America and Europe. Instead of being creative, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic experts in government have chosen to take the short-cut to national transformation by merely copying and pasting World Bank and IMF prescriptions. It is longer secret that both the World Bank and IMF are tools used by the West to pursue their hidden economic agendas against developing countries especially in Africa. Most of the fiscal prescriptions that come out of the World Bank and IMF are usually anti-people and specifically designed to pitch the masses in developing countries against their governments so as to brew economic crisis and consequent social dissent. With this, they would be able to discreetly sabotage rapid economic growth in Africa and protect the export-based economies of Western democracies. Some of such fiscal prescriptions are Structural Adjustment Program, Currency Devaluation, and Anti-Subsidy policy.

The time has come for President Jonathan to hear the truth. There are too many “false patriots” in his administration. No doubt, they are honourable in appearance and eloquent during debates. The truth is that they do not mean well for him and Nigeria. Like it is in every developed country, the people are the centerpiece of democracy. For this singular reason, any policy that will injure the welfare of the people must be jettisoned. Call for the removal of fuel subsidy is one of them.
It has been very clear right from the onset that the federal government’s fiscal plan of withdrawing fuel subsidy next year is not the idea of President Goodluck Jonathan. Nevertheless, he will bear whatever consequences that may arise from it. This is the major reason why the president must ignore the minority clan of well-heeled elites and stand with the Nigerian masses like he promised during the campaign season. To do this, President Jonathan would have to quickly separate reality from cheap logic as being postulated by some of his lieutenants in the corridors of power.

For the avoidance doubt, it is the fundamental responsibility of government to see that the welfare of the citizens is protected through deliberate policies with human face. The planned removal of fuel subsidy would not have human face as far as the poor and hapless Nigerian masses are concerned. Government should rather look for other means of raising money to fund the nation’s socio-economic framework. In the last five decades, it has been the low and middle class that have shouldered the burden of national transformation, leaving the wealthy few to swim in their typically questionable affluence. Government can raise up to N1 trillion by imposing 2% annual tax (for 5 years from date of purchase) on every private car above N3 million, 2% tax on every private residential house costing more than N7 million, 1% on each local flight ticket, 2% on each international flight ticket, 2% tax on accommodation in luxury hotels, and 50% reduction in the salaries and allowances of elected and appointed government officials.

Furthermore, government should build more refineries and also ensure that the four existing ones operate at optimum capacities. With this, the pump price of petrol will fall in line with what is obtainable in other OPEC countries, where a liter of petrol sells between N9 and N45. The masses should not be punished for the deliberate ineptitude of some government officials that sabotaged our local refineries in order to promote the fuel import business.

FUEL SUBSIDY IMPASSE: WHY THE PRESIDENT MUST SACK OKONJO-IWEALA NOW

It has been very clear right from the onset that the federal government’s fiscal plan of withdrawing fuel subsidy next year is not the idea of President Goodluck Jonathan. Nevertheless, he will have to bear whatever consequences that may arise from it. This is the major reason why the president must ignore the minority clan of well-heeled elites and stand with the Nigerian masses like he promised during the campaign season. To do this, President Jonathan would have to quickly separate reality from cheap logic as being postulated by some of his lieutenants in the corridors of power. Like the president himself observed shortly before the nomination of his cabinet, different people are in government for diverse reasons. While some are for service, others for personal gains. There are still some who seek power just to protect the interests or agendas of third party organizations. Of greater worry are those who stay in government to deliberately give counsels that will pitch the people against government. Quite frankly, the suggestion that government removes fuel subsidy as contained in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework for 2012 is one of them.

This writer does not dismiss the fact that there are gains to be made from the removal of fuel subsidy. Nevertheless, it is quite cheerless to note that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and team of economic advisers have declined to accept the naked fact that a coin does not have only one side. This has caused them not to acknowledge that Nigeria’s socio-economic framework is still too fragile to bear the additional burdens that will come with the removal of fuel subsidy. The burden will come in the form of a weakened purchasing power of the middle and low income classes of workers because the prices of transportation, house rent, foodstuff, education, and health care services among others will respond to the jump in the price of fuel. Sadly, some persons either in government or heeled enough to buy fuel even at N200 a liter have been shouting on roof tops that the federal government removed subsidy on diesel in 2009 and Nigeria did not collapse. On the strength of this, they argue that nothing damaging would happen even if the same thing is done to petrol. Apart from displaying crass misunderstanding of the fundamentals of political governance, the problem with this opinion is that its promoters have deliberately refused to appreciate the major causes of poverty, disease, and crime in Nigeria over the last decade.

It is a fact that the increase in the pump price of diesel in 2009 jumped the cost of transportation. It naturally displaced economic permutations because most manufacturers and entrepreneurs rely mainly on diesel-powered generators and trucks to move their goods from factories to their distribution outlets. As expected, the additional cost brought about by the sharp increase in the cost of transportation was effortlessly tied on the neck of consumers. The prices of finished goods and services quickly climbed up the ladder. Almost immediately, most Nigerians were unable to meet the basic needs of their families owing to the weakening of their purchasing power. For instance, families that survived on N10,000 monthly now needed between N15,000 and N20,000 because the price of almost every product or services that had something to do with diesel had jumped in response to prevailing market forces. The above picture is also an appropriate response to the argument by government that the money saved from the withdrawal of fuel subsidy would be invested in infrastructural development.

It is important to point out here that no responsible government will afford to consciously weaken the purchasing power of the citizens in order to develop her infrastructure. Removing fuel subsidy to raise money to develop critical national infrastructure can be likened to a father that sacrificed his son to make money.

Poverty is growing in many developing countries, including Nigeria because attention is not given to the purchasing power of the citizens. Poverty is judged by the level of weakness of the purchasing power of citizens. Unfortunately, our fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers believe job creation is the only way to reduce poverty. There would still be poverty even now that national minimum wage is N18,000 per month. This is because, even N50,000 would not be enough to meet the basic needs of an average Nigerian family of five: father, mother, and three children. These basic needs include feeding, shelter, transportation, education, health care, and socials. It would therefore be suicidal for any government to ignore reality and continue to blindly pursue western crafted fiscal policies. It would be shocking for many to learn that in 2010, the European Union spent a whooping €57 billion on agricultural development programme. Of this amount, €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. A total of 40% of EU’s budget goes to Agricultural and fisheries subsidies. Who is fooling who? The World Bank and IMF are fooling Africans. If advanced democracies do not subsidize fuel, they would subsidize agriculture, housing, transport, or health care. It is left for every government to identify the critical sector to intervene. Frankly, it would be wide of the mark for Nigeria to remove fuel subsidy because Britain or the United did so. Unfortunately, our fiscal policy formulators and economic experts are mere copy-cats. Perhaps, this was the reason why the late afro-beat icon, Fela Anikulapo Kuti asked Africans to follow western polices with caution.

As much as the development of critical national infrastructure is important, deliberate fiscal policies must also be developed side-by-side to strengthen the purchasing power of the citizens. In addition to the creation of new jobs, the removal of fuel subsidy will enable government build more roads, schools, and hospitals etc. We must however accept the fact that citizens will still pay for services rendered in the new hospitals and schools that will be built with money saved from the withdrawal of fuel subsidy. The transporters that will use the new roads and rail lines will not keep fares down because they were built with money saved from the removal of fuel subsidy. With the weakening of the purchasing power of citizens, poverty will not allow the masses to enjoy the benefits of the new infrastructure government intends to develop.

It is not healthy for a people to forget their history too quickly. The West is not happy that Africa ran away with political independence so soon. Colonization was mainly the exploitation of human and material resources of weak nations to protect the economies of world powers. Owing largely to worldwide censure of obnoxious political cultures, Western democracies have now found it convenient to hide behind the veil of World Bank and IMF to deny developing countries economic independence. Political independence without economic independence is as bad as colonialism. It is whispered in international circles that Africa’s economic independence will spell doom for the economies of Europe and America. This is one strong reason why African political leaders must be careful with whatever that comes out of the World Bank and IMF. It must however be noted that most Africans do not even know that they are being used to destroy the economies of their own countries. One of such person is Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Coordinating minister of the Economy and minister of Finance. In one of my earlier articles on fuel subsidy removal, I had described Okonjo-Iweala as “a patriot blinded by the West.” She is indeed a patriot but an involuntary victim of Western manipulations. I came to this conclusion after a very careful consideration of a wide range of issues bothering on the fundamental essence of political governance.

Good governance is the road that leads to economic growth and political stability. A prominent feature of good governance is mass participation. Because of exigencies, it will not be convenient for citizens to vote on every government policy. The masses are therefore left with no better option than to invest their confidence in elected and appointed officials. Ordinarily, these officials are supposed to protect the wider interests of the society. This has never been the case. Most elected and appointed officials simply ignore the feelings of the people and follow their shallow and narrow minds. This is responsible for why several government policies are anti-people. The planned removal of fuel subsidy is one of such policies. It would do the Nigerian masses more harm than good. The elites do not have much to lose.

One thing has become clear following the debate that has trailed the decision of the federal government to remove fuel subsidy next year. There is no enough money to sustain the nation’s socio-economic framework. Unfortunately, the well-motivated fiscal policy formulators and hoard of economic experts have run dry of ideas to help raise the needed funds to keep the nation afloat. This problem is caused by their refusal to accept the open fact that a coin does not have only one side. They always see and reason based on the side of the coin they are facing. Little wonder why only a few wealthy Nigerians who can afford to buy a liter of fuel even at N200 are supporting calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. I am very convinced that they would all sing a different song if they earn N100,000 a month. By their mien, those calling for the removal of fuel subsidy have joined spirit with Cain who queried God for expecting him to be responsible for his brother’s safety or good.

It is the fundamental responsibility of government to see that the welfare of the citizens is protected through deliberate policies with human face. The planned removal of fuel subsidy would not have human face as far as the poor and hapless Nigerian masses are concerned. Government should rather look for other means of raising money to fund the nation’s socio-economic framework. In the last five decades, it has been the low and middle class that have carried the burden of national transformation, leaving the wealthy few to swim in their typically questionable affluence. Government can raise up to N1 trillion by imposing 2% annual tax (for 5 years from date of purchase) on every private car above N3 million, 2% tax on every private residential house costing more than N7 million, 1% on each local flight ticket/2% on each international flight ticket, 2% tax on accommodation in luxury hotels, and 50% reduction in the salaries and allowances of elected and appointed government officials.

Because of the hot political wind that is blowing across Africa, Nigerian masses have been weaned and would not be ready to tolerate further abuses of their corporate rights by government. Going by the colour of anger being expressed by many, it is very likely that the masses would raise their voices against the Goodluck Jonathan administration if it goes ahead with the planned removal of fuel subsidy next year. This is the ultimate desire of the West. They want Nigeria and the rest of Africa to be continuously enmeshed in political turmoil in order to sabotage her economic recovery efforts. Already, the United States believes that Nigeria will disintegrate by 2015. Seen and unseen hands have been positioned to turn the masses against President Jonathan. In return, the Niger Delta people will be instigated to cry fowl and forced to rock the foundation that carries the destiny of corporate Nigeria. This is the wish of the developed West. It is for this reason that President Goodluck Jonathan should sack the Coordinating minister of the Economy and minister of Finance for not properly reading the hand writing on the wall. She clearly has no answers to the economic problems of the country. Nigeria needs indigenous solutions to our national problems.

The fuel subsidy culture is a shame. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, Nigeria does not have any excuse to import fuel to service local demands. The federal government can end fuel subsidy by making our four refineries work at optimum capacities. Of all the OPEC countries, the pump price of petrol is costliest in Nigeria. Why is this so? Is there anything other OPEC countries are doing that we are not? This is the question our nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic experts should have asked themselves. Instead, they are pouncing on poor and hungry masses to cover up their incompetence. President Jonathan must sack Okonjo-Iweala now before she puts him and Nigeria in serious trouble. This country is bigger than any one single individual.

Nigeria belongs to Nigerians. The oil and gas wealth belongs to Nigerians as well. We therefore have every corporate right to enjoy the benefits of oil and gas just like citizens of other OPEC countries are doing. Let us find out how is it that a liter of petrol sells for about N18 in Saudi Arabia and just N9 in Venezuela.

The fact that our oil industry is fowled by corruption is no longer in doubt. What is in doubt is the desire or ability of government to tackle the cabal that has for so long been milking the Nigeria people dry through fuel subsidy. This writer does not however support the idea of punishing the masses through the withdrawal of fuel subsidy as an option to fight the cabal that is hiding behind subsidy to milk the nation of trillions of Naira. Making our refineries work at optimum capacity is the best way to end fuel subsidy. The pump price of fuel will climb down below N65 if petrol is refined locally. Functional refineries will help to stimulate complementary economic streams. Furthermore, let us study the Venezuela model and do same in Nigeria. Sack Okonjo-Iweala now! She has no answers to the problems of our national economy.

KALI GWEGWE
2, Greenvilla-Customs Link Road
Biogbolo-Epie
Yenagoa
Bayelsa State
Nigeria
08064074810

GIVING FUEL SUBSIDY A BAD NAME

I have, over the last twenty-four months written severally on the need for government to maintain the current fuel subsidy regime. My main argument has been that Nigeria’s socio-economic framework is still too fragile to absorb whatever shock that may arise from further increases in the pump price of petroleum products. I am not unaware of the fact that the income and welfare of Nigerians have not improved for a long time.

As at March 2009, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reported that about 10m Nigerians were unemployed. This figure is disputable. It reported a mere 19.7 employment rate. Sadly, unemployment has continued to be on a steady rise in the country owing to a number of critical factors. The volume of economic expansion has not been robust enough to correct the causes of growing unemployment in the country. Some of the major factors contributing to high unemployment figures are pandemic corruption in private and public sectors, high cost of doing business, poor power system, insecurity, lack of access to financing, high interest rate, and dilapidated public infrastructure among others. All of these have in turn helped to promote the negative culture of poverty, hunger, crime, disease, and underdevelopment.

It was in the midst of this sad reality that Goodluck Jonathan contested and won the 2011 presidential election. For one very simple reason, Nigerian masses wholeheartedly welcomed with both hands, the transformational agenda of President Goodluck Jonathan. It was aimed at alleviating the long time suffering of more than 60% of the nation’s population that literally sell their own blood in order to provide food, clothing, housing, transportation, education, and health care for members of their families.

The transformational agenda started well with a “zero tolerance for corruption” posture. For the first time, a large cache of “untouchables” were arrested and docked for issues bothering on graft. Deliberate efforts are also being made by government to diversify the nation’s economy through practical steps to discontinue our reliance on the unpredictable revenue from oil and gas. Another highpoint of the transformational agenda of the Jonathan-led administration is the renewed vigour towards fixing the very important power sector through increased funding and other complimentary instruments and policies. To crown it all, government found it wise to increase the basic salaries of workers after coming to the realization that the nation’s present socio-economic framework was too weak to support majority of households in the country meet their statutory obligations.

Owing to the ignoble activities of a few but powerful persons working with foreign collaborators, four of the nation’s refineries located in Rivers, Delta, and Kaduna States were systematically sabotaged in order to promote a needless fuel importation business. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, we have no reason to import petroleum products at all. As a matter of fact, Nigeria is importing petrol and kerosene today because government has lost the battle of “will” to a tiny group of people that feed on the common blood of Nigerians. Instead of going after these enemies of the nation, government is being stampeded into harassing hapless citizens through the arrogant attempts to remove fuel subsidy.
Signs suggesting that government have lost the soul of the nation to a small clan of greedy and heartless Nigerians and their foreign accomplices emerged when the governor of the Central Bank, Mallam Lamido Sanusi called for the immediate withdrawal of fuel subsidy shortly after resuming office. His major plank of argument was that only a “tiny cabal” was benefiting from the huge subsidy paid by government. I strongly disagree with Sanusi’s opinion.

It is quite regrettable that the CBN governor will in a cheap attempt to push his opinion through, dismiss and bury the fact that millions of Nigerians benefit from the subsidy government pay on petroleum products. For the few people like him that does not dip hands into their bottomless pockets to buy petrol, he may find it convenient to deny the benefits of fuel subsidy. This kind of attitude displays the mien of the average top government official. The truth is that, there are millions of Nigerians, including bus/taxi drivers, small scale enterprises, Okada riders, hair dressers, restaurateurs, hoteliers, and even religious organizations that save about N90 for every liter of petrol they buy. No person or amount of propaganda can drown this fact in a pool of insensitivity of a few well-heeled government officials. A lie will always remain a lie, no matter who tells it. This clarification is very important because of the high amount of respect President Jonathan has for his aides and other top government functionaries.

Sometimes, government officials acting the script of third parties, can deliberately give counsels that will put their principals in problem. The president should therefore take heed of this and ignore any policy that will put more holes in the pockets of ordinary Nigerians. In everything, let him stand with the masses. Events around the globe have shown that power actually belongs to the masses. I am tempted to believe that the enemies of Nigerian democracy (they are many) will take advantage of the expected uproar that will greet the removal of fuel subsidy next year to incite the masses to ask for the resignation of the president. These are some of the reasons why the president must be very cautious with the suggestions he receives from his advisers, ministers, and other top government functionaries.

The unilateral position of Sanusi concerning the removal of fuel subsidy was emboldened by the coming of Dr. Okonjo-Iweala as the Minister Finance in August, 2011. She too has been in the forefront of calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. I am not surprised owing to her background as a senior World Bank staff. The World Bank is a tool used by the West to promote and protect their economy. Unknown to many, the economic independence of Africa will be a threat to the West. They will hide behind any veil to destabilize the continent’s polity and economy. Some of these veils include Austerity Measures, Structural Adjustment Program, and Currency Devaluation.

Currently, attention has been shifted to the National Assembly. The minister of Finance is investing so much energy trying to convince the legislators on the need to remove fuel subsidy. Let them not be deceived by paper logic. Governance is more of a practical thing than paper logic. They should not be swayed by the beautiful pictures Okonjo-Iweala usually paints about Europe and America. If Nigerian workers earns as much as their contemporaries in those countries, nobody will complain about buying fuel even at N200 per liter.

Sadly, the latest call for the removal of fuel subsidy came from the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF). According to its chairman and governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Amaechi; the fuel subsidy was enriching only a few people. I strongly condemn the series of lapses that have led to Nigeria becoming a petrol-import-dependent country. However, there is no way those who import petroleum products will not make profit. It is the huge profits these importers make that cause Sanusi and Amaechi to argue that only a tiny number of Nigerians are enjoying the benefits of fuel subsidy. This is a very faulty way to analyze issues and draw conclusion. It will be too wrong for government to sacrifice Nigerian masses just to “fight” those who milk Nigeria through the subsidy they receive from importing petroleum products to service the high demands in the local market.

There is also this suspicion that some persons and companies involved in the importation of petroleum products do collaborate with some government officials to engage in sharp practices that is costing the country trillions of Naira. There are also cases of smuggling of petroleum products out of the country. All of the factors enumerated above are reasons why the CBN governor, NGF, and minister of finance want fuel subsidy removed. If our refineries are working at optimum capacity, we would have no reason to import fuel and spend huge amount on subsidies. The Nigerian masses should not be forced to pay for the inefficiencies of government officials and organizations.

One fact that has emerged clearly from all the calls for the removal of fuel subsidy points to one direction. The nation’s fiscal policy formulators and advisers do not have regard for the Nigerian masses. They are therefore easily persuaded to take a pro-elitist stand each time the need for national transformation arises. In fact, they see the masses as inconsequential in the greater Nigerian Project. This is one strong reason why President Jonathan must be quick to dismiss whatever idea or suggestion that will cause him not to stand with the masses.

It is also a huge fact that the nation’s policy formulators, special advisers, and senior special assistants to the president are either lazy or ran out of ideas. The only option left for them is to take hold of the jugular of hapless masses by rooting for the removal of fuel subsidy. They see it as a short cut to fixing the nation’s frail socio-economic framework. Like I have suggested elsewhere, the phase has come for government to make the affluent bear the burden of nation’s transformational agenda for the first time in the history of the country. Since independence in 1960, it has been the suffering masses that carry the burden of the nation’s political and economic experimentations.
There is no doubt about the fact that the withdrawal of fuel subsidy will save billions of Naira for government to invest in other critical areas. However, the other side of the coin is that majority of Nigerians are too poor to buy a liter of fuel at N150. These are persons that earn less than $2 a day. It is with this $2 that they pay for the feeding, rent, clothing, education, and medical expenses of their family members. Withdrawing fuel subsidy at this time will definitely increase the level of poverty in Nigeria. The gains of the new minimum wage of N18,000 will be rubbished by the hike in the pump price of fuel.

Like I have suggested in my other write-ups on this same issue, those pushing for the removal of petroleum subsidy would sing a different song if they were earning even N100,000 a month. Many persons in the “president’s team” are not on the same page with him. Ordinarily, their opinions are supposed to be shaped by the pledge of the president, which is to “stand with the masses.”

Instead of strangulating the poor and hapless masses to raise additional money to service the nation’s socio-economic framework, government should pay more attention to the development of the non-oil sector of the economy. This should be done by energizing the private sector to perform at optimum capacity. This will however mean having a robust power groundwork, cheap access to credit facilities, lower interest rates, improved security of lives and property, friendly tax regime, and a sound transport infrastructure among others. With these fiscal policies, the economy will pick up and help create jobs and improve the welfare of the citizenry. It is at this point that government can contemplate the removal of fuel subsidy. By then, the nation’s socio-economic framework would be able to absorb the shocks that would come with it.

Calls for fuel subsidy removal: How not to help the president

Never in the history of Nigeria has any president or military ruler enjoyed the overwhelming support of the low and middle class as Goodluck Jonathan does. These two socio-economic classes make up over 80% of the Nigerian population. The interpretation of this analysis is that Goodluck Jonathan is Nigeria’s first “people’s president.” Several reasons are responsible for this political development. However, let me dwell on the fundamental factor.

After decades of uncertainty, Nigerians have come to accept democracy as the best form of government. Up till 1999, a greater percentage of Nigerians preferred military dictatorship to civilian administration. The foundation of this aberration is not far-fetched. Previous democratic experiments crashed on the heads of hapless Nigerian masses. It happened that most politicians simply used their privileged positions in government to pursue personal, tribal, and religious interests. This sad political development went on to rubbish the fair spirit of democracy. Soon, corruption, tribalism, religious intolerance, political thuggery, and decaying public infrastructure drowned the fertile expectations of the hoard of the unemployed, middle and low income Nigerians. What followed this distasteful reality was not unexpected. People started clamouring for change. Sadly however, this change came not through the ballot boxes, but barrel of guns. At first, it never mattered much to the masses. People were just interested in a change; not minding the colour or taste.

Just in no distant time, falsehood grew weak and collapsed on the laps of military dictators. These despots spoke in tongues that resembled those of saints. Despite the quality of propaganda they unleashed on harmless and unsuspecting Nigerians; all their lies could not be turned into truth. It however cost Nigeria the sweat and blood of some patriotic citizens for the unsuspecting masses to come to the realization that democracy was superior to dictatorship. The important point to note is that the problem with Nigerian democracy was traditional. It had something to do with our peculiar political attitude.

In countries where democracy is working, it is the political leaders that have made it so. This directly rests the blame for Nigeria’s poor democratic culture on the shoulders of the nation’s political class, which have continued to ignore the fundamental fact that democracy is all about identifying and finding solutions to the needs of society. These needs include peace, security of lives and property, economic growth, infrastructural development, and social welfare.

It was in this state in the political history of Nigeria that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan came into the scene. From every available indication, Jonathan’s emergence is more of a divine interjection than human connections. President Jonathan is no doubt Nigeria’s first unassuming head of government. He is intelligent, humble, hardworking, and a God-trusting personality. His captainship of Aso Rock defied many national traditions and norms. Apart from the fact that he is the first PhD holder to mount Nigeria’s presidency, Jonathan is the only minority to have been entrusted with the nation’s driving seat. His famous “I was not born rich” speech endeared him to many voters, weeks leading to the April 2011 presidential election. Millions of ordinary Nigerians, including myself hurriedly saw Jonathan as “our man.” This was a man that went to school without sandals or bag to carry his books. He slept under an electric fan only at the University of Port Harcourt.

It never took many suffering Nigerians more than ten seconds to pick Jonathan as their presidential choice. The outcome of the 2011 presidential election did not come as a surprise to many. Even the few that expressed doubt about his chances did so based on their fears about the towering ethnic and religious factors in Nigerian politics. They therefore wondered how Jonathan could survive an election that will be decided by tribe and creed. It is gladdening that Nigeria has crossed the bridge of parochial sentiments.

The outcome of the 2011 presidential election was indeed a coup against the few but powerful enemies of Nigeria. The down-trodden masses decided to join forces to say no to the dirty and old order, where they are used and hurriedly dumped after oiling the ambitions of a few smooth-tongued politicians. Even in the midst of the darkest night, one thing has become very clear. Nigerians are tired of bad political leadership. President Jonathan appreciates this fact too. Unfortunately, not many in his team are on the same page with him. This is not only dangerous for him as an individual, but a big threat to the culture of democracy in Nigeria. The president must therefore do everything within his powers to moderate the opinions and counsels of his advisers and aides.

The greatest problem political leaders worldwide face is in the selection of a “winning team.” This is responsible for the many cases where government officials reason and walk in different directions. In such cases, the president usually fails to deliver on his mandate. Like President Jonathan himself confessed shortly before the nomination of his cabinet, people seek political offices for different reasons. While some are for service, others for personal gains. There are still some who seek power just to protect the interests or agendas of third party organisations. Quite frankly, it is very difficult to separate the “clean” from the “dirty” because they all wear the same faces and robes.

To help differentiate between the “clean” and “dirty”, political leaders are expected to listen to the opinions of their advisers, but strongly consider the interests of the masses. This is the secret of successful political leaders. Very few government officials will be ingenious enough to climb down from their Olympian heights to consider the feelings of the unemployed or low income earners. Their reasoning is always unilateral. The beauty of democracy is not in how sweet a song is, but how many people “feel” the lyrics. The truth is that democracy is all about numbers. The majority may be wrong in some cases. They cannot be wrong all the time. Nigerian masses are indeed right in asking for the continuation of fuel subsidy at least for now.

It is a huge fact that many of those who voted for President Jonathan are card-carrying members of political parties other than the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). This is one good reason why the president must ignore every temptation and continue to absorb criticisms from the opposition. This will make him a better president than all his predecessors. No doubt, criticisms will come from labour, NGOs, cultural, and even faith-based organisations. It is also true that some persons and organisations simply find it fashionable to criticize every government policy or programme. This is wrong. Ordinarily, criticisms should be constructive.

However, one very important fact to consider is that criticisms of government policies and programs usually arise from isolated issues. For instance, labor and civil society organisations have vowed to resist any attempt to increase the pump price of petrol following the announcement by the minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala that that government is planning to remove petrol subsidy soon. Protests also greeted the revelation that electricity tariff will be reviewed upward early next year. It is not as if these government policies are bad. The problem lies in the fact that in developing policies and frameworks, most government officials usually refuse to look at all the sides of the coin. Every policy must take into consideration associated factors such as culture, income strength, percentage of unemployment, and level of poverty. Take for instance calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. Those making this call hinge their argument mainly on the fact that other developed countries have saved a lot of money through the withdrawal of fuel subsidy. Unfortunately, the proponents of fuel subsidy removal have forgotten that the least citizens of those countries earn is as much as $130 a day. One cannot for any reason compare this to a country where many earn less that $2 a day. They have deliberately ignored the fact that the level of unemployment and poverty are still very high in Nigeria.

There is no doubt about the fact that the withdrawal of fuel subsidy will save billions of Naira for government to invest in other critical areas. However, the other side of the coin is that majority of Nigerians are too poor to buy a litre of fuel even at N65. These are persons that earn less than $2 a day. It is with this $2 that they pay for the feeding, rent, clothing, education, and medical expenses of their family members. Withdrawing fuel subsidy at this time will definitely increase the level of poverty in Nigeria. The gains of the new minimum wage of N18,000 will be rubbished by the hike in the pump price of fuel. Like I have suggested in my other write-ups on this same issue, those pushing for the removal of petroleum subsidy would sing a different song if they were earning even N100,000 a month. Many persons in the “president’s team” are not on the same page with him. Ordinarily, their opinions are supposed to be shaped by the pledge of the president, which is to “stand with the masses.”

This brings to the fore how ministers, special advisers, senior special assistants, and other aides are not helping the president to “stand with the masses.” Just as there are many ways to kill a rat, there also many ways they can help the president succeed without hurting the masses. Since from independence, hapless Nigerian masses have been forced to carry the burden of national economic transformation agendas, leaving the elites free as eagles in a clear sky. Like is usually done in western democracies, formulators of fiscal policies should turn the heat on the wealthy this time around. Government should introduce heavy taxes on luxury cars, mansions, and all imported goods that can be produced locally. Government should also reduce the salaries and allowances of elected officials and political appointees. More than that, the fight against corruption should be taken to the zenith.

Furthermore, government should pay more attention to the development of the non-oil sector of the economy. This should be done by energizing the private sector to perform at optimum capacity. This will however mean having a robust power groundwork, cheap access to credit facilities, lower interest rates, improved security of lives and property, friendly tax regime, and a sound transport infrastructure among others. With these fiscal policies, the economy will pick up and help create jobs and improve the welfare of the citizenry. It is at this point that government can contemplate the removal of fuel subsidy. By then, the nation’s socio-economic framework would be able to absorb the shocks that would come with it.

It is a shame that the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil is importing fuel for local consumption. It shows that something is wrong with us as a nation. Instead of joining forces with the ministry of Petroleum Resources to make our refineries work at optimum capacity, the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and Governor of Central Bank, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi see the removal of petroleum subsidy as a magic wand that will help provide the bulk of the money Nigeria needs to service her socio-economic masterplan. They should look elsewhere to raise money. The Nigerian masses have seen enough this last fifty years! This is very important because fuel is one thing that everybody uses directly or indirectly. There is no doubt that any increase in the pump price of fuel will prompt the upward review of transport fares, school fees, house rent, food stuff, and health care services.

WikiLeak: The Dressing of Informants as Diplomats

Every coin has three sides- not two as widely believed. It is only when you role a coin on a smooth surface that you will realize the hidden truth surrounding the third face of every coin. In the same vein, it took only the now infamous WikiLeaks for the world to know that most developed democracies dress informants in diplomats’ robes to deceive unsuspecting friendly countries for their own gains.

The emergence of WikiLeaks is not just an eye opener for the entire African continent, but very timely too for Nigeria in particular. Only recently, the Nigerian federal government woke up from its shameful slumber to attempt redirecting her foreign policy thrust, which had been long overdue.

Going by the conventional mandates given to most western diplomats by their home governments, one can hurriedly conclude that our foreign missions have done nothing more than providing jobs for some of our citizens. As exposed by WikiLeaks, most advanced democracies including the United States, Britain, France, Italy, and Germany among others, hold more critical information about our nation than the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does. This is because these countries see Nigeria as a very vital link in their various national security and economic plans.

This is exactly what was expected of our diplomats abroad. Had this been the case, Nigeria would have benefited tremendously from America’s military technology, China’s industrial revolution, India’s medical prowess, Britain’s mass transport scheme, Japan’s automobile industry, Germany’s construction technology, Spain’s agricultural exploits, and France’s electricity success story among others. Owing largely to a weak and purposeless foreign policy thrust, our diplomats just spend taxpayers’ money to wine, dine, and shop in their duty posts. At best, they organize elaborate tours and cocktail parties for visiting government officials.

Here in Nigeria, a deliberate plan has been successfully hatched to make it very fashionable for critical public figures; including presidents, vice presidents, leadership of the National Assembly, military chiefs, ministers, governors, anti-graft officials, and the leadership of religious, tribal, cultural, and opposition political parties to befriend western diplomats. The reward is mostly speed-of- light approval of visa applications by friends and family members of the friends of these western diplomats.

Do not doubt a Nigerian if he or she boasts of securing you a visa to any grade A country just with a phone call. In most cases, it does not amount to anything criminal if critical information is volunteered to foreign diplomats. It becomes a different ball game if the information is solicited. This is where cases of espionage take root.

The dangers posed by this unhealthy diplomatic culture are very grave. Apart from endangering national security, the cord that holds the multi-ethnic fiber of the nation is threatened. In most cases, the information sent back to their home governments by these diplomats is not usually verified to ascertain their authenticity. This can be confirmed by the pattern of the many one-sided reports sent by the immediate past American Ambassador in Nigeria, Dr. Robin Sanders, as was leaked by WikiLeaks. The “informant” simply reported the personal opinions of critical citizens about key government officials and national issues. No doubt, the hoard of information they gathered were open to being tainted with lies, half-truths, anger, hate, and vengeance. This view is responsible for why most advanced democracies, especially the United States hold wrong opinion about many personalities and countries. Without doubt, this fact has caused Washington to take several wrong and unilateral actions in the past. The United States will continue to do more as long as Washington refuses to change her foreign policy mechanism.

In one of my books, “The Undressing of Bill Clinton’s White House: Enemies of United States’ Democracy Unmasked” which was published in 2010, I have pursued the argument that America’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on wrong intelligence. This is unfortunate. Only God knows what the world has suffered in the hands of the world’s super powers owing to faulty intelligence and wrong opinions they hold about personalities and governments.

The time has therefore come for the world to wake up and act fast too. It is exceedingly unwise and wasteful for the United States to sacrifice the lives of thousands of brilliant youths and billions of taxpayers’ dollars to fight terrorism while she is provoking more people to embrace extreme violence. It will be far cheaper and easier to achieve victory over terrorism by simply respecting the human rights of citizens and political independence of weaker nations.

Back then, our grand parents used guns to fight for political independence from the colonists. In this age, we should use patriotism to fight for the economic independence of the African continent. Without economic independence, our future will offer nothing. Too many of our patriots have been blinded by the west.

Okonjo-Iweala: A Patriot Blinded By The West

In one of my books, “Western Democrats in Glass parliament”, published in 2000, I have argued that western democracies will never tolerate Africa’s economic independence owing to the direction of their national ideologies. It is no secret that the economies of many western countries are energized by the inability of Africa’s political leaders to deploy sound fiscal policies aimed at stimulating rapid economic growth. This sad development has continued to keep Africa as an export- dependent economy despite the fact that the bulk of the raw materials used in the manufacture and production of finished goods imported by African countries are sourced from the continent.

There is no doubt about the fact that Nigeria is blessed with great brains and patriots. Among them are Wole Soyinka, Dora Akunyili, Oby Ezekwesili, Lamido Sanusi, and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala among others. What is in doubt is whether all of them are aware that the developed democracies will be too willing to do anything under the sun to promote and protect their national economies. Colonisation, the Cold War, civil wars, tribal conflicts, and the several international humanitarian/peace-keeping missions are all tools used by western democracies to secure economic victories over the African continent.

It has become evident that both the World Bank and IMF are tools in the hands of western democracies. As long as African intellectuals refuse to accept this overflowing truth, their brains and patriotism will do the continent very little or no good at all. Is it not surprising that the many Africans in diaspora have not been able to make meaningful differences whenever they are given the opportunities to serve their countries in various capacities?

Perhaps, I should also point out here that Structural Adjustment Program, Currency Devaluation, and Subsidy Removal are examples of some of the pills western democracies such as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain prescribe as cure for the continent’s economic problems. In actual sense, they hide behind these false fiscal policies to cripple the economies of African countries. As part of the plot, they task international institutions such as the World Bank, IMF, and world class universities to recruit the best brains from the continent. These intellectuals are hurriedly thought the Core Values of human and economic management. This is aimed at arousing the patriotic fiber in them. At this point, they are drugged (paid far more than their contemporaries at home), blinded (unable to recognize the evil in their employers), and given a pair of “western eyes.” At this point, these intellectuals no longer see things from the African perspective. They both reason and look at Africa with “western eyes.”

It must be noted that every society has its own peculiarities. As a result of this, what has worked in country A may not necessarily work in country B. Africans wearing “western eyes” will never realize this fact even though it is profusely clear. For instance, the governor of Nigeria’s Central, Lamido Sanusi and Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala are all bitterly agitating for the removal of fuel subsidy simply because same has worked elsewhere in America and Europe. Since they are wearing “western eyes”, they have failed to realize that: (a) Unemployment figures are very low in America and Europe (b) An average American or European worker earn as much as $130 or N19,500 per day. With this kind of salary, Nigerians can afford to buy fuel even at N150 per liter.

There is no doubt that both Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi will not try stampeding government into removing fuel subsidy if they were earning monthly salaries of N50,000 per month. While tens of millions of Nigerians are earning less than $2 daily, they go home with outrageous salaries and allowances. One had expected them to suggest better ways of putting the nation’s economy back on track. The poor masses cannot continue to sacrifice the little they have while the few well-heeled federal government officials are allowed to laugh away in the comfort of their cars, offices, and houses each time government decides to find solutions to the problems of the country. Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi do not need to be reminded that the removal of fuel subsidy will translate into the sharp upward movement of the prices of goods and services such as food, rent, transportation, education, health care, and building materials among others.

But if one may ask: What is wrong in subsidizing fuel? Are the beneficiaries of fuel subsidy not Nigerians whose interests the president, ministers, legislators, governors, and governor of the Central Bank all swore to protect? As a matter of fact, owing to the collapse of the culture of sound political leadership, fuel subsidy has turned out to be the only sure way Nigerian masses can benefit from the oil and gas revenue accruing the nation. There is no citizen that does not benefit from fuel subsidy direct or indirectly. Removing it will therefore bring out the fire in the heart of millions of suffering Nigerian masses. This is what the west is looking for. President Goodluck Jonathan must therefore not allow American and European powers to tie his hands behind him and plunge the country into the abyss of socio-economic instability. The west does not want Africa to gain economic independence. It is only through orchestrated socio-economic instabilities that they can achieve such evil plots. This is the more reason why despite all the noise they make about corruption; American and European banks still accept billions of stolen dollars from Africa.

With the way Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi are going about the fuel subsidy removal debate, I am pretty sure that they will one day ask the federal government to stop spending billions of Naira to construct roads. While our fiscal policy formulators and advisers are busy giving subsidy a bad name, agricultural subsidies accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of the EU. Who is fooling who?

Hugo Chavez is definitely on my mind. The time has come for President Jonathan to call all the anti-people members of his team to order or fire them out rightly. There is enough evidence to show that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and advisers are out of touch with the vision of the present administration. They have clearly run dry of ideas. Spending N600b to assist Nigerians buy fuel at an affordable price is not a crime. Rather than call for the removal of fuel subsidy, the anti-subsidy apostles should task their brains and think of better ways to increase the revenue receipt of the nation without worsening the already bad plight of ordinary Nigerians. In this regard, government should be serious with the war against graft, reduce the monetary rewards of elected officials and political appointees, stabilize electricity to expand industrial production, increase investments in the non-oil/gas sectors, improve basic socio-economic infrastructure such as roads/railway/waterways, provide affordable quality health care service, and provide free quality education from primary to secondary levels. All of these will help energize and expand the national economy. With this, the likes of Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi will not have any reason to bother about how much government spends to subsidize fuel.

More than that, concerted efforts must be put in motion to stop the continuous importation of petroleum products. This is part of the wider agenda of western democracies. They simply coopt a few willing Nigerians to ensure that our refineries do not work at optimum capacities. With this, they will be able to import crude from us and sell petrol and kerosene to us with a very appreciable profit margin. The same thing applies to the power sector. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala should wake up from her slumber and return the “western eyes” she is wearing. Also help Lamido Sanusi do same.

The art and culture of living above one's income

Corruption has since turned into an art following the sophistication of anti-graft protocols by national governments and the global community. The reason for this development is not far fetched. It has been acknowledged globally that corruption is mostly responsible for the many cases of poor political leadership, pandemic poverty, snail-speed economic growth, decaying socio-economic infrastructure, and political instability especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

It has also become an acceptable norm for people who occupy public offices to acquire fleet of expensive automobiles and own landed properties in major cities across the globe. Those who fail to meet this mark are hurriedly dismissed as dull or out of tone with current realities. This is most regrettable.

A careful analysis of this sad development has shown that people are forced into living above their incomes for varying reasons. Chief among them are weak national socio-economic framework which is too feeble to support citizens survive on their legitimate incomes. People are therefore forced to seek alternative means of finding funds to take care of their basic necessities such as shelter, food, clothing, health care, and educational needs of their families. This is one of the many ways corruption grow in developing societies.

There is no gainsaying that in addition to the high level of unemployment, close to 50% of Nigerian subsistent farmers, artisans, and junior workers in the public service earn barely $1 dollar daily. Another 30% earn about $2 daily while 20% earn close to $5 daily. The percentage of Nigerians that earn up to $100 daily is less than 10%. With such realities staring us in the face, one can rush to the conclusion that most Nigerians are living above their legitimate incomes going by the cost of imported cars, household equipments, and sprawling mansions springing up every minute of the day across the country.

Disturbed by the near boiling-point anger of the masses, the political class has now devised some strange mechanisms to launder proceeds of corruption. These are in the form of outrageous allowances, over invoicing of contracts, frivolous travels and seminars among others.

As part of efforts to discourage people from living above their legitimate incomes, government must act fast and address the following issues:
1. Reduce to the barest minimum, the percentage of unemployment and poverty
2. Carry out Socio-cultural re-orientation
3. Redesign the nation’s anti-graft protocols

In order to achieve these three fundamental objectives, government will need to energise the organized private sector to stimulate rapid national economic growth with specific emphasis on agriculture and other non-oil sectors of the economy. This will not only expand the employment market but also help to reduce poverty significantly. With this development, crime rate will fall drastically.

Furthermore, government will have to embark on the revitalization of all national socio-economic infrastructures like roads and power in order to reduce the high cost of doing business. Government should also pursue the inland waterways and railway transport infrastructure as part of efforts to reduce the high cost of moving goods and services around the country. Insecurity is another problem threatening the nation’s economic growth. The various security agencies should collaborate and invest massively in intelligence gathering mechanism. More than that, government should strengthen existing specialized banks like Bank of Industry and National Agriculture and Cooperative Bank to provide cheaper access to funds for farmers and those that desire to establish new businesses. The commercial banks are usually not ideal for these kinds of enterprises.

The National Orientation Agencies to me have not been doing enough to service its mandate. The agency should liaise with religious, social, and community based organisations to re-orient citizens on the importance of hard work and integrity.

In addition to all the existing anti-graft legislations establishing and empowering both the EFCC and ICPC, there is still the important need to establish a National Wealth Verification Commission (NWVC). Whoever- citizen or foreigner that intends to spend N3m or more should be required by law to approach any recognized court of law to swear to an affidavit indicating the sources of the fund and lodge the original copy with the NWVC. Within a maximum of 24 hours, the deponent will be issued a clearance certificate with which to spend the said amount. However, the issuance of the Clearance Certificate must not be tied to confirmation of facts deposed to by the deponent. NWVC will however within a period of not more than 12 months carry out thorough investigation of sources of funds and issue a Certificate of Confirmation of the previous Clearance Certificate. Where the deponent is found to have sworn to a doubtful or false affidavit, such person will be prosecuted in a specialized court set up to try cases of financial corruption alone. It is my belief that the introduction of NWVC will go a very long way to reduce the menace of corruption in Nigeria.

Reuben Abati: When Snakes Change Skin

I grew in an environment surrounded by thick forest on all sides. Seeing snakeskins was therefore not strange to me because there was never a week I did not stumble on one or more while playing in my dad’s then beautiful and serene landscaped compound. In my childhood innocence, snakes meant just one thing to me: a shy crawling creature that loves changing cloths always. I was however not jealous because my father succeeded in making his children to accept the fact that unhealthy desires were sin against God and man. Mind you, not many parents were that lucky.

As years continue to take the better part of my sojourn on earth, my childhood opinion about snakes began to melt like ice-cream on a sunny afternoon in Kano or Sokoto. Interestingly, I have come to realize that snakes mean different things to different people. While some snakes are poisonous, others are not. Even though, many will detest the presence of snakes around them, some keep them as pets. There are others- snake charmers who are believed to possess the ability to manipulate the mind of these multi-specie creatures.

Since I appreciate how much space religion occupies in the consciousness of Nigerians; let me take a plunge into the deep waters of the Bible to appraise the unique place of snakes in the lives of Christians, which I am one. While commissioning His disciples in readiness for the task of spreading the gospel of hope and salvation in an unfriendly world, Jesus Christ said in Matthew 10:16: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” What will you find if one takes down the walls surrounding this counsel? Two mysteries. The first one is wisdom if in the midst of unfriendly people. The second mystery is magnanimity in victory.

This brings me to the foundation of my piece. There are usually two camps in human life. You are either on the defensive or on offensive. Whichever camp one finds him or her self, there is a moral code of engagement. This is where many people- especially newspaper columnists have failed. The fact that the media is the conscience of the society is no longer in doubt. The problem has been that many newspaper columnists and reporters only celebrate failures and ignore excellence. They believe that it is unprofessional to clap for political leaders even when the need becomes obvious. Those that sing praises of the excellent efforts of politicians are quickly tagged “corrupt” or “derailed.” Funny enough, the apostles of “anti” and “attack” brand of journalism will not bother to point their high beam torchlights to dry grounds in order to enable the masses walk through hard grounds. This does not make sense.

As a commentator on contemporary issues, I do admire the philosophy behind the “attack” brand of journalism. I however do complement writings with quite a handful of “how tos.” Every criticism must come with one or more alternative ideas. This makes it positive and healthy for the growth of democracy.
Unarguably, Reuben Abati is among the small community of Christian journalists that heeded the counsel of Jesus Christ as recorded in Matthew 10:16. He has lived most of his public life as a snake when the situation demanded and like a dove if it was necessary. This is one reason snakes change skin.

Now that Reuben Abati has just changed skin, I want to hope that the unambiguous job prescription of a spokesperson of the president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the federal republic of Nigeria will not make him live all his days in Aso Rock only as a dove. No doubt, the snake in him will help his charmer- the president to be on his toes always. Benefit? Democracy would be energised and the masses will have many reasons to rejoice.

However, while I was on the last paragraph of this piece, a close friend of my family called to inform me that a snake has just bitten its charmer at the market square. I tried to find out what happened afterwards but his line went dead. Each time I made attempt to get back to him, a mysterious feminine voice kept on reminding me that my friend’s number has been switched off. Because of the nature of his job, my friend will never switch off his phone. Could it be a problem of flat battery? Immediately, my mind flashed to PHCN. Abati- sorry, God help Nigeria!

Anti-graft war: when a nation's No.1 law officer becomes helpless

A new but sad vista was added to the myriad of reasons why not much have been achieved in Nigeria’s much talked-about war against graft despite the huge amount of human and material resources invested in it. As a matter of fact, it was tales of helplessness and absence of zeal that were brought to the fore when the immediate past Attorney-General of the federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Adoke volunteered answers during the screening exercise of ministerial nominees at the National Assembly in Abuja on Thursday, 30th June, 2011.
Clearly, his opinion about the EFCC and ICPC were not unexpected. Adoke was quite aware that of recent, the nation’s two anti-graft agencies have become very unpopular among members of the National Assembly. This is not unconnected with the bitter experiences of the former speaker of the House of Representatives; Mr. Dimeji Bankole and other principal officers. He therefore capitalized on this unique opportunity to play to the gallery without counting his teeth.

Without doubt, Adoke’s comments about EFCC and ICPC carried marks of occupational fatigue and ‘do as you wish’ attitude. All of these are dangerous and unexpected of the No. 1 law officer of a country that’s desirous of winning the battle against corruption. As Attorney-General of the federation and Minister of Justice, Adoke had both teeth and voice but for reasons best known to him alone; refused to bark simply because the fierce looking leadership of both the EFCC and ICPC hanged a charge of ‘interference’ on his neck. This is novel in the history of anti-graft crusade.

To many observers, it was shocking to hear that the EFCC and ICPC lacked the required capacity to do thorough investigation and collation of evidences to secure the conviction of persons charged with corrupt practices. This cannot be true. Perhaps, the former law officer was only trying to polish the fact that officials the nation’s two anti-graft agencies do collect gratification and deliberately leave openings to enable accused persons escape the long arm of the law.

There is already this cloudy opinion in some quarters that the fast becoming culture of rift between the office of the Attorney-General of the federation on one hand and those of EFCC and ICPC on the other are the handiwork of some well heeled apostles of corruption in and outside the country. It started in the early days of the late President Musa Yar’Adua’s administration. The then attorney-general, Mr. Michael Aondoakaa and the leadership of EFCC and ICPC never agreed to put their kernels in one basket. It therefore became extremely difficult for government to wage an effective war against corruption. Some analysts are of the opinion that these unnecessary disagreements are mere smokescreens rehearsed and deployed to distract and eventually deceive unsuspecting Nigerian masses.

Let no one, including Mohammed Adoke stand on the Vaswani brothers’ case to undress the EFCC and ICPC in front of Nigerian masses. The truth is that, right from 2000 when the ICPC was inaugurated; the office of the Attorney-General of the federation has never wanted to fight corruption. They have rather been busy rubbing drums of grease on the elbows of Nigeria’s many and powerful apostles of corruption. To support this opinion, let’s consider the submission of Adoke as it concerns the Halliburton scandal. According to him, “I decided to confront the issue once and for all. I called for the reports and went through the reports. I found out that there were no sufficient evidences linking any of our past leaders in respect of the said Halliburton scandal.

“Those of them that we could identify, including Halliburton itself, Julius Berger, and others, we decided to evaluate the position of our laws. At the end of the day, in line with global best practices, we opted to settle with them, because if we decided to prosecute them, the likeliness of our securing a conviction was very minimal.”

With due respect to Mohammed Adoke, his submission was not only shallow but an insult on the sensibilities of ordinary Nigerians. He should do well to tell Nigerians how weak our laws are that it cannot nail persons that clearly took bribes to influence the awards of contracts. This is made more repulsive because some of the foreigners that gave the bribes have been indicted in their countries. Even in the face of the worst case scenario, we should ascribe to Femi Falana’s opinion that the aim of going to court is not always to win. Sometimes, it should act as opportunities to make bold statements. In the Halliburton case, the statement would have been: corruption is killing our nation. The truth about the Halliburton case is that no one is disputing the fact that bribes were given. What, according to Adoke was the problem is lack of sufficient evidences to nail those involved. Even at that, the minutest of evidences should have been presented in court and allow the judge to make a pronouncement. This will add real value to the war against graft. Our anti-corruption war should also seek to place moral burdens on those that committed corrupt practices but were freed by the courts due to technical inadequacies. This will in some way help to discourage corrupt intentions.

We are aware that it has become fashionable for those accused of corrupt practices to abandon proving their innocence to pursuing technical loopholes to escape justice. Unfortunately, there is no practical evidence anywhere that any of Nigeria’s attorneys-general has religiously made attempts to tighten our laws so as not to give room for corrupt persons to shorten the long arms of the law. This is what I earlier on referred to as occupational fatigue. It’s sometimes caused by lack of patriotism. That’s the reason for question like, “na my papa work? It takes only a patriotic mind for a public office holder to go all the length for one’s country.

More than that, the majority of Nigerians are convinced about President Goodluck Jonathan’s promise of a national reformation agenda. The foundation of this conviction is in his decision to appoint a no-nonsense Nigerian in the person of Professor Attahiru Jega as head of INEC. Every informed mind is aware of the fact that the task of national transformation starts with the conduct of credible elections, which the Professor Jega-led INEC did. The president will need to do same for the office of the attorney-general and minister of justice if the war against graft must be won.

Furthermore, appropriate legislation should be made to streamline the activities of the EFCC and ICPC to make them more civil in terms of their mode of reporting, investigation, invitation, arrest, and prosecution. Also, the reasons behind the constant conflict between the offices of the attorney-general and the anti-graft agencies must also be addressed so as to avoid technical lapses that led to rewarding corrupt people with their ill-gotten wealth. Most importantly, thorough investigation must be concluded before the arrest of suspects. These investigations should be tired to time. No investigation should take more than twelve months.
While I agree with Adoke that the EFCC and ICPC were in some cases involved in snowmaking while doing their jobs, it will be very difficult to invite or arrest Politically Exposed Persons (PEP) without the media making noise about it. This is where the ‘show’ comes in. Is he suggesting that their invitation, arrest, and prosecution should be done in secrecy?

The Boko Haram Question

It is not surprising that the Boko Haram question is fast gaining space in Nigeria. For a country that has almost been ruined by poor leadership in the political, cultural, economic, and religious sectors; the emergence of the Boko Haram sect is only a positive reminder that God loves Nigeria. With the pitiable depth Nigeria has sunk to in the last fifty years, many outside the shores of the country had thought that the world’s most populous black nation would have been dead and buried in the backyard of African history. Nigerians should therefore thank God before worrying about the menace of Boko Haram.

Over the last few months, many commentators have made the grave mistake of putting the Niger Delta crisis in the same basket with the Boko Haram question. Others have placed Boko Haram in the same cage with the Odua and Biafra agendas. They are not in any way birds of the same feather.

History has shown that political, social, and economic ideologies built on the foundation of religion is usually very complex and difficult to manage. This is due to the important place of God in the affairs of men and societies. It has therefore been easy for people and organizations to hide behind the banner of religion to promote their individual and collective beliefs. Even when some of these beliefs are doubtful or unpalatable, fear of the wrath of the unseen God- and not necessarily threats of violence weakens the resolve to put up open resistance. This, coupled with high quality propaganda has earned many radical Islamic organizations such as Al Qaeda the sympathy of many Muslim faithfuls.

In analyzing the Boko Haram question, one fundamental issue must be fully digested. Every religion has a unique way of responding to different issues involving God. For instance; Christians will gladly wait for God to avenge those that desecrate His name, nature, or eminence. Some Muslim sects will not. They will rather stand up to physically defend the name, nature, and eminence of Allah. This is the foundation of Islamic radicalism or fundamentalism. Unfortunately, several western countries like Britain and the United States have refused to accept this bare reality. The result is a steady increase in terrorist activities all over the world. In their own folly, Washington and London have responded with the use of extreme force against militant organisations at home and abroad.
Despite the astronomical amount of human and financial resources deployed in the last twenty years to combat religious radicalism as represented by Al Qaeda and sister organisations, very little have been achieved. This is one simple reason why I strongly endorse President Goodluck Jonathan’s decision to bring the leadership of the Boko Haram sect to a round table. This should not be seen as weakness on the part of the federal government. President Jonathan should not for any reason repeat the mistakes of the two Bush presidencies in the United States. They undermined the complexities and spiritual strength of Islamic fundamentalists. We are all sad witnesses to how wrong Washington was.
With superior arguments, the Boko Haram sect will disengage. This argument will however not be done with threats, guns and tanks. In 2009, the Nigerian federal government appropriated about N400b to equip the military to extinguish militancy in the Niger Delta region but failed woefully. What the military succeeded in achieving was the demolition of several coastline communities. They also won the prize of killing thousands of innocent women and children.
With all of these in mind, the federal government will need to invest enough political will and diverse resources to make the Boko Haram leadership appreciate the truth about the mechanism of globalization. They need to be told that our failing value system- not western education is responsible for the sordid state we have found ourselves. A whole lot of intellectual capacity will be required to achieve this dream.

I am not aware that western education encourages government officials to ignore the interests of the wider society and protect their private interests alone. Western education does not teach corruption. It does not also promote sexual promiscuity. No doubt, the concerns raised by Boko Haram are tenable. The problem is how to address them. This should be a challenge to all political, economic, cultural, and religious leaders in Nigeria. We cannot sit back and allow our values to be rubbished by the greed and strength of a few heeled persons in the society.