POLITICAL POWER SHOULD BE ABOUT IDEAS AND NOT PHYSICAL OR VERBAL ABUSE

I do not support the idea of President Jonathan suing Akande (APC interim Chairman) for airing his views, albeit that it is caustic and abrasive and does not touch on what is important, but I reckon that name calling only begs the issue. I will not vote for a party simply because it is calling another names. I want APC to bring on the real issues and tell us what they will do differently:
1. Insecurity – How will you handle the Boko Haram issue in the North and the Militancy issue in the South (Don’t go telling me about Amnesty; that is an old idea)
2. Youth Unemployment – How will you deal with the issue of youth unemployment knowing that Nigeria has a population of 167 Million people with 70% of the population being under 40 years of age.
3. Power – How will you raise the generation capacity given that Nigeria currently produce less that 5000 Megawatts and needs between 25,000 – 40,000 backed with the right distribution and transmission infrastructure. What will your timeline be like? (Please don’t tell us you need 5 years, we have heard that before).
4. Infrastructure – What will be your approach to bridging Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit? Will you favour some kind of consumption tax model as used under the PTF or would you rather out-rightly go for a Public partnership model? If any of these is not an option, how do you plan to raise capital budget and lower recurrent expenditure? How will you do this? By reducing Public sector work-force, cutting spending on unimportant things, or through other means? Or are you just going to borrow?
5. Education – What will your approach be in solving the problem of falling standards? How will you handle ASUU and other unions within the Education sector?
6. Healthcare – What will you do differently? Where will your focus be – putting new Health Infrastructure in place or just upgrading the existing ones? How about reinvigorating the NHIS? How do you plan to do this?
7. Agriculture – How do you plan to intervene in this sector? Will it be about leveraging a value-chain model which will tie in the Agro-allied sector or will it be about assuring food security alone? Any strategy as regards backward integration with a possibility of making Agriculture a chief source of foreign exchange earning? How will you do this?
8. Raising Industrial Capacity – What will you do with the dying Textile Industry? How will you jump-start local production? Will you leverage International Investments in this area? How will you achieve this against the back-drop of weak infrastructure and the lack of adequate support for the real sector by Nigerian banks?
9. How will you deal with other critical issues like restructuring Nigeria – devolution of powers, resource control, policing, federal character, cost of running government,etc.
10. I will reckon that if APC were seriously thinking of all these issues, it will have no time for name calling, except of-course it wants to behave like the PDP – “Get the power first and decide what to do will it afterwards!”

KEEPING A PACT WITH THE NIGERIAN PEOPLE

I have not seen the APC manifesto but I have picked up buzz words like food security, raising our power generation capacity to 40,000 MW, equality for all, devolution of powers and accelerated economic growth from newspaper coverage. This lacks any style nor does it really differentiate the APC, as there have been similar offers by the PDP. We have heard the so-called “Seven Point Agenda” from the PDP under YarAdua which did not go too far. However, its a good start by the APC, because it is better to trade ideas than to trade empty words like “Kindagarten President” and words like “Rascal”. In the days ahead, we need to see the details of the APC deal so as to know if it is practical and properly thought through. I will suggest that the APC begin to engage Community Based Organisations, Civil Society Groups and other Groups within the Civic space so as test the robustness of their offer to the Nigerian people. This election should not be fought on sentiments, so I will advise them to refrain from the “its our turn mentality”. It is pure hogwash and does not bear relevance in a modern world. I will not vote for a candidate because he is from the North or South. I will vote for a candidate whose offer I consider realistic and whose track-record convinces me he truly has the capacity to deliver on his promise. It is indeed the turn of the Nigerian people!

RUNNING GOVERNMENT LIKE BUSINESS

1. Paying Legislators Salaries instead of Allowances: I often wonder if corporate governance statutes will even allow non-executive directors earn monthly salaries? That will be totally at variance with corporate governance standards, wouldn’t it? So why do we pay our Legislators Salaries instead of Sitting Allowances? Why do we have a National Assembly Service Commission different from the Civil Service Commission?

2. Voting Money for Constituency Projects under the Management of Legislators: The constituency project issue is also another interesting issue. I can’t imagine a non-executive director having a dedicated budget from which he is able to implement projects meant to be done by executive directors. So who will exercise the oversight?

3. Having no Standards on Which Ministers Are Judged: Although the Federal Government claims there is a performance measurement standard for its Ministers, but I really cannot see it in practice except at press conferences where bogus achievements are unveiled by each ministry without a verification process and a peer-review mechanism as it happens in best practice business environments. In a Company, Directors are given targets that are measurable and Appraisals are conducted periodically and scores are given and based on performance appraisals, Directors are either rewarded, lose bonuses or are asked to exit based on performance, isn’t it? So why will you have a Minister who is basically playing politics, missing critical targets and getting rewarded from tax-payers money?

Though I accept that government must keep its social basis, it must yet apply basic business principles in order to deliver tangible results.

STILL ON GEORGE ZIMMERMAN’S ACQUITTAL

Beyond the race issue which is heating up emotions on this matter, I think there are are so many questions yet unanswered in this case:
1. Did Trayvon Martin have a right to be at the location he was at the time George Zimmerman spotted him?
2. Was Travyvon Martin committing a crime or was he in anyway doing something that was out-rightly anti-social at the time Zimmerman spotted him?
3. Did Zimmerman not raise an alarm and was advised not to continue trailing Trayvon?
4. Why was George Zimmerman adamant after being told to stop trailing Trayvon Martin?
5. Who was really the aggressor – Zimmerman or Trayvon?
6. Was there really a ground for Trayvon to have been agitated given Zimmerman’s pesky behaviour?
7. Why would Zimmerman use lethal force against an unarmed youth, not with a gang, not caught doing anything wrong, who is almost 10 years younger than him?
8. I have checked again and I still cannot find a logical basis for George Zimmerman’s acquittal.
I have heard the whole contradictions around the “stand your ground law” and I do not think Trayvon actually broke into a private property, nor did he initiate the aggression which led to his death and so do not think Zimmerman was in anyway standing his ground in this case. I think someone is manipulating the law to serve an inordinate end and I think the United States of America needs to readjust its moral compass if it wants to continue to lead the world.

LEAVING OUR TRIBAL CAMPS

I have been ruminating about how we can overcome the various challenges that seem to blur our potential as a nation in Nigeria, and it dawned on me that the only way that can happen is if we collectively let go of our tribal camps and allow the best among us lead the change, not caring where he. Or she comes from – whether he or she belongs to majority or minority ethnic group. For once, I want to see an Igbo man or an Hausa man rule Lagos provided he is the best and all his interest in Lagos and I want to see either a Yorba man or an Hausa man rule Anambra and either a Yoruba man or an Igbo man do same in Kano or Sokoto. I want to see us treat ourselves as humans first and not as animals that are of different breeds. Let’s recognize that development can only come when we run an inclusive system underscored by merit and openness. I believe in a healthy rivalry among regions, but I also believe that every Nigerian should be able to self actualize anywhere he chooses to reside within Nigeria; that way, I believe that regions will succeed or fail based on their preparedness and willingness to allow diversity and inclusion. I dream a Nigeria where state of origin and local government is not emphasized and all that matters is what you have to offer. Until that happens, politicians will continue to use our differences to divide us for their selfish advantages. For in truth, only nation, that allows diversity and inclusion can rise to greatness. God bless Nigeria.

WHO SAYS WE CANNOT HAVE A PART TIME LEGISLATURE IN NIGERIA?

The National Assembly recently rejected the idea of having a part time legislature. The questions to ask are: How many days does the Legislature have sittings? What is the nature of committee work as well as oversight functions that cannot be done on a part basis? How many months of the year does the Assembly go on recess? What is the average attendance at sittings even when the House is in full session? Does the resource being expended on State and Federal Legislature reflect the quantum of work being done? Is it possible that we can be more efficient? Can the Legislators be remunerated on a per-sitting basis? Can we lower staffing ratio per Legislator so as to obtain cost savings? These are questions a patriotic legislature should ask rather than throwing away the proposal on part-time legislature. I believe that it is workable proposition which should first be adopted at state levels just as it is widely done in the United States and should be introduced eventually at the Federal level because, we have more developmental challenges for which we need to deploy our resources than to continue to carry an unwieldy Legislature that is a huge drain on our resources.

SYRIA AND THE ANTI-LOGIC OF HUMANITARIAN STRIKES

In early 1991, I watched (as a young University Student) as James A. Baker, then Secretary of State under George H. Bush justified the need for Military intervention in order to stop Iraq from advancing into Kuwait. I thought to myself, is it not possible to have a pragmatic solution; one that will bring Saddam Hussein to the table? But before I could open my eyes, “Operation Dessert Storm” had started and years of tension followed with suspicion of Saddam’s complexity in a lot of terror attempts on the United States climaxing in the 9-11 disaster. Then again, in late 2002, I watched Colin Powell, then Secretary of State under George W. Bush, justify a strike, yet again, on Iraq in search of “weapons of mass destruction” and before I could open my eyes, war had started again, and this time, it took over a decade and by the time the United States saw the need to end it, the weight of war had taken a huge toll not just on the economy of the United States but also on the lives of United States service Men. Today, I am again watching as another Secretary of State, John Kerry, under Barack Obama, tries to justify another humanitarian strike on Syria for the use of “Chemical weapons”. I am a student of history and I reckon that in the last two decades, we have seen a lot of senseless humanitarian wars, which could have been averted if only America can explore other options. The Middle-East is already boiling, I really do not think it needs another heat, at least not at this time.