A REVIEW OF THE NIGERIA NATIONAL CONFERENCE 2014 REPORT

DEEPENING THE ALLOCATION MENTALITY:
When the National Conference was inaugurated in March 2014, what I was most concerned about, was the issue of Nigeria’s structural deficiencies rather than mundane issues such as State Creation. In considering the issue of the proverbial “National Cake”, it seems to me that the Delegates did not consider the need to create a structure that will BAKE MORE, rather than SHARE MORE.

MINOR GAINS MADE IN THE AREA OF DEVOLUTION OF POWERS: THE CONFERENCE RECOMMENDED THAT POLICING BE PUT UNDER THE CONCURRENT LEGISLATIVE LIST:
Item 45 under the Devolution of Powers subject of the National Conference Report recommended that Policing should be placed under the Concurrent Legislative list rather than the Exclusive Legislative List. This is a victory for all those who had cried that the right things be done!
The Conference also recommended that States could create their Electricity boards, but it is not however clear if this provision finally brings Electricity Generation, Transmission and Distribution under the Concurrent Legislative List where it really should be.

MAJOR SET-BACK – AMBIGUITIES IN THE AREA OF FISCAL FEDERALISM AND THE RETENTION OF THE PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM:
Nigeria’s National Conference 2014 report recommended the creation of the “Office of the Accountant General of the Federation” as different from the Office of the Accountant General of the Federal Government. This is funny, tautological and only serves to deepen “Allocation Mentality” rather than entrench fiscal federalism. What the National Conference should have done is to recommend the scrapping of the Federation Account and replace it with a Fiscal Commission which will ensure that each Federating Unit contributes to maintaining the Federal Structure rather than it being the other way round. The Conference still retained a high sharing ratio for the centre – 42.5% from 52.68%. I also do not see the need for appropriation to be made at Federal level for Local Governments. That should be the responsibility of the States with representation at the local level through the local representatives of the Communities and with State Edicts which creates a legal basis for the allocation based on local realities. This brings back the whole issue of a Federal Government creating Local Governments for States and Listing it in the Constitution? That is a legacy of the Military which we must depart from! Creation of local Governments must be put on the Residual list and States that create local governments must be able to fund them.
STATE CREATION – WHAT IS THE FISCAL BASIS FOR THIS?
The National Conference recommended the creation of Apa State from the present Benue State; Edu State from Niger State; Kainji State from the present Kebbi State; Katagun State from the present Bauchi State; Savannah State from the present Borno State; Amana State from the present Adamawa State; Gurara State from the present Kaduna State; Ghari State from the present Kano State; Etiti State from the present South East Zone; Aba State from the present Abia State; Adada State from the present Enugu State; Njaba-Anim State from the present Anambra and Imo States; Anioma State from the present Delta State; Ogoja State from the present Cross River State; Ijebu State from the present Ogun State; New Oyo State from the present Oyo State. My question is: are these States going to be self sustaining? If not, why not look at the Regions as the recognised Federating Unit and convert States into Provinces under Regions as done in India? Would that not be a more prudent thing to do than creating multiple structures with each making demands on the resources at the centre.

CONFERENCE REPORTS – ENTRENCHING A REGIME OF CHRONIC FUNDING AND FISCAL CRISIS:
Nigeria is currently under the throes of chronic funding and fiscal crisis. A situation where the real institutions that matter such as schools, hospitals and public infrastructure are under-funded but more States with Civil Service Bureaucracies and more Political structures are created, each demanding more of the Nation’s Resources while the things that matter are left unattended to, yet the National Conference rather than call for the streamlining of the current bogus structure, actually bloated it the more by recommending THE CREATION OF MORE STATES, so the current recurrent expenditure to capital projects profile which is put at 69 – 31 can further widen, deepening poverty and extending the grip of corruption on the Country. Wither the change that we badly desire?

RESOLVING NIGERIA’S STRUCTURAL IMBALANCE: THE SCOTTISH EXAMPLE

I followed with keen interest the United Kingdom’s conversation around the independence of Scotland and I must say that I am indeed enamoured of the way the debates went – no rancour, no violence, just the issues! Key issues that dominated the debate were EU membership, the retention of the British pound as a currency, taxation, control of the oil-rich North Sea, military spending, and of course autonomy from the British houses of parliament in Westminster. But beyond these headline issues, there were also underline issues which drove the campaigns.
ARGUMENT FROM ALEX SALMOND AND THE YES CAMP
Beyond the argument for the devolution of powers and the call for fiscal freedom, Alex Salmond and the YES camp pushed for the retention of the Scottish Identity away from the melting pot that the United Kingdom represents. Flowing from its fight for the establishment of an independent Scottish Parliament, Alex Salmond and the Yes camp had desired to have total control over Scotland’s wealth which includes the vast reserve of Oil and Gas at the North Sea and the fact that the Scottish component of the United Kingdom population is a paltry 8.4%, an Independent Scotland would have been a resource rich economy with a very high per capita income. With a sizeable landmass (78,772 km²), a huge hydro-carbon deposit and a fairly developed Financial system as represented by the strength of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Bank, the Yes camp had sought, not just political independence but also economic self-determination.
THE BETTER TOGETHER ARGUMENT AS ADVANCED BY ALISTAIR DARLING
Alistair Darling and the Better Together camp argued for the retention of the Union as a bigger Union will guarantee better economic security and the retention of the Political Power of Britain as signposted by its influence not just within the European Union but indeed on the Globe. The argument of the Better Together Camp centred more on leveraging the diversity and strength of the Union in achieving the Scottish objective. The key thrust of the Better Together argument was the need for the preservation of hard-won institutions such as the United Kingdom’s Economic engine as signposted by the strength of the British Pound Sterling, the strength of the health system as typified by the NHS and the egalitarian nature of the United Kingdom with the enthronement of a welfare state where Shelter, Food Security, Education, Social Infrastructure and other forms of Economic Security was guaranteed to all Citizens at the expense of the State and as Gordon Brown argued, ‘we fought for all of these together’.
THE OUTCOME: THE VICTORY OF THE NO CAMP AND THE CHANGES THAT ARE LIKELY TO COME THEREAFTER.
Scotland chose to stay in the Union as the No camp scored a 55% in the total votes tallied against the Yes camp’s 45%. However, what is palpable is that the voice for change in the United Kingdom remains strong and the issues that led to the great following which the Scottish National Party was able to garner in the build-up to this debate such as the need for devolution of powers from the West-Minister to constituents of the Union and the call for economic independence must be addressed. For now, the No camp is relieved that a feisty debate has been settled in its favour and the Yes Camp has accepted defeat. I PRAY SOMEDAY, MY DEAR NIGERIA WILL BE BRAVE ENOUGH TO PUT THE NIGERIAN QUESTION TO A NATIONAL DEBATE AND A REFERENDUM SUCH AS THIS…

BATTLING INSURGENCY AND DEALING WITH ITS AFTER-EFFECTS: ITS TIME TO FIX THE FUNDAMENTALS.

Nigeria offers a classic case of how not to structure and run a State. While a lot of us are quick to blame the British Colonial powers for why things are the way they are, my take is that we are largely accountable for the rot. At Independence, the British allowed us a Constitutional Conference – the 1957-58 London Conference – where the ethnic nationalities came together to discuss their view of how a post independent Nigeria should be structured. Positions were taken and a Constitutional arrangement started to emerge. Noting that the interest of Minorities may suffer, the Wilkins Commission on Minorities issue was set up. Alas, the January and July 1966 Coups, which were both ill-conceived and driven by officers who were novices in Statecraft and ill-equipped for Governance took over. Since then, Nigeria has continued to jump from one mis-step to another with the repercussion being a descent into Ethic and Religious intolerance, a Civil War, the battle for resource control and the Militancy that arose therefrom and the lingering battle for the place of Sharia in Governance and the Religious unrests that has resulted therefrom, leading to Militancy and snowballing into Terrorism which was willingly embraced by vested interests as a platform for the negotiation for power.
WHERE DID THE MIS-STEPS COME FROM?
1. IRONSI’S UNIFICATION DECREE 34 OF 1966:
Military interregnum and the quest to manage diversity using the Military’s Command and Control Structure. It all started with Aguiyi Ironsi’s attempt at forging unity without consensus. Ironsi, looking at the way the Military runs – with a central command structure and units taking directives from the centre, promulgated the Unification Decree No. 34 with implication being that Nigeria, though still laying claims to being a Federation, automatically became a unitary state, as things such as fiscal federalism were thrown out of the window. So all the battle for resource control which were to come later had their root in the Unification Decree 34 of 1966 promulgated by General Aguiyi Ironsi.
2. MILITARY’S STATE CREATION WITHOUT RESORT TO CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES SUCH AS A REFERENDUM:
Originally seeking to wrest the control of Oil resources from the then Eastern Region, the Military, under General Yakubu Gowon, resorted to creating States and dissolving the inherited Regional Structure. Starting out with 12 States, successive Military Government soon saw this as a veritable way to assert their power with Murtala Muhammed creating 7 new States, taking the tally to 19, General Ibrahim Babagida initially creating 2 States taking the tally to 21 and later creating 9 others taking the tally to 30 and General Sani Abacha creating 6 new States taking the total to 36 States all within a space of less than 40 years! What is interesting to note is that all of these came without a Constitutional process and was imposed on a democratic order with Constitutions that also recognised phony Local Governments created by the Military. So all the issues of marginalisation and imbalance in the Political structure of Nigeria had their root in the arbitrary creation of States.
THE 49 WISE-MEN AND THE ISSUE OF SHARIA IN THE CONSTITUTION MAKING PROCESS WHICH LED TO THE 1979 CONSTITUTION:
Following the need to return Nigeria to Civil rule in 1979, the Military under the Murtala/Obasanjo regime set-up a Panel initially made up of 50 Men led by Chief FRA Williams, but with Chief Obafemi Awolowo dropping off, it became a Panel of 49.The place of Islamic law in governance was a major issue these 49 wise men had to deal with. Beyond the pragmatic way it was dealt with in the Constitution making process that led to the 1960 Constitution, the Debacle of 1979, resulting from the crisis which greeted the place of sharia in governance as debated in the constitution-making process of 1976-78 and the absence of a resolution up till date, accounts for the frequent religious uprising Nigeria has witnesses till date, with the result being its hijack by vested interests for political gains.
RESOLVING THE NIGERIAN QUESTION AND ENDING INSURGENCY:
Resolving the Nigerian question and ending insurgency are not mutually exclusive as our Politicians will have us believe. We need to address the fundamentals on which the Nation Nigeria operates for us to have peace. We may continue to use the Military option, but it is not a sustainable option and needless to state that we may continue to play the Ostrich at our peril.

ARE OUR LEADERS THINKING OF US, OR ARE THEY OVERWHELMED WITH THE SPOILS OF OFFICE AND THE LIES BY SYCOPHANTS AND HANGERS-ON?

Greed and not service seem to be the underlining motive for going into government in Nigeria. Let me give you three scenarios that bring my thesis to life:
1. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO FEED A PRESIDENT?
From the 2015 budget estimates, it will cost 4 Billion Naira to feed the President, his household and guests in 2015. That amount will provide more than 312,000 packs of Indomie Noodles daily, for one year. That is enough to feed the Children in the displaced people’s camps in North-East Nigeria for one year. I would reckon that if our leaders were thinking about us, just a quarter of that amount is more than enough.
2. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO HOUSE A VICE PRESIDENT?
Initially, the amount budgeted for the building of a new residence for Vice President Namadi Sambo was 7 Billion naira but given the need to accommodate the lifestyle of the Vice President, the first plan was altered leading to a cost over-run of 9 Billion naira, bringing the entire cost to 16 Billion naira. 16 Billion Naira will build at least 2 standard Primary Healthcare Centres in each of the 36 States of Nigeria at an average cost of 200 Million Naira. Why do we need a new House for a Vice President? Should that truly be a priority if our leaders are serious?
3. WHAT IS THE SALARY OF A NIGERIAN SENATOR?
The Economist magazine revealed that Nigeria federal legislators, with a basic salary of $189,500.00 per annum (N30.6m), are the highest paid lawmakers in the world. It looked at the lawmakers’ basic salary as a ratio of the Gross Domestic Product per person across the world. According to the report, the basic salary (which excludes allowances); of a Nigerian lawmaker is 116 times the country’s GDP per person of $1,600.00. In another report, the 469 federal lawmakers (109 senators and 360 members of the House of Representatives) cost Nigeria over N76 billion on annual salaries, allowances and quarterly payments. Each member of the 54 standing Senate committee, receives a monthly imprest of between N648 million and N972 million per year, while, a member of the House of Representatives receives N35 million or N140 million as quarterly or yearly allowances; which means conservatively the 25 per cent of the overhead of the nation’s budget goes to the National Assembly. Aside from their scandalous wages, kept from the public consumption, their intended imbedding pensions for life for its principal officers into the Constitution; and now the Federal government’s reports that the National Assembly have spent N1 trillion from 2005 to 2013, really makes non-sense of the meaning of service. If only they had cut their wages and allowances in the last 10 years by a half, we would have been able to deliver basic infrastructure which can stimulate growth in the domestic economy.
WHILE AN AVERAGE AMERICAN PRESIDENT AGES IN OFFICE, OURS GET FATTER. WHILE AN AVERAGE BRITISH POLITICIAN RIDES THE TRAIN, OURS RIDE PRIVATE JETS. Little wonder why Nigeria is not working for the good of all?

A NATION CANNOT RISE ABOVE THE PERSPECTIVE OF IT’S LEADERS:

Its time for a new vision. It’s time for a different agenda. It’s time for a fresh perspective to the problems of Nigeria
CHINA OFFERS US A GOOD EXAMPLE:
China may not be a Democracy sensu stricto, but because the Communist Party of China runs an hierarchical system, it is possible to discern distinct generations of Chinese leadership. There is usually a 10 year cycle before new leaders who have been groomed and prepared for the role are given the mantle of leadership. Over the years, there has been changes in the leadership of China across generations and each generation, in defining its own vision, comes to the table with a distinct extension of the ideology of the Communist party.
THE FOUNDERS GENERATION, DEFINED BY THE IRON RICE BOWL – MAO ZEDONG AND THE ERA OF BIG STATE AND SMALL ECONOMY:
The first generation, from 1949 to 1976, consisted of Mao Zedong as core, along with Zhou Enlai, Liu Shaoqi, Zhu De, Chen Yun, Peng Dehuai, and later Lin Biao. This was the era of the Iron Rice bowl, when the State was everything and directed everything as China was purely Communist and was directed by a stiff State policy which frowned at individualism and capitalism and pursued a communal posture and communist ideology. With the death of Chairman Mao, the weakness of this perspective as seen in the high level of poverty based on low aggregate production because the State guaranteed the iron rice bowl (in literal parlance – job security) to all its citizens regardless of whether they were productive or not, forced a new vision by a new generation.
THE SECOND GENERATION – 1976 – 1992 – THE MOVE FOR A LIBERALIZED ECONOMY
The era began with Hua Guofeng as the successor to Mao, but his position was soon eclipsed by the ascendancy of Deng Xiaoping as the paramount leader, in which position he remained at least until 1992 when he resigned from his leadership positions. This era saw the implementation of structural reforms aimed at raising China’s economic fortunes. It saw the move for the control of population growth, labour reforms and the move for a better management of economic resources. This generation saw the smashing of Chairman Mao’s Iron Rice Bowl and the move towards a liberal economy.
FROM THE THIRD TO THE FIFTH GENERATION: OPENING CHINA TO THE WORLD AND TAKING CHINA TO THE WORLD
From 1992, when the third generation took the reins of power, we have seen China open up to the world by joining the World Trade Organisation, hosting the Olympics and getting involved with Africa towards driving its industrial growth agenda by aligning with resource rich Countries in Africa in exchange for infrastructural and technical support. The third to fifth generation have asserted China’s presence on the world stage not only as an alternate power but also a key economic bloc.
WHILE ALL THESE WAS GOING ON IN CHINA, NIGERIA HAS REMAINED STUCK WITH ITS SECOND GENERATION OF LEADERS
Nigeria has been stuck with the second generation of leaders who took over from the founding Fathers who have just been recycling themselves in the corridors of power instead of allowing a new generation of leaders to emerge. Little wonder then why Nigeria appears to be stagnating? Its time to change this trend.

POWER REFORMS AND PLUMMETING CAPACITY WITHIN THE NIGERIAN POWER MARKET

Nigeria’s Power Market seem to be failing to deliver on the promise of the reforms as we are witnessing a steady decline in capacity rather than a climb. As at April this year, capacity dropped to 1,714.89 Megawatts Hour/Hour (MWH/H) from 3,563 generated in December 2013. Furthermore it seems that the new players are rather slow in their reaction to a lot of the capacity issues in the industry. As we be…hold the interesting developments in Nigeria’s Power sector, with capacity continuously plummeting despite the power reforms, one critical question is: why are we not witnessing rapid industry transformation, as we saw with the privatisation of the Telecoms Industry?
CHANGING THE GAME – THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO BE BETTER COORDINATED IN DEALING WITH FUNDING ISSUES AND COUNTER-PARTIES AGREEMENTS
Ordinarily, one would have expected that with the privatisation of the Electricity Market, the new industry players will be in their Capacity Upgrade Phase and would have started rolling out innovative offering with a consequent improvement in the delivery of value to electricity consumers, but funding seems to be a major problem. Another problem is the slow pace of putting together the requisite industry structures. While one would have expected that the industry will pull together in order to ensure the smooth take-off of the Transitional Electricity Market (TEM), the Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), Gas Supply Aggregation Agreements (GSAA) and Gas Transportation Agreements (GTAs), which would have unlocked the potential of the market, on the contrary, what we are witnessing, is the slow take-off of the broad industry structures which would have helped eased out the old order and deliver the kind of game-changing dynamics we witnessed upon the liberalisation of the Telecoms market.
GOVERNMENT OR OPERATORS – WHO IS TO BLAME?
Even though government has not been up to speed in helping to oversee the transition from policy to practice, truth be told, the quality of players in the game, is hindering envisaged progress. My take on this matter is that we got the power reforms wrong from the licence bid stage.

IS FIGHTING CORRUPTION ALL ABOUT CATCHING THE CURRENT THIEF ALONE?

I am daily inundated with the wrong rhetoric on this whole issue of corruption. We were in this same Nigeria when some House Members embarked on a probe of the Power Contracts under Obasanjo, but and not come to the table with tangible facts on what went wrong and who was responsible, we saw a situation where ongoing Power projects were stalled and imported GE Turbines were left to gather demurrage at the ports while money exchanged hands between Power Contractors and House Members on supposed oversights. Same thing played out on the Petroleum Subsidy Probe, ending in a Televised Drama which had the protagonist stuffing his cap with Dollars to waive a charge against one of the beneficiaries of the said subsidy.
FIGHTING CORRUPTION IS MORE ABOUT REFOCUSING THE SYSTEM
It was Nuhu Ribadu who said that “when you fight corruption, corruption fights back”. I reckon a lot of us did not weigh that statement carefully. What this simply says is that corruption will explore any loop-hole to cast a doubt in the mind of the arbiter either in the court of law or in the court of public opinion. When this happens, what you’ll find is a travesty of justice and not pure justice. It follows therefore, that anyone seeking to fight corruption must first address the systemic issues that cause corruption. These systemic malaise are captured in Mahatma Ghadi’s seven Social Sins:
1. Wealth without work.
2. Pleasure without conscience.
3. Knowledge without character.
4. Commerce without morality.
5. Science without humanity.
6. Worship without sacrifice.
7. Politics without principle.
WE NEED TO AVOID TREATING THE SYMPTOMS ALONE…
Except we fight the battle holistically and address the systemic issues which predispose people to corruption, we are going nowhere. At best, what you’ll have is a situation where you are merely treating the symptoms without dealing with the root-cause of the ailment. God Bless Nigeria.

NIGERIA: ARE WE A COUNTRY ON A DEMOCRATIC JOURNEY OR JUST A COUNTRY OF DRIFTERS?

In my discussions with a lot of informed analysts and commentators, one thing always seem to stand out – THE PAST ALWAYS SEEM BETTER THAN THE PRESENT. On the other end, it always seems like the future is vague and given that scenario, we usually walk back to the past.
NIGERIA’S POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT FROM SELF GOVERNMENT IN THE 1950″S TO INDEPENDENCE AND THE 2 COUPS OF 1966:
Following the argument over self-government in the build-up to Nigeria’s independence, it was clear that crisis was brewing as the political class in the then 3 regions had discovered the route to earning and keeping political power through THE MANIPULATION OF ETHNIC IDENTITY. This played out in the 1951 as the Yoruba members of the NCNC cross-carpeted to the Action Group in a bid to forestall the emergence of Nnamdi Azikiwe as the leader of government business in the Western Region and NCNC was soon to do same as Eyo Ita, a minority South Easterner was soon displaced by Nnamdi Azikiwe. a majority Igbo in the South East. The Coup of January 1966 also came under the Ethnic Identity periscope as 5 Majors – 4 of them from the South East – were accused of killing political gladiators from the North and South West, leading to the reappraisal Coup of July 1966, led by Northern Officers and the Pogrom which followed mainly in the North against South Easterners; leading to a civil war. In all of these instances, it was the manipulation of ethnic identity, by political / military players, that was at play here and not religious identity.
THE MANIPULATION OF RELIGIOUS IDENTITY – FROM THE 49 WISE-MEN AND THE SHARIA DEBATE OF THE 1970’S TO THE PRESENT BOKO HARAM INSURGENCY:
In 1976, when the Murtala/Obasanjo regime put together a Constitution Drafting Committee led by Chief Frederick Rotimi Alade Williams – dubbed the 49 wise-men, little did we know that trouble was soon to brew, until the status of Sharia in the soon to be delivered 1979 Presidential Constitution, came up for debate. While those largely from the Christian dominated South felt that the Penal Code in the Independence Constitution which recognised the role of Sharia in dealing with Civil cases and not criminal cases should be adopted, others, largely from the Muslim dominated Northern Nigeria felt that Sharia should be extended even for criminal prosecutions. The absence of a win-win resolution of this stormy argument was soon to lead to the Maitasine riots of 1980 – 81. Although, these riots were quelled, a new phase in Nigeria’s political development had emerged – THE MANIPULATION OF RELIGIOUS IDENTITY FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. This soon led to several religious riots across decades, leading to the Boko Haram insurgence which started in 2009 and continues to rage till date.
GOING FORWARD WITHOUT MOVING BACKWARD: 2015 ON MY MIND
As earlier stated, what has tended to happen in Nigeria’s political development, is that, rather than address issues which affect Nigeria’s diversity, politicians always play up differences in Ethnic and Religious Identity to gain advantage and by so doing, politicians have surreptitiously socialised Nigerians into the evil of ethnic mistrust, hatred and violence. As we go into the 2015 Presidential debate, Nigerian’s need to ask the two major players what their plans for inclusion and integration is. Inclusion and integration need not necessarily involve turning Nigeria into a MELTING-POT, as Ethnic and Religious identities cannot be wished away as the Bolsheviks did in the old Soviet Union following the revolution led by Lenin. Nigeria’s must on the flip-side, look out for policies which recognises and leverages Nigeria’s SALAD BOWL status, where Lettuce is different from Carrot and Carrot is different from Cabbage and Cabbage is different from Cream but they all come together, in a symphony to build the salad bowl.

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!