• Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala told us that about 70 per cent of Nigerians trek, and wondered why we are fighting over subsidy removal?
Saturday January 07, 2012
•Comrade Omar
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on This Section
The President of the Nigeria Labour Congress, Comrade Abdulwaheed Omar, has drawn the battle line on the sand in Labour’s fight with the government over the removal of fuel subsidy, which has seen the price of petrol shooting up from N65 to N141. 50, in many stations across the nation.
In an exclusive interview with Saturday Sun, an enraged Omar said there was no going back on the general strike called for Monday, except the Goodluck Jonathan administration reverts to the old pump price.
Omar believes President Jonathan has been held hostage by some of his ministers and advisers who are apparently egging him on in his ‘shocking New Year gift’ to Nigerians. One of these officials, he claims, is finance minister and coordinating minister for the economy, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a former Managing Director of the World Bank, who reportedly asked Labour officials, at one of the meetings, held between both parties, why they were so worried over subsidy removal when about 70 per cent of Nigerians don’t own cars, but trek!
He also revealed his fears of a bloody revolt if the masses are further pushed to the wall by those at the helm of affairs. He spoke with ERIC OSAGIE in Abuja.
Excerpts….
You have given government ultimatum, which expires on Monday, January 9, after which a strike begins. How is it going to play out? Will Labour soft-pedal or eventually backpedal?
No. We have given an ultimatum; we are awaiting what happens between now and that time. If nothing happens, in terms of reverting to the status quo, we shall go on strike
What do you mean by ‘ reverting to the status quo?’
That is reverting to the old pump price of N65 a litre.
Do you think it is possible in this country, where government behaves like a god or you are just talking?
Well, that is the decision of the National Executive Council of NLC; that is also the decision of Trade Union Congress (TUC). And we are also being joined by other civil society organizations and students groups, etc. That is the bottom line. A couple of minutes ago, somebody called from the Ministry of Labour that the Presidential Negotiating Committee has been inaugurated and that they want us to talk, but we said what is the need of talking? The issue we are supposed to discuss is already overtaken by events. If they want such discussion, let them revert to the N65 per litre pump price, and then we will be ready to talk.
So you are not going to be part of any negotiation?
For now, no!
Did President Jonathan shock you with the subsidy removal or were you expecting it?
Yes, I was really shocked. Shocked in the sense that just a few days ago, one of the things we mentioned to the President and his team was the issue of trust by people who are in government and we pointed at a number of issues. I was shocked because just two, three days back, a minister was saying: ‘look, this issue of deregulation, even if anything is to happen, it should be as from April.’ Only for us, the following day, to wake up with this drastic decision.
But we understand that you met with the man where he told you clearly that if you guys like shoot him the subsidy will go. How true is that?
He said that; he told us that no matter what happens the removal of subsidy was inevitable for Nigeria to continue to exist and so on. But we restated our position that there were things government must look into. But government completely jettisoned that. For example, this issue of corruption, we said how could a whole government be talking that some people have hijacked the system, that there is so much corruption in the subsidy transactions and you are not taking any step towards dealing with that issue of corruption? Rather, you feel it is better to visit the entire hardship on the common man. We believe that is not a sensible thing to do. If government had tried to checkmate this corruption issue they, perhaps, may have achieved some measure of success. But the President and his government are not doing that. I have also been thinking in my mind that government cannot be this wicked to say that at a go you just wipe out this thing and triple the price of pump price of fuel, especially when it knows that the decision is going to affect in like manner the social and economic condition of the citizenry especially the downtrodden.
When I reflected, I said well it is not a surprise because when we met with Mr. President the submission of the minister of finance was a bit laughable. What she said was also of concern because she said the removal of fuel subsidy would affect only a sizeable percentage of Nigerians because about 70 per cent of Nigerians trek! Yes, the minister of finance said that.
It is laughable because how can a government voted by people be talking like that? It is also a thing of concern because that tells you that that minister is completely detached from the realities of things in this country. To say that after all 70 per cent of citizens trek, means that she is not aware that pump price is likely to affect every other thing and that for the fact that somebody treks does not mean that he would not want to send his child to school; it does not mean that he would not like to buy tomato from the market. The danfo driver will increase his fare; the tomato seller will increase her own and will even reduce the quantity.
It is important that government understands that any fuel price increase will affect the generality of Nigerians. We told them clearly there that, look, if you remove subsidy it means increasing fuel prices and by increasing fuel prices even the money that will accrue from the increase will not be there because the inflation that will set in will consume this savings. May be they didn’t take us seriously; now what we told them is happening. Immediately the new policy took effect, people doubled prices of their wares. One thing that is clear is that this is an evil cycle that will continue to play out in this country.
Now, the PPRA that announced this thing put a price. And the question is why would they put a price? Why the N141.00? How did they arrive at N141? Secondly, what business do they have if they said they do not have a hand in the new price regime? Why would they fix a price if what we are talking about is total deregulation? So, you see, there are a lot of deceits in this thing.
Would you say Nigerians underestimated Jonathan?
Very seriously, Nigerians underestimated him. We were deceived by his utterances. Personally, I worked with him as a member of National Council on Privatisation, that was when I got serious admiration for him. All his utterances about Nigeria, about our economy, about the common man were excellent. But, unfortunately, what really happened is the way he is surrounded by some people. Honestly speaking, if you look at the situation you can pity the President that perhaps, he is seriously caged.
Are you saying he is held hostage?
I think that is true. He is a politician. This is a policy that is very unpopular and he keeps pushing it; people keep telling you everyday, every minute that he should not do it, but he keeps pushing. He is doing it to the extent that he said that whatever would happen let it happen. I think it is a very dangerous development.
When the President told you that what was your response?
We didn’t have to say anything; he was making his submission; it was in the course of rounding up that he said it. But it is really unfortunate.
Why is Labour against the removal of fuel subsidy? The President’s position is that Nigeria will collapse if the subsidy is not removed?
Our own side of the argument is that removal of subsidy to government simply means fuel price increase. But what we are saying is, look, there are certain things you must do and Nigerians could live with fuel price increase to the extent that by the time you graduate this thing, you remove your hand gradually. When you do it that way, people will not even notice anything; you allow the system to run. This one, you have not put anything in place to cushion the effects of the policy; government didn’t even start it gradually; all we heard is that you must do this. And the same government closed its ears to what everybody is saying, that there is endemic corruption there, tackle it and you will see that things will change. I told Mr. President at the meeting that if government will have the political will to fight the endemic corruption there, he will discover that the amount of money that will remain could be something that government can survive with while the subsidy remains.
It is practical; it is clear; even the last year budget showed that allocation to subsidy was about N260 billion, then how come anybody will say that we spent aboutN1.3 trillion. First, if you are to analyse this thing, you will say that if it is true that we spent N1.3trillion instead of N260billion, that is a three-fold leap, something definitely must have been wrong.
Secondly, it is not on record anywhere that the President had gone back to the National Assembly to ask for supplementary appropriation to top up this money. So, what is the problem? It means there is a lot of deceit, either all those figures they are talking about are not real or something is wrong somewhere. The National Assembly has a duty to say, look, you provided N260billion and this was what we approved where did you get N1.3trillion,? Why did you spend such money without our approval? That is illegality.
Have you people asked why our refineries cannot work?
That is another area. It is all part of the corruption. Let me tell you; the reality is that the people they said were benefiting from the subsidy thing can never allow any refinery to work in Nigeria.
Why?
This is because they are making cheap money. We were told that some of the ways they get this subsidy money include the refined oil they get from our own refineries; they move them to ports and pretend as if they imported them in order to get the subsidy money. So, how do you expect them to allow these refineries to work? Another thing is that we were told that they will register these products and government will pay and after sometime the same products will be presented as newly imported. They perpetrate all sorts of fraud. We believe that if government had sat down and looked at all this fraud it could have stopped them. Now if they remove subsidy, I hope that this corruption thing will not be there; it is the same people that will continue to import the products. The first thing they will do is to block any chance of anybody building refineries. At best, they will be the ones to take the licences and start one construction or the other of refineries and they will stop somewhere because it is more lucrative for them to continue to import. And as long as we do not refine the commodity we are going to continue to suffer.
The reality of things now is that what we are going to witness, assuming this regime of deregulated downstream sector will stay, we are going to witness two major things. First, the hike in the price, secondly, artificial scarcity will be created. It will never be the same again; you will not see fuel in filling stations, as we used to see. Again the possibility of hiking the price to whatever level they like is there. Each time they want to hike the price, all they need to do is to hoard the product, allow people to scramble for fuel; the price will go up. Government will say one, it is not our responsibility; we have hands off. I think the essence of governance is for the welfare of citizens; it is not too much for the Nigerian government to make sure, as it has been doing, that there is availability of fuel and that it is also affordable. This is the meaning of the subsidy. It is not just in terms of the money; it is in terms of making this available in all the nooks and crannies of this country. The price has to be affordable; the supply has to be constant. But if government decides to remove its hands all these things will set in and only God knows how it will be.
Are we heading for a revolution?
Already we are seeing what is happening in Lagos, Kano, and Kwara etc. We have a President who said no matter the consequences his government is going to go ahead. He made good his promise of removing the subsidy and we will make good ours.
I guess my major fea r is the fact that a revolution in Nigeria is not going to be the same revolution in Egypt, Syria or elsewhere, where there is so much maturity, in terms of the way security agents handled issues. Look at Egypt; it was even against the soldiers, the military, yet they were not touching anybody, to the extent that they were molested by the masses. But in Nigeria, it may not be so. That is my fear. And when this thing get out of hand government will think that they will continue to have control, but that is a lie. Already, there are so many divergent interests that are lying low waiting for something to trigger them.
Just a few days ago they shot somebody at Ilorin; security agents are moving about with live ammunition and any slight provocation they will shoot people. And this thing, with the type of anger people have now, the fear is that if, for instance, people in Maiduguri or Port Harcourt get information that police are killing people in Lokoja there may be reaction.
We must be very careful; somebody told me what the minister of labour said that if the protests will get out of hand; he said they have means to checkmate them. This means that government is prepared to crush and kill citizens who protest. People put them in that position of authority and they are ready to kill them just because they are opposed to a policy. So, it is highly lamentable and let me hope that the President will now wake up to his own responsibilities.
I have said it before that no matter what, no matter how highly placed a minister is, he is answerable to the President. We have had presidents; we recently had President Obasanjo. He was a very radical civilian president, but he was himself. He was radical and stubborn. Twice he attempted to remove the fuel subsidy, but twice he went back. It was not because he could not close his eyes and do it, but he was analysing the consequences on the citizens. He went back not because he was weak; nobody will say President Obasanjo was a weak president. But here we are with a President who is defiant. When Obasanjo wanted to remove the fuel subsidy, he didn’t get one quarter of the negative reaction that this president got, but he had to go back. But this one, just look at it, everybody, almost every group said don’t do it, but he is only listening to only one group: the group that is telling him to do it and making him believe he will be the hero.
There is the allegation that Labour has compromised on this, that it is being sponsored by disgruntled politicians to destabilise the government. What is your reaction?
Well if the allegation will hold water, it means Labour has remained constant; that means they compromised in the past because they took the same action. If labour is taking this action, it is not the first time it is taking it; what I want to tell you is that I challenge anybody to say whether labour has been compromised. The issue is we have been making our position clear; we have made it not only in the open but also everywhere. When the president summoned us for this consultation, we sat down and said okay let us go, but we must not go to sit down, even though by then we didn’t know the topic. We only assumed that it was on the issue of subsidy that he was calling us. We said we must not fold our alms when we go there; let’s go with a written position, so that even the press will not find us wanting. Unfortunately, when we went there, the President said he wanted to meet both NLC and TUC together; we said fine. What we agreed was that we must maintain our position.
After all the presentations by ministers of finance, Petroleum Labour and the Vice President we restated our position. We pointed out some of the lapses in the presentation. So these are the things. People will always say anything they like. It is the easiest thing to say that we have compromised. If government has not compromised us, why should we be compromised by any other group? Government is big and is ready to do anything to elicit support from people. The truth is that Labour will always stand on the side of the Nigerian masses. Nigerian workers are part of the masses. We always think what is best for Nigeria. Therefore, if somebody says we have compromised and that is why we want to scuttle the government, look at the other side of the coins. Who compromised with the government for it to continue to push this arbitrary policy that is rejected almost by 90 percent of Nigeria? It takes two to tango.
What is the position on the minimum wage?
We are still on because, we still have some issues to thrash out. But majority of the states are already paying. When we met with Mr. President we raised this; we said okay how could citizens trust a government that does not live up to its trust. We pointed out the issue of minimum wage, that we negotiated, agreed and signed with Federal Government for implementation right from May but up to the point we were talking the Federal Government had not implemented the minimum wage. The President said he was not aware that it was not paid, that it was not implemented at the federal level. That is a very weighty statement coming from Mr. President. It means the President has been cut off. Everything should stop at his desk. How can, after reaching and signing an agreement with no less person leading the government team than the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, one will wonder the kind of trick people are laying on the President if what he said was true. Was it that they just told him Your Excellency we have concluded and signed agreement and it ends there.
The President one would have expected should have had the interest to say this thing how far have you gone in the implementation. We were surprised that the President said he was not aware that the minimum wage was not implemented at the federal level.
What is your message to Nigerians on the fuel subsidy issue?
My message to Nigerians is that, first, let us keep calm. I believe the situation is still very redeemable. It is redeemable if the government will be sensitive to the yearnings and aspirations of the common man. So let people keep calm; let us pray that the President will certainly wake up to his responsibilities to Nigerian citizens. I owe it a duty to ensure that the citizens have some measure of respect and therefore let us go back to the drawing board and look at these things again with absolute reality.
You said that government is saying that if we did not remove subsidy the government will collapse because of lack of money. I am not an economist but as somebody who knows that when I sign and collect my salary I know how to budget to say I will buy rice, garri but I will not buy palm oil etc, it is in the same manner government should work. If you say if you do not remove subsidy the country will collapse but you are not doing anything to change your living style, think; something fundamental is wrong. Look at the budget presented. How much was earmarked as recurrent expenditure? For me as a layman, if Mr. President is a President with executive powers, any minister or somebody bringing a proposal to spend N2.7trillion on recurrent expenditure without looking at anything I can take my biro and say N1.7trillion is what we will spend on recurrent expenditure, I don’t want to hear any story.
But in a situation the government is not ready to change its lifestyle, even where everybody is crying that the cost of governance is so much, how can citizens trust and accept that it is the money made from subsidy removal will not go into servicing the appetite and lifestyle of those in government? Source > http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2012/jan/07/national-07-01-2011-010.html
Saturday, 7 January 2012
Subsidy removal is terrorism — Aremu, NLC vice president
From ISMAIL OMIPIDAN, Kaduna
Saturday January 07, 2012
•Aremu
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on This Section
Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) Vice President and a leading public commentator, Comrade Issa Aremu, has said that President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration is one that Nigerians would certainly curse, for promising a breath of fresh air, only to turn around to inflict pains on people through the recent petroleum subsidy removal.
Speaking with Saturday Sun in Kaduna, shortly after the announcement of the new price regime by the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), the Labour activist insisted that there was no difference between those who bombed Nigerians on Christmas Day and President Jonathan, as both chose a day of joy and a day of worship to impose hardship on the people. He called on Nigerians to resist the new price regime, adding that if Nigerians allow it, they could accept anything.
While insisting that most Nigerian leaders are unbelievers, Aremu said: “We can also even dramatise it. The President was in Madalla and he was reportedly shedding tears for the victims of the criminal bombing on Christmas Day and everybody felt that, for once he was sensitive to the plight of Nigerians, because he went to the scene. Not only that, he issued a New Year message, wishing Nigerians a better year ahead, only for PPPRA to increase the price of a product, which does not have a substitute, by over 100 per cent. This is more terrorising than the Boko Haram attacks.
“It is also clear that our leaders are not believers. This is because they actually behave like unbelievers. I mean, why will any president, democratically elected by the people, on a New Year Day, decides to inflict pain on the electorate?
The argument is that, if you cannot improve their public welfare, don’t worsen it and certainly not on a festive day. That is why I am saying that this price terrorism can be compared to the same bomb terrorism on Christmas Day in Madalla, because it is the same day of joy somebody dropped a bomb to kill worshippers. But the president went there to shed crocodile tears; it is crocodile tears, because after shedding the tears, the next thing is to impose the same hardship on his own people with endless tears.
“This one is a process tear. It is a tear that cannot be wiped off easily. The whole logic is the same. The person who dropped that Madalla bomb and that who dropped the price bomb are all unbelievers because they each chose a day of joy, of worship to impose more hardship on the people and as we have already said, what happened to those that have gone home to mark the festivity? This is a president who has promised that this is not immediate; it has to be in April. For now, President Jonathan is having trust deficit and he needs to work hard to regain this trust. Policy that asks the citizens to pay more for services in the New Year cannot be in the citizens’ interest.”
He spoke on these and others.
About two weeks ago or so, you were part of a Town Hall meeting on subsidy removal. There appeared nothing, during the proceeding to suggest that the President had concluded consultations on the matter. But Nigerians woke up on January 1, to hear the PPPRA announcement removing the subsidy. What is the implication for governance and leadership in the country?
Well, I think it confirms the legitimate fear of the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress that this government is not to be trusted. For the first time, we are having a renewed policy dialogue, which is inclusive of all stakeholders, the government, the labour, community leaders, religious leaders. Suddenly, a discredited agency, like the PPPRA, just came up with a dictated price for Nigerians. For me, this has further compounded the problem of crisis of confidence in governance. For the past one and half year that Jonathan came in, we have not seen any practical results, in terms of dividends of democracy. I mean, most of the roads are still the way they are; we still have epileptic power supply; we still live in a more compounded problem of insecurity. This (subsidy removal) is one area he has stained his credibility; he promised to consult widely and leave the option for Nigerians. For me, the sudden price dictatorship, by PPPRA must be resisted by Nigerians.
We can also even dramatise it. The President was in Madalla and he was reportedly shedding tears for the victims of the criminal bombing on Christmas Day and everybody felt that, for once, he is sensitive to the plight of Nigerians, because he went to the scene. Not only that, he issued a New Year message, wishing Nigerians a better year ahead, only for PPPRA to increase the price of a product, which does not have a substitute, by over 100 per cent. This is more terrorising than the Boko Haram attacks. As you can see, the commercial heartbeat of Nigeria, Lagos is already grounded and in the next couple of days, you will see the effect on the entire nation.
So, what I am saying is that Jonathan has abandoned policy dialogue for policy dictatorship, and it is now left for him to prove that PPPRA is not doing his bidding, but if is true that PPPRA is implementing the plan of the president, then this government cannot be trusted by Nigerians.
You have consistently described the PPPRA as a discredited agency. Is there anything you know about PPPRA that the rest of us don’t know?
PPPRA is supposed to be Petroleum Products Regulatory Agency. I am asking you, which regulation are they doing? Even at the old price, we were told that it is only in few parts of Nigeria that people buy fuel at N65 per litre. What regulation has PPPRA carried out? All the figures of the so-called cabals, who carry out series of sharp practices in the industries, ought to have been checked by the PPPRA. I mean, what credibility has PPPRA brought to bear in that respect? So, when we talk of all the distortions in the price chain of products from the landed products, the discharge of product, which leads to demurrage, transportation, the banking charges and so on, it is the PPPRA that is supposed to check those charges, but we have investigated those figures and discovered that they are just fraudulent; they are just loaded to reward marketers and themselves too.
If you also find out, most of them, I mean, members of the regulatory agency are also operators. So, what kind of confidence can Nigerians have in such kind of agency to dictate the price? I also want to put this to you: the whole idea that we gathered during this policy dialogue was that they wanted to allow market to operate; that is forces of demand and supply; the prices would be determined by the market. Now, the price that was announced two days ago, tell me how that is a market price? That is not a market price; it is a dictated price. Why N141 per litre? Why not N14 per litre? Why not N1,000 per litre? Over 100 per cent increase overnight? This can only be PPPRA market. This cannot be a market price. There is no market like that in the whole world. This is a distorted and corrupt market. It is investment driven market. Even in terms of the way they carried out the policy, it is price dictation, and as we have also predicted during the town hall meeting, what we told Nigerians is that, there is a gap between official resolute, by allowing market forces to operate, and the reality. You know in the normal market, prices always go up and come down. But what we have seen, in respect to petroleum products over the years, is that prices always go up and what has happened in the last two days is not exception, from N65 to N150 for a product, which does not have a substitute.
You are working with The Sun. Can you increase the cover price of your paper by 100 per cent overnight? For me, if Nigerians take this, it means they can take anything. What is also very bad is that, this is a public agency, which is supposed to serve public interest. The reason it is so bad is that Nigerian consumers are the one in trouble because once the agency could engage in price oppression, what do you expect of private agencies? They will do worse. You pay so much to travel by air through the aviation, so much delay at the airport, very little services to render and so on. So, what are we talking about?
Shortly before the late Umar Yar’Adua administration, there was an increase in pump price, which took effect on assumption of his office. Labour went on strike and there were some negotiations and agreement, to the effect the price will remains at N65 and anytime it would be reviewed, Labour and government will sit down to look at a safety net. What happens to that understanding?
I am happy that you made reference to the government of President Yar’Adua administration to which Jonathan was a party, because he was the vice president then. We insisted that there was not going to be any increment in the prices of petroleum product. In fact, there was a reduction from N70 to N65, because it was arbitrarily done by Obasanjo when he was leaving office. So, we had to review it, to set up a process of review, but, unfortunately, President Yar’Adua died shortly after words. And part of the issues that emerged at that process was that we drew up a template of a number of things that must be in place, part of which is fixing of refineries. We strongly believe that if you want to deregulate or you want us to have market driven prices for product, it will be nice that we have that market product for domestic refined product because that we also create job rather than importing jobs.
We also said that there was need for overhauling of existing infrastructure for product delivery. Then along the line the issue of PIB also came in, that is, Petroleum Industry Bill. We said let’s us look at it holistically. How do we improve local content because the oil companies are just having fun with us. We also talked about how we manage the possible proceeds, if eventually, we allow for deregulation. But beyond that, we are also being engaged with this very President, if the issue is just a casual issue, why was the president leading the dialogue himself? He met with Labour; he met with religious leaders and his coordinating ministers moderated that town hall meeting. Minister of petroleum resources and minister of finance were there and CBN governor, who ordinarily should be pre-occupied with monetary policy, was also there.
That shows how important the policy was to the government. So, for Mr. President to now conclusively move to the next level, with this policy, which is not driven by the same kind of process (dialogue) it started with, means the whole process has come to nothing. And that shows how insensitive the government is to the plight of people of the ordinary Nigerian. And I want to tell you that in the process of this (dialogue) discussion, all these issues about the refineries also came up: how do we get the refineries working? And we were told that the minister of petroleum has re- awarded the contract to the original builders of these refineries. So, we want to see how they are going to work; we want to see the projects. We were also told that efforts are being made to see how the profit would be handled. None of these has been done, but suddenly a group called PPPRA announced the removal of the subsidy. This is a country, which economy is still more or less mono-dependent and road transportation, either by okada or by our cars or commercial vehicles, is the major source of transportation. We all depend on petrol, railway is not yet there. So, the impact will be seriously felt by the masses.
But come to think of it, as an individual, do you think we really need this fuel subsidy of a thing?
I think the question is wrongly put. I think the question should be, do we need good roads? Do we need uninterrupted power supply? Do we need other social amenities?
I think every Nigerian will agree that we need uninterrupted power supply at appropriate price. Even now that we don’t have it, the tariff for power that is not supplied is high. Diesel has been deregulated and is now N198. This is what we ought to be using when power is not supplied. I think every Nigerian needs power supply rather than using generator. Every Nigerian will say we need a type of transportation experienced in developed countries. Most people travelled for this holiday based on certain assumptions that the price of going home will be N1500; now to travel back has gone up to about N5000.
So, to respond to your question on whether we need subsidy or not, whether subsidy is there or not, what is the impact on public welfare? This policy, if care is not taken, will be a winner-takes-all kind of a thing. And in this case, the winners are petroleum marketers, who can charge any price on the product, which doesn’t have substitute, maybe also to pay some of the dept they owe; the other few winners include government, who, according to them, will now have free money from the federation account for availability of governors to have their share. But you know the big losers are Nigerians who are road bound, who are stranded, and who cannot afford the new cost of transportation, medical bills and the rest of them. So, this idea of one cap fits all, that once you deregulate everything will be in place is not so, because everything has come to a halt. The end is what will be the result, the result is, do we have public welfare? What we have seen so far is that with the removal of the so-called fuel subsidy, public welfare remains the same; in fact worsen. And I said so at the Town Hall meeting that our government should not be dogmatic or ideological about the whole idea of deregulation, because my fear is that, this government is thinking that deregulation will free them of responsibilities when actually that is when responsibilities begin. No market operator can last a day longer if government is not on duty.
And you can see, talking about dogmatism, we have the same dogmatism about money market before; it was almost two decades of deregulation in the money market. You see everybody set up commercial banks, nobody regulated them; they were just playing around with money; they were even financing cocaine business, and they were probably financing terrorism with public money, until CBN came in under Sanusi Lamido and said we have to put in some controls here. So, as far as we are concerned, the issue is not whether you remove fuel subsidy or not, but the welfare of people must be ensured.
You said Nigerians should resist it, but if you drive round town, some Nigerians are queuing up to buy petrol at either N140 or N145. Do you think this set of people will support the NLC’s protest?
It will not be right to blame the victims on what they are not responsible for. The fact that Nigerians are queuing up, to buy the product at outrageous prices, show why Nigerians should be pitied more than ever before. This is because you can’t compare petroleum products with telecom services, because for this product, there is no substitute; what will people travel with if they don’t buy it? That is why government is blackmailing people that, they must buy because they don’t have any choice. But what government does not understand is that the money that is available to buy 30 litres of fuel at N140 per litre will not be available to pay school fees. The money available to buy 40 litres of fuel at an outrageous price will certainly not be available to buy food. So, definitely, there is a serious cost implication. Most filling stations have the products now and they are not selling. They are possibly waiting to get more profit at the expense of the masses. It is bad enough that they have increased this price and it is even worse that nobody is there to make sure the product is available. Where is PPPRA? Why are people having product, which they bought when it was highly subsidised and yet they are still not selling, because they are waiting for what time they will be able to sell at any price.
So, the point I am raising is that, it is not about whether there is support for labour or not. I have never seen any consumer, even though they are buying at that price, who is praying for this government. And I have never seen anyone who is buying and cursing labour for opposing this outrageous price. So, I want to put it at that level, that you will see the other side of Nigerians with time, because everybody will spark when it comes; transporters will feel the pain, because what goes round comes round. Foodstuff prices will go up and the rest of them. Inflation rate will go up; poverty rate will worsen. It is going to compound socio-economic insecurity, which has implication on physical insecurity. More jobs will be lost with this. Because, once the cost of production goes up, for every producer, they have to see how to manage their cost of production and one of the first casualties is the Labour force. Now, what should worry you is the way this new price regime dictated by PPPRA under the auspices of the President that promised a breath of fresh air, in his transformation agenda, will worsen the level of poverty in Nigeria, further undermine productivity and create unnecessary rancour.
And for me, I find it completely scandalous that a government that declared emergency in times of physical crisis in some states decides to impose an emergency situation on the country. This policy is divisive; it is meant to divide us. And that is why we have said that as far as we are concerned, the constituted price is what we respect, which N65 per litre is. And the Federal Government will be held responsible for any chaos that comes as a result of this.
We will open our own register against this policy. But the point is, whether we have opened register or not, the hidden register will be far more devastating for Nigeria. This is the same Jonathan government that has not paid minimum wage. So, this is not a government people will certainly not curse. You signed a law, you have not implemented, meanwhile, you have increased prices. So, it is not just Labour forces; it is the forces of all Nigerians. But, any day anytime, we trust Nigerians, and any step we take, we will get solidarity of Nigerians.
As far as we are concerned, this policy is worse than what we use to go through before, because in those days, government will announce a few other things they want to put in place for citizens to pick what is their own, but this one is just winner takes all, while the rest of us are left to suffer.
It is also clear that our leaders are not believers. This is because they actually behave like unbelievers. I mean, why will any President democratically elected by the people, on a New Year day, decides to inflict pain on the electorate. The argument is that, if you cannot improve their public welfare, don’t worsen it and certainly not on a festive day. That is why I am saying that this price terrorism can be compared to the same bomb terrorism on Christmas Day in Madalla, because it is the same day of joy somebody dropped a bomb to kill worshippers. But the president went there to shed crocodile tears; it is crocodile tears, because after shedding the tears, the next thing is to impose the same hardship on his own people with endless tears. This one is a process tear. It is a tear that cannot be wiped off easily. The whole logic is the same. The person who dropped that Madalla bomb and that who dropped the price bomb are all unbelievers because they each chose a day of joy, of worship to impose more hardship on the people and as we have already said, what happened to those that have gone home to mark the festivity? This is a president who has promised that this is not immediate; it has to be in April. For now, President Jonathan is having trust deficit and he needs to work hard to regain this trust. Policy that asks the citizens to pay more for services in the New Year cannot be in the citizens’ interest.
Source> http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2012/jan/07/national-07-01-2011-011.html
Saturday January 07, 2012
•Aremu
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on This Section
Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) Vice President and a leading public commentator, Comrade Issa Aremu, has said that President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration is one that Nigerians would certainly curse, for promising a breath of fresh air, only to turn around to inflict pains on people through the recent petroleum subsidy removal.
Speaking with Saturday Sun in Kaduna, shortly after the announcement of the new price regime by the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), the Labour activist insisted that there was no difference between those who bombed Nigerians on Christmas Day and President Jonathan, as both chose a day of joy and a day of worship to impose hardship on the people. He called on Nigerians to resist the new price regime, adding that if Nigerians allow it, they could accept anything.
While insisting that most Nigerian leaders are unbelievers, Aremu said: “We can also even dramatise it. The President was in Madalla and he was reportedly shedding tears for the victims of the criminal bombing on Christmas Day and everybody felt that, for once he was sensitive to the plight of Nigerians, because he went to the scene. Not only that, he issued a New Year message, wishing Nigerians a better year ahead, only for PPPRA to increase the price of a product, which does not have a substitute, by over 100 per cent. This is more terrorising than the Boko Haram attacks.
“It is also clear that our leaders are not believers. This is because they actually behave like unbelievers. I mean, why will any president, democratically elected by the people, on a New Year Day, decides to inflict pain on the electorate?
The argument is that, if you cannot improve their public welfare, don’t worsen it and certainly not on a festive day. That is why I am saying that this price terrorism can be compared to the same bomb terrorism on Christmas Day in Madalla, because it is the same day of joy somebody dropped a bomb to kill worshippers. But the president went there to shed crocodile tears; it is crocodile tears, because after shedding the tears, the next thing is to impose the same hardship on his own people with endless tears.
“This one is a process tear. It is a tear that cannot be wiped off easily. The whole logic is the same. The person who dropped that Madalla bomb and that who dropped the price bomb are all unbelievers because they each chose a day of joy, of worship to impose more hardship on the people and as we have already said, what happened to those that have gone home to mark the festivity? This is a president who has promised that this is not immediate; it has to be in April. For now, President Jonathan is having trust deficit and he needs to work hard to regain this trust. Policy that asks the citizens to pay more for services in the New Year cannot be in the citizens’ interest.”
He spoke on these and others.
About two weeks ago or so, you were part of a Town Hall meeting on subsidy removal. There appeared nothing, during the proceeding to suggest that the President had concluded consultations on the matter. But Nigerians woke up on January 1, to hear the PPPRA announcement removing the subsidy. What is the implication for governance and leadership in the country?
Well, I think it confirms the legitimate fear of the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress that this government is not to be trusted. For the first time, we are having a renewed policy dialogue, which is inclusive of all stakeholders, the government, the labour, community leaders, religious leaders. Suddenly, a discredited agency, like the PPPRA, just came up with a dictated price for Nigerians. For me, this has further compounded the problem of crisis of confidence in governance. For the past one and half year that Jonathan came in, we have not seen any practical results, in terms of dividends of democracy. I mean, most of the roads are still the way they are; we still have epileptic power supply; we still live in a more compounded problem of insecurity. This (subsidy removal) is one area he has stained his credibility; he promised to consult widely and leave the option for Nigerians. For me, the sudden price dictatorship, by PPPRA must be resisted by Nigerians.
We can also even dramatise it. The President was in Madalla and he was reportedly shedding tears for the victims of the criminal bombing on Christmas Day and everybody felt that, for once, he is sensitive to the plight of Nigerians, because he went to the scene. Not only that, he issued a New Year message, wishing Nigerians a better year ahead, only for PPPRA to increase the price of a product, which does not have a substitute, by over 100 per cent. This is more terrorising than the Boko Haram attacks. As you can see, the commercial heartbeat of Nigeria, Lagos is already grounded and in the next couple of days, you will see the effect on the entire nation.
So, what I am saying is that Jonathan has abandoned policy dialogue for policy dictatorship, and it is now left for him to prove that PPPRA is not doing his bidding, but if is true that PPPRA is implementing the plan of the president, then this government cannot be trusted by Nigerians.
You have consistently described the PPPRA as a discredited agency. Is there anything you know about PPPRA that the rest of us don’t know?
PPPRA is supposed to be Petroleum Products Regulatory Agency. I am asking you, which regulation are they doing? Even at the old price, we were told that it is only in few parts of Nigeria that people buy fuel at N65 per litre. What regulation has PPPRA carried out? All the figures of the so-called cabals, who carry out series of sharp practices in the industries, ought to have been checked by the PPPRA. I mean, what credibility has PPPRA brought to bear in that respect? So, when we talk of all the distortions in the price chain of products from the landed products, the discharge of product, which leads to demurrage, transportation, the banking charges and so on, it is the PPPRA that is supposed to check those charges, but we have investigated those figures and discovered that they are just fraudulent; they are just loaded to reward marketers and themselves too.
If you also find out, most of them, I mean, members of the regulatory agency are also operators. So, what kind of confidence can Nigerians have in such kind of agency to dictate the price? I also want to put this to you: the whole idea that we gathered during this policy dialogue was that they wanted to allow market to operate; that is forces of demand and supply; the prices would be determined by the market. Now, the price that was announced two days ago, tell me how that is a market price? That is not a market price; it is a dictated price. Why N141 per litre? Why not N14 per litre? Why not N1,000 per litre? Over 100 per cent increase overnight? This can only be PPPRA market. This cannot be a market price. There is no market like that in the whole world. This is a distorted and corrupt market. It is investment driven market. Even in terms of the way they carried out the policy, it is price dictation, and as we have also predicted during the town hall meeting, what we told Nigerians is that, there is a gap between official resolute, by allowing market forces to operate, and the reality. You know in the normal market, prices always go up and come down. But what we have seen, in respect to petroleum products over the years, is that prices always go up and what has happened in the last two days is not exception, from N65 to N150 for a product, which does not have a substitute.
You are working with The Sun. Can you increase the cover price of your paper by 100 per cent overnight? For me, if Nigerians take this, it means they can take anything. What is also very bad is that, this is a public agency, which is supposed to serve public interest. The reason it is so bad is that Nigerian consumers are the one in trouble because once the agency could engage in price oppression, what do you expect of private agencies? They will do worse. You pay so much to travel by air through the aviation, so much delay at the airport, very little services to render and so on. So, what are we talking about?
Shortly before the late Umar Yar’Adua administration, there was an increase in pump price, which took effect on assumption of his office. Labour went on strike and there were some negotiations and agreement, to the effect the price will remains at N65 and anytime it would be reviewed, Labour and government will sit down to look at a safety net. What happens to that understanding?
I am happy that you made reference to the government of President Yar’Adua administration to which Jonathan was a party, because he was the vice president then. We insisted that there was not going to be any increment in the prices of petroleum product. In fact, there was a reduction from N70 to N65, because it was arbitrarily done by Obasanjo when he was leaving office. So, we had to review it, to set up a process of review, but, unfortunately, President Yar’Adua died shortly after words. And part of the issues that emerged at that process was that we drew up a template of a number of things that must be in place, part of which is fixing of refineries. We strongly believe that if you want to deregulate or you want us to have market driven prices for product, it will be nice that we have that market product for domestic refined product because that we also create job rather than importing jobs.
We also said that there was need for overhauling of existing infrastructure for product delivery. Then along the line the issue of PIB also came in, that is, Petroleum Industry Bill. We said let’s us look at it holistically. How do we improve local content because the oil companies are just having fun with us. We also talked about how we manage the possible proceeds, if eventually, we allow for deregulation. But beyond that, we are also being engaged with this very President, if the issue is just a casual issue, why was the president leading the dialogue himself? He met with Labour; he met with religious leaders and his coordinating ministers moderated that town hall meeting. Minister of petroleum resources and minister of finance were there and CBN governor, who ordinarily should be pre-occupied with monetary policy, was also there.
That shows how important the policy was to the government. So, for Mr. President to now conclusively move to the next level, with this policy, which is not driven by the same kind of process (dialogue) it started with, means the whole process has come to nothing. And that shows how insensitive the government is to the plight of people of the ordinary Nigerian. And I want to tell you that in the process of this (dialogue) discussion, all these issues about the refineries also came up: how do we get the refineries working? And we were told that the minister of petroleum has re- awarded the contract to the original builders of these refineries. So, we want to see how they are going to work; we want to see the projects. We were also told that efforts are being made to see how the profit would be handled. None of these has been done, but suddenly a group called PPPRA announced the removal of the subsidy. This is a country, which economy is still more or less mono-dependent and road transportation, either by okada or by our cars or commercial vehicles, is the major source of transportation. We all depend on petrol, railway is not yet there. So, the impact will be seriously felt by the masses.
But come to think of it, as an individual, do you think we really need this fuel subsidy of a thing?
I think the question is wrongly put. I think the question should be, do we need good roads? Do we need uninterrupted power supply? Do we need other social amenities?
I think every Nigerian will agree that we need uninterrupted power supply at appropriate price. Even now that we don’t have it, the tariff for power that is not supplied is high. Diesel has been deregulated and is now N198. This is what we ought to be using when power is not supplied. I think every Nigerian needs power supply rather than using generator. Every Nigerian will say we need a type of transportation experienced in developed countries. Most people travelled for this holiday based on certain assumptions that the price of going home will be N1500; now to travel back has gone up to about N5000.
So, to respond to your question on whether we need subsidy or not, whether subsidy is there or not, what is the impact on public welfare? This policy, if care is not taken, will be a winner-takes-all kind of a thing. And in this case, the winners are petroleum marketers, who can charge any price on the product, which doesn’t have substitute, maybe also to pay some of the dept they owe; the other few winners include government, who, according to them, will now have free money from the federation account for availability of governors to have their share. But you know the big losers are Nigerians who are road bound, who are stranded, and who cannot afford the new cost of transportation, medical bills and the rest of them. So, this idea of one cap fits all, that once you deregulate everything will be in place is not so, because everything has come to a halt. The end is what will be the result, the result is, do we have public welfare? What we have seen so far is that with the removal of the so-called fuel subsidy, public welfare remains the same; in fact worsen. And I said so at the Town Hall meeting that our government should not be dogmatic or ideological about the whole idea of deregulation, because my fear is that, this government is thinking that deregulation will free them of responsibilities when actually that is when responsibilities begin. No market operator can last a day longer if government is not on duty.
And you can see, talking about dogmatism, we have the same dogmatism about money market before; it was almost two decades of deregulation in the money market. You see everybody set up commercial banks, nobody regulated them; they were just playing around with money; they were even financing cocaine business, and they were probably financing terrorism with public money, until CBN came in under Sanusi Lamido and said we have to put in some controls here. So, as far as we are concerned, the issue is not whether you remove fuel subsidy or not, but the welfare of people must be ensured.
You said Nigerians should resist it, but if you drive round town, some Nigerians are queuing up to buy petrol at either N140 or N145. Do you think this set of people will support the NLC’s protest?
It will not be right to blame the victims on what they are not responsible for. The fact that Nigerians are queuing up, to buy the product at outrageous prices, show why Nigerians should be pitied more than ever before. This is because you can’t compare petroleum products with telecom services, because for this product, there is no substitute; what will people travel with if they don’t buy it? That is why government is blackmailing people that, they must buy because they don’t have any choice. But what government does not understand is that the money that is available to buy 30 litres of fuel at N140 per litre will not be available to pay school fees. The money available to buy 40 litres of fuel at an outrageous price will certainly not be available to buy food. So, definitely, there is a serious cost implication. Most filling stations have the products now and they are not selling. They are possibly waiting to get more profit at the expense of the masses. It is bad enough that they have increased this price and it is even worse that nobody is there to make sure the product is available. Where is PPPRA? Why are people having product, which they bought when it was highly subsidised and yet they are still not selling, because they are waiting for what time they will be able to sell at any price.
So, the point I am raising is that, it is not about whether there is support for labour or not. I have never seen any consumer, even though they are buying at that price, who is praying for this government. And I have never seen anyone who is buying and cursing labour for opposing this outrageous price. So, I want to put it at that level, that you will see the other side of Nigerians with time, because everybody will spark when it comes; transporters will feel the pain, because what goes round comes round. Foodstuff prices will go up and the rest of them. Inflation rate will go up; poverty rate will worsen. It is going to compound socio-economic insecurity, which has implication on physical insecurity. More jobs will be lost with this. Because, once the cost of production goes up, for every producer, they have to see how to manage their cost of production and one of the first casualties is the Labour force. Now, what should worry you is the way this new price regime dictated by PPPRA under the auspices of the President that promised a breath of fresh air, in his transformation agenda, will worsen the level of poverty in Nigeria, further undermine productivity and create unnecessary rancour.
And for me, I find it completely scandalous that a government that declared emergency in times of physical crisis in some states decides to impose an emergency situation on the country. This policy is divisive; it is meant to divide us. And that is why we have said that as far as we are concerned, the constituted price is what we respect, which N65 per litre is. And the Federal Government will be held responsible for any chaos that comes as a result of this.
We will open our own register against this policy. But the point is, whether we have opened register or not, the hidden register will be far more devastating for Nigeria. This is the same Jonathan government that has not paid minimum wage. So, this is not a government people will certainly not curse. You signed a law, you have not implemented, meanwhile, you have increased prices. So, it is not just Labour forces; it is the forces of all Nigerians. But, any day anytime, we trust Nigerians, and any step we take, we will get solidarity of Nigerians.
As far as we are concerned, this policy is worse than what we use to go through before, because in those days, government will announce a few other things they want to put in place for citizens to pick what is their own, but this one is just winner takes all, while the rest of us are left to suffer.
It is also clear that our leaders are not believers. This is because they actually behave like unbelievers. I mean, why will any President democratically elected by the people, on a New Year day, decides to inflict pain on the electorate. The argument is that, if you cannot improve their public welfare, don’t worsen it and certainly not on a festive day. That is why I am saying that this price terrorism can be compared to the same bomb terrorism on Christmas Day in Madalla, because it is the same day of joy somebody dropped a bomb to kill worshippers. But the president went there to shed crocodile tears; it is crocodile tears, because after shedding the tears, the next thing is to impose the same hardship on his own people with endless tears. This one is a process tear. It is a tear that cannot be wiped off easily. The whole logic is the same. The person who dropped that Madalla bomb and that who dropped the price bomb are all unbelievers because they each chose a day of joy, of worship to impose more hardship on the people and as we have already said, what happened to those that have gone home to mark the festivity? This is a president who has promised that this is not immediate; it has to be in April. For now, President Jonathan is having trust deficit and he needs to work hard to regain this trust. Policy that asks the citizens to pay more for services in the New Year cannot be in the citizens’ interest.
Source> http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2012/jan/07/national-07-01-2011-011.html
Sacrifice, the true spelling of love
By Osondu Anyalechi [oanyalechi@yahoo.co.uk]
Saturday, December 31, 2011
http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/columnists/familytonic/2011/family-dec-31-2011.html
A mother visited her son in Lagos many years ago and in an attempt to impress her, the daughter-in-law served her the only two legs of chicken they had in the soup pot. Mama burst into deep grief, bemoaning her singular misfortune of her son marrying a lady from another town. ‘Is this how my son’s money is wasted – everything into the stomach? If she served me two legs of chicken – two legs for one person – who knows how many she has eaten? Did I not oppose my son marrying from ‘mba-kesi’? This is it,’ she lamented.
That simple act of kindness demonstrated by the lady, sacrificing their own meat for Mama’s comfort, had lit the fuse of calumny against her. It takes an adult mind to realize that whenever we receive benefits or services from people, someone has paid for them.
Many years ago, Rev. H.L.O. Williams, the principal at the Methodist College, Uzuakoli, was travelling to England, his home country, when their ship capsized. Death was imminent, looming on their faces. The passengers took their lifejackets immediately but a pregnant woman was wailing uncontrollably and violently. Her outburst had nothing to do with William Shakespeare’s postulation that cowards die three times before their death. She was not one. Her problem was peculiar - no lifejacket under her seat!
Who would help her? If it were giving out a coat, someone might sacrifice his and with time, be able to replace it. If it were giving out money, somebody could do it and would manage what remained with him. It was exchanging one’s life with hers. It was dying that she would live, a bargain for death. And that was what happened! H.O.L. Williams gave her his lifejacket. And He died! And she lived!
In Standard Four in 1953 at the Methodist Central School, Ovim, Mr. Nkama, our class teacher, taught us during the History lesson about Horatius, a brave Roman soldier. The Tuscany army was marching aggressively to Rome and nothing could hinder them. He realized that the only thing that could save his country was the sacrifice of life - his and a few others. Like a suicide squad, while fighting the invading army, his people busied themselves cutting down the link-bridge to Rome. When the bridge fell, he and his colleagues perished with it but Rome was saved!
‘England,’ said Nelson, ‘expects every man to do his duty’. That should apply to every citizen of every country. ‘Thank God,’ Nelson challenged before his death, ‘I have done my duty’. Nigeria will be a beautiful country if every citizen and leader, at the end of his life or tenure, at all levels of governance - political, commercial, religious, et cetera - will say to himself and also to the public that he has done his duty. Prophet Samuel made a similar declaration in public – 1 Sam 12.3. Apostle Paul also followed suit - 2 Tim 4:7. I hope the duty the Nigerian has done will not be that of meeting his projected stealing-target. It is the duty he had promised to accomplish.
Joseph, who turned down the sex advances of the amorous wife of Potiphar, went to jail without defending himself. Doing that would expose what really transpired between them, a wife her moral decadence was so messy that the Bible did not bother to record her name. If Joseph had produced her text messages, emails, love letters, gifts, et cetera, he would have ‘scattered’ their marriage. He chose to suffer so that her marriage would be preserved.
I met Esther, a Nigerian lady, in Dallas. She worked for Dr. Peter Odilli, the former Governor of Rivers State. She and her husband, Chidi, live in the U.S. Apart from her paid job at that time, she used her spare time in buying and retailing clothes. The business blossomed, bringing in almost seven times of her salary. With more responsibilities in her office, time became of much essence. It was obvious that she must quit either her paid job or her money-spinning business. Economic rationality favoured quitting her paid job. As a child of God, moral consideration tilted the balance even to her hurt, making her hammer to fall on the budding business.
That was a sacrifice she made to encourage parents in her community to be sending their daughters to school. A lady her parents had sent to the U.S. abused the privilege and refused to return. Other parents, as a result, decided to limit education to their sons. Her dad reasoned differently, refusing to associate the lady’s misconduct to her gender and thus, sent Esther to school. Her business did not require any academics but her paid job did. This meant that ladies, who did not go to school, could do the same business but not her job. Quitting the paid job would confirm the fears of the people in her community. God has today, honoured that sacrifice. I visited her store in April and November here in Dallas and what I saw is an eloquent testimony to that.
In the primary school, I made a sacrifice that attracted the wrath and cane of my master. We were living at Ngbo, in Abakalili. Their main market, Okwo, was held once in five days. The first soup I made, using the fresh meat I bought, usually lasted three days and the second, two days. One day, we had a visitor that fell in love with my soup, to the extent that my master requested twice for more soup, a man who was contented with what I served him. I managed the remaining soup for two days and the left over was not enough for the third night I served other people and went without food. ‘Thank sir,’ I greeted my Oga, not known that his children had told him that I did not eat. My reward was his cane!
No one could satisfy a guest speaker when he asked the congregation to spell LOVE. It was a surprise, even to the English majors. ‘I will help you, ‘he volunteered. ‘Please, write it down, the true spelling of LOVE’. In rapt attention, they listened as he spelt ‘S A C R I F I C E’.
For comments, please contact Osondu Anyalechi on
0802- 3002-471; anyalechiosondu@yahoo.com
Saturday, December 31, 2011
http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/columnists/familytonic/2011/family-dec-31-2011.html
A mother visited her son in Lagos many years ago and in an attempt to impress her, the daughter-in-law served her the only two legs of chicken they had in the soup pot. Mama burst into deep grief, bemoaning her singular misfortune of her son marrying a lady from another town. ‘Is this how my son’s money is wasted – everything into the stomach? If she served me two legs of chicken – two legs for one person – who knows how many she has eaten? Did I not oppose my son marrying from ‘mba-kesi’? This is it,’ she lamented.
That simple act of kindness demonstrated by the lady, sacrificing their own meat for Mama’s comfort, had lit the fuse of calumny against her. It takes an adult mind to realize that whenever we receive benefits or services from people, someone has paid for them.
Many years ago, Rev. H.L.O. Williams, the principal at the Methodist College, Uzuakoli, was travelling to England, his home country, when their ship capsized. Death was imminent, looming on their faces. The passengers took their lifejackets immediately but a pregnant woman was wailing uncontrollably and violently. Her outburst had nothing to do with William Shakespeare’s postulation that cowards die three times before their death. She was not one. Her problem was peculiar - no lifejacket under her seat!
Who would help her? If it were giving out a coat, someone might sacrifice his and with time, be able to replace it. If it were giving out money, somebody could do it and would manage what remained with him. It was exchanging one’s life with hers. It was dying that she would live, a bargain for death. And that was what happened! H.O.L. Williams gave her his lifejacket. And He died! And she lived!
In Standard Four in 1953 at the Methodist Central School, Ovim, Mr. Nkama, our class teacher, taught us during the History lesson about Horatius, a brave Roman soldier. The Tuscany army was marching aggressively to Rome and nothing could hinder them. He realized that the only thing that could save his country was the sacrifice of life - his and a few others. Like a suicide squad, while fighting the invading army, his people busied themselves cutting down the link-bridge to Rome. When the bridge fell, he and his colleagues perished with it but Rome was saved!
‘England,’ said Nelson, ‘expects every man to do his duty’. That should apply to every citizen of every country. ‘Thank God,’ Nelson challenged before his death, ‘I have done my duty’. Nigeria will be a beautiful country if every citizen and leader, at the end of his life or tenure, at all levels of governance - political, commercial, religious, et cetera - will say to himself and also to the public that he has done his duty. Prophet Samuel made a similar declaration in public – 1 Sam 12.3. Apostle Paul also followed suit - 2 Tim 4:7. I hope the duty the Nigerian has done will not be that of meeting his projected stealing-target. It is the duty he had promised to accomplish.
Joseph, who turned down the sex advances of the amorous wife of Potiphar, went to jail without defending himself. Doing that would expose what really transpired between them, a wife her moral decadence was so messy that the Bible did not bother to record her name. If Joseph had produced her text messages, emails, love letters, gifts, et cetera, he would have ‘scattered’ their marriage. He chose to suffer so that her marriage would be preserved.
I met Esther, a Nigerian lady, in Dallas. She worked for Dr. Peter Odilli, the former Governor of Rivers State. She and her husband, Chidi, live in the U.S. Apart from her paid job at that time, she used her spare time in buying and retailing clothes. The business blossomed, bringing in almost seven times of her salary. With more responsibilities in her office, time became of much essence. It was obvious that she must quit either her paid job or her money-spinning business. Economic rationality favoured quitting her paid job. As a child of God, moral consideration tilted the balance even to her hurt, making her hammer to fall on the budding business.
That was a sacrifice she made to encourage parents in her community to be sending their daughters to school. A lady her parents had sent to the U.S. abused the privilege and refused to return. Other parents, as a result, decided to limit education to their sons. Her dad reasoned differently, refusing to associate the lady’s misconduct to her gender and thus, sent Esther to school. Her business did not require any academics but her paid job did. This meant that ladies, who did not go to school, could do the same business but not her job. Quitting the paid job would confirm the fears of the people in her community. God has today, honoured that sacrifice. I visited her store in April and November here in Dallas and what I saw is an eloquent testimony to that.
In the primary school, I made a sacrifice that attracted the wrath and cane of my master. We were living at Ngbo, in Abakalili. Their main market, Okwo, was held once in five days. The first soup I made, using the fresh meat I bought, usually lasted three days and the second, two days. One day, we had a visitor that fell in love with my soup, to the extent that my master requested twice for more soup, a man who was contented with what I served him. I managed the remaining soup for two days and the left over was not enough for the third night I served other people and went without food. ‘Thank sir,’ I greeted my Oga, not known that his children had told him that I did not eat. My reward was his cane!
No one could satisfy a guest speaker when he asked the congregation to spell LOVE. It was a surprise, even to the English majors. ‘I will help you, ‘he volunteered. ‘Please, write it down, the true spelling of LOVE’. In rapt attention, they listened as he spelt ‘S A C R I F I C E’.
For comments, please contact Osondu Anyalechi on
0802- 3002-471; anyalechiosondu@yahoo.com
That ‘Tam David-West’ Smetamorphosis: ’Pedestrian, puerile, ignorant, disinformation
By TAM DAVID-WEST
Saturday January 07, 2012
•Prof. Tam David West
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on this Section
Let me begin by ‘congratulating’ Tony Egbulefu for his attempt at being a Jonathan government apologist on the ‘subsidy’ question, which he himself rightly described as “subsidy conundrum” in his pro-‘subsidy’ article “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (Compass, December 8, 2011, page 8). The article even carried his pix smiling for a job well done. Well done? No! Rubbish.
However, if he had taken some more time to do better and painstaking research, especially being a self-vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst,” he would have saved himself the monstrous embarrassment of manifest ignorance and inaccuracies on the one hand and the palpable disinformation on the other hand, which I intend to highlight under the above caption of this rebuttal.
I apologise for the longish caption. But each of the selected words has its own particular import to my theme or discourse. On a rather light note my caption could be said to be ‘pygmy’ when compared to the ‘giant’ 40-word caption of the controversy-laden Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB).
Tony Egbulefu, “Abuja-based policy analyst,” joined what looks to all the world as the team of government-sponsored “pro-‘subsidy’ removal” hatchet writers who in the past few months have surfaced in different guises and with varying doses of disinformation to the public: Paid multi-page colour adverts e.g. “Fuel Subsidy Frequently Asked Questions” by a said “Campaign Against Waste (CAW)” The Nation On Sunday, October 16, 2011 and The Guardian Sunday, October 23, 2011 “No (2)” (I missed the earlier No.1).
The very elaborate 6-page colour advert, “Let’s Change The Equation Remove Oil Subsidy…” This Day, October 21, 2011 Front Page Sensation! by a said “Mass Interest Project (MIP).”
Altruistic? Voluntary? No. Never. A page of colour advert costs between N300 and N400 (sometimes even more). Even a child can see through the cheap veil of government sponsorship. And these programmed propaganda adverts ran for some weeks. Who picked up the colossal bills? Santa Claus government.
In addition to the above there were many pro-‘subsidy’ articles with varying display of sophistry and spins. Some of them were broad-sides against me, an obdurate, implacable unapologetic “ANTI-‘SUBSIDY’.”
Of all of them, Egbulefu’s contribution was easily the cheapest, the most bereft of substance, the most careless (ad hominem and libelous) the most jejune, the most replete with inaccuracies and disinformation. The most flagrant display, nay parade of crass ignorance. It was also the most widely circulated. All of these will be addressed later on in this rebuttal. Certainly, not edifying for a vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst.”
His “Tam David-West’s metamorphosis” (The Nation, December 6, 2011); “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (This Day, December 9, 2011) “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of Tam David-West” (Compass, December 8, 2011 page 8) are all replete with all the above listed negatives.
He was apparently so pleased with himself for a splendid job of being Pro-government and “Pro-‘subsidy’ removal” his “metamorphosis” ‘thesis’ was widely circulated in the media both print (some half a dozen) and electronic (internet). I seem to wonder how much was paid for this job. Shoddy job as will be seen later.
It is therefore, my humble expectation and respectful appeal that similar gesture of robust generosity be extended also to me. “Balancing the equation” so to say. Equity. All for a balanced public good.
Before I take up the specifics, I must state categorically and with some measure of satisfaction and refreshing vindication that NONE of the “Pro-writers” have faulted me on the CRUCIAL FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE that THERE IS NO FUEL SUBSIDY. NONE. NEVER EXISTED.
The number of hatchet writers and commentators assembled against me is redolent of the situation of Albert Einstein and his ground-breaking “Relativity Theory.” The anti-Einstein even published a book, “100 Authors Against Einstein.” Einstein’s reaction? “If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!” Not “100”! (In: “A Brief History Of Time” by Stephen Hawking).
And so similarly on my well-considered position, which is buttressed with facts and figures and cogent argument that any talk of “Fuel Subsidy” is FRAUDULENT. LIE. CORRUPTION. DECEITFUL. NEVER EXISTED. All what is needed to humble me, disgrace me, expose me to public opprobrium is for the Jonathan government, especially his “de facto prime minister” (Wikipedia), Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, to accept my challenge for an Open-Space Public Debate on ‘SUBSIDY’ simpliciter. This is the ONLY way the public interest would be served.
No amount of government-sponsored adverts, articles, campaigns, lobby, threats, blackmail, bribing or “settlement,” economic Armageddon, doom prophecy on the Economy can change the fact of the NON EXISTENCE of fuel subsidy.
If 99 people out of 100 (99%) claim that the sun rises from the West and sets in the East; and only one person holds the opposite position, it does not ever mean that the 99 are right and the lonely one is in error.
In their frustration to muster effective counters against me, they resort to totally irrelevant and sterile diversionary red herring that being a Virologist, I may not fully understand the subsidy controversy.
My reaction? Arrant nonsense. I was oil minister. It was the annus mirabilis for the nation’s oil business. The records are there!
Besides, their Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Allison-Madueke, is B.Sc, Architecture, Howard University Washington DC. I am MSc (Yale) PhD (McGill) in Virology. The most celebrated oil minister in the world, Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani, Saudi Arabia oil minister for some 25 years, is a lawyer. Juan Pablo Perez Alfonso, the famous oil minister of Venezuela, who initiated the formation of OPEC, is a doctor, MD Johns Hopkins.
Virologist, yes. So why not accept my challenge to a public debate on your so-called ‘subsidy’ and disgrace me. Why lily-livered. Why chicken-hearted.
It is outrageous for government to misappropriate huge public funds (multi-millions) to sponsor and ‘merchandise’ lies and disinformation about their phantom fuel ‘subsidy’ through their hired hatchet writers. It is corruption, plain and simple. “Corruption is the use of public powers in order to achieve private goals” (Christopher Clapham). The “private goal” here is ego trip, the massaging of one’s sense of self. Jonathan, especially Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, his obtrusive ‘guardian angel.’
“Proponents of the removal of petroleum ‘subsidy’ are aflush with millions of Naira, as indicated in the flood of advertorials in the media.” In “Again, the petroleum ‘subsidy’ bogey” by Ojo Olorunleke, News Star, October 19, 2011. Back page.
Let me now debunk seriatim Tony Egbulefu, the great “Abuja-based policy-analyst. The government apologist.
I do this not because I am worried about his piece. Not even a bit. Truth is like cork, unsinkable.
However, first, I want to set the distorted records and disinformation straight for now and for posterity. Secondly, I wish to put him on notice (a fascinating legal phrase) on where he carelessly overstretched himself with actionable distortion about my integrity, which is pivotal to my very life. Because one’s good name is so much more superior to all the silver, gold and diamond in the whole world. Thirdly, among the eight President Abraham Lincoln’s “LINCOLN PRINCIPLES” are the following:
• One, “It is not entirely safe to allow a misrepresentation to go uncorrected.”
• Two, “Remember that truth is generally the best vindication against slander.”
• Three, “If you yield to even one false charge, you may open yourself up to other unjust attacks.” In, “Lincoln On Leadership” by Donald T. Phillips.
Finally, I wish to state quite honestly that I am not allergic to criticisms or counters to my strongly held positions. I am not, like any mortal, perfect or omniscient. These defining qualities are the exclusive preserve of the Almighty. But I detest intellectual laziness, which I am inexorably contemptuous of. I also, similarly, despise physical indolence. Hence my mantra as a social critic: Demolish me with facts. If you bring fiction I will demolish you.
On Egbulefu’s “metamorphosis,” I am completely at a loss to see where or how I ever metamorphosed. I’m not being simply pedantic. I am dead serious.
As a professional Research Scientist (Virologist) and as once a student of Biology I do know that “Metamorphosis,” is the biological progressive transformation of animal body from one post-embryonic form to another, usually from larva to adult. The word is derived from two Greek words: “meta” or “after” and “morphe” or “form.”
The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary defines it as “A process in which somebody or something changes completely into something different.”
I have been very consistent over the years (over five decades) as a social critic. Furthermore, I have only one personality. Constant. Not split. No persona. No façade. Transparently and reliably one me. I therefore, challenge Egbulefu or any other so disposed to confront me with any somersaults on my part. Any. I have always called a spade by its very name “spade” no matter who is involved. Constructively. And by His grace I am blessed with the freedom from fear and solid confidence in His Divine direction. Hence, I am often being vindicated.
My book, “My Controversies My Vindications” will soon be out by His grace.
Some 100. From Daily Paid Labour to Gowon’s Overthrow, to New Federal Capital, to Admission of Communist China to the UN, to the Fall of Apartheid, to America’s Middle East Misadventure, to One-Term Vice-Chancellors. Most of them some 5 or 10 even 20 years after my ‘Controversy.’ To Him be the glory.
For one of my latest ‘controversies.’ I wrote repeatedly that if President Musa Yar’Adua dies in office, Nigeria would have a profound crisis of leadership. Again, vindicated. The rest is now history.
The case of Dan Etete, Abacha’s Petroleum Resources Minister, is paradigmatic of my so-called controversies and their corresponding vindications. He is Ijaw (Bayelsa), like myself, and also similarly Jonathan (Bayelsa). He was easily the most carefree oil minister. From two pet lions at his Port Harcourt marble mansion at Woi Street GRA being fed two goats each day by NNPC, to $500,000.00 (Half Million Dollars) per day Estacada to the United States, to oil block (OMS 56) etc etc etc. My essay “The Imperial Minister” (This Day, January 23, 1997 page 6) and (City People, February 5, 1997 page 2) gave details of Etete’s prodigality and profligacy.
I rounded up on Etete: “Etete Will Leave Office in Disgrace – David-West” (The Diet, May 12-18, 1997. Front Page; Page 12-14).
VINDICATION
One, “IG orders ex-minister Etete’s arrest” (This Day, February 20, 2003). Case referred to Interpol.
Two, “Dan Etete Police Inspector General declares former minister wanted” (The Comet, February 20, 2003. Front Page Lead). This was full 12 years after my so-called ‘controversy.’
Three, “ETETE CONVICTED French Appeal Court upholds ex-Petroleum Minister’s sentence. Fines him N2.5billion for money laundering,” Daily Sun, March 19, 2009. Front Page Lead.
I have never been a time-server. No amount of money – even all in our mint – can buy my conscience or derogate my principles. Impossibility!
But I am not unaware of some hatchet writers who I tag “Penny Per Column” or some “Scavenger Writers” who flock to government for sponsored or “Nairatised” articles. Indeed, like vultures flock around dead bodies. Such people are disservice to society and to the honourable profession of writing.
Egbulefu, quite rightly stated, “Facts are sacred.” But he repeatedly spun facts on their heads. Maybe he merely parroted the maxim without really understanding it, especially its profound moral implication.
For instance, it is totally false that General Buhari “luckily didn’t encounter the monster of petroleum products subsidy because he inherited three relatively new and functional refineries.” This is not good enough, in fact shameful, for a great “policy analyst.” During Buhari’s time there was iron-cast discipline. No corruption. No sabotage of refineries. No fuel importation. Not even one litre. We even exported. No problems at all with Turn Around Maintenance (TAM) of our refineries. Like vehicle owners who service their vehicles regularly.
It is also an embarrassing falsehood that as Chairman of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) Buhari believed in “fuel subsidy removal.” The great vaunted “policy analyst” is completely wet and crassly ignorant about the philosophy or rationale for the formation of the PTF as an “interventionist body” set up in 1994 by Abacha to use the quantum of price of fuel increase in visible positives for the economy. Plentitude of concrete records. Unlike the daydreaming and castles in the air, vacuous unreliable promises of Jonathan and Okonjo-Iweala. All these sweet nothings have been said before by corrupt governments. Déjà vu!
“Major-General Muhammadu Buhari, an extraordinary Nigerian, matched only by few in integrity and readiness to subject himself to the demands of public office…By all standards the PTF has been a success, able to reverse public cynicism in a very short time….” Testimony by General Abdusalami Abubakar, GCFR in his Forward to “Buhari: the PTF Years” (1990).
Like me, General Buhari has never supported the so-called ‘fuel subsidy removal:’ “Fuel subsidy is corruption…It is a big scam….There is no such thing in the country today…We must fix our refineries and refine our petroleum products locally.” Buhari. Daily Sun, October 20, 2011. Front Page/Page 5. “Fuel Subsidy Jonathan misquoted me – Buhari” Saturday Mirror, November 12, 2011.
“There is no fuel subsidy in Nigeria, says David-West”…“The concept of petroleum subsidy is fraudulent.” David-West. National Mirror, June 26, 2011. “Fuel Subsidy, a big fraud.” “Ex-petroleum minister opens up.” Saturday Sun, October 15, 2011. Front Page Lead.
Egbulefu, also lied that I said refineries “would become obsolete and money guzzling after 30 years of existence.” I never ever said so. What I said, and that repeatedly over the years, was that the experts inform me that new refineries could go on for some 20-30 years without major problems. Even vehicles well-maintained can go on for 20 years. For instance, I used my Peugeot for 22 years before I sold it to my driver’s brother. It is still on the street.
It is also shameful fabrication for Egbulefu, the great “Abuja-based policy analyst” to ever say that I am against private refineries. I seem to wonder if he really understood what he read or has been reading especially as a vaunted “policy analyst.”
What I said was that to build a refinery is so very cost intensive that no Nigerian businessman can single-handedly build one. He must need serious-minded foreign partners.
Inact, I was Chairman of the “VISION 2010” DOWNSTREAM Sub-Committee. Our report is there for any serious-minded policy-analyst to read.
On my said public lecture on ‘subsidy’ “delivered at the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI)…on Thursday November, 24.” (2011). This total inaccuracy, indeed monstrous lie, completely destroyed Egbulefu’s big claim, nay parade, as a “policy analyst.”
Now, I am for the very first time in my addressing the ill-conceived and misdirected piece quite infuriated by this so-called “Abuja-based policy analyst,” Tony Egbulefu, for making me take time off from my very heavy time schedule to rebut his nonsense.
He has shown or demonstrated beyond any reasonable reservation that he is both intellectually lazy and also physically indolent. It is all self-advertisement for patronage. He does not also even respect the dictum he recited that “Facts are sacred.” He fabricates with ease swank and utter abandon.
First, I never ever delivered any lecture at the “Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industries” and on “Thursday November 24.” It’s all infuriating shameless tissue of lies. I don’t even know where the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industries is situated.
My invitation Lecture on “OIL ‘SUBSIDY:’ FACTS, FICTION AND FRAUD” was at the “Lagos Country Club, Ikeja, Lagos.” And it was on “Wednesday 23rd November, 2011.”
Clearly, it is people like Egbulefu who constitute albatross to President Jonathan. But as Machiavelli said in “The Prince,” to be wisely advised the Prince should also be wise.
I have zero tolerance for people who parade intellectualism and knowledgibility with all sorts of self-serving “Non-Government Organisations” (NGO) or outfits. For instance, hear “policy analyst” Egbulefu, again: “But here we are in a democracy that has power to make even a leopard change its spots.” Arrant nonsense. Unqualified rubbish.
First, are we in a “Democracy?” No. Not even “Quasi-Democracy,” Finter. Secondly, our ‘Federalism’ is also a fraudulent parody. Thirdly, and more disgusting, no democracy, even that of classical Athens of Pericles can “make even a leopard to change its spots.”
“Democracy” is not the magician’s abracadabra invocation. Silly. Cheap. Puerile.
I urge the great “Policy analyst” to read Ben Nwabueze’s “How President Obasanjo Subverted The Rule of Law And Democracy” (2007). 415 pages. Flows in reading. It will make him to be much more serious-minded.
Still another “Egbulefian lie.” Babangida did not appoint me “Minister of Petroleum and Energy.” It was “Minister of Petroleum Resources.” Quite different. A serious “policy analyst” should be able to know this.
Yet, another one of the “Egbulefian lies” and embarrassing carelessness and physical indolence for a “policy analyst” who is expected to (and indeed mandatorily imperative) do serious research before talking or writing. I am not in “serious academics;” and I am not “saddled” with teaching. I retired from the university since 1991.
And more and more lies, the Egbulefuian. My relationship with military government did not come to a “screeching halt, when Babangida, in his own wisdom found him wanting on an alleged issue on infraction and best practices.”
The FACTS. SACRED FACTS. The TRUTHS:
First, there was never any suddenness or “screeching halt.” Between September 1986 when I left the government to the Babangida – Aminu inspired Special Military Tribunal in September 1990 when I appeared before the Tribunal was four years and eight months interval (almost 5 years) post – government.
Two, I was discharged and acquitted by the Special Appeal Tribunal, Chairman, The Honourable Justice Dahunsi Coker (Supreme Court retd) on 08 August, 1991:
“No iota of evidence on the charge of corruption.”
My victory and my triumph were hailed nationally and internationally. “David-West: A Victory for Justice” Editorial The Guardian, August 21, 1991.
“Tam’s Testimonial” by Ray Ekpu, Newswatch, August 26, 1991. My Birthday.
Why testimonial? The Special Appeal Tribunal showered encomiums on me and to all intents and purpose decorated me with tasty accolades and sprayed me with colourful sweet confetti.
“We observe and note the evidence that the accused as Minister and Chairman of NNPC performed his duties conscientiously and courageously. He is no doubt a person of very high intellect, hard working and conscientious…..”
Egbulefu, should read my First Anniversary of Bama Prison publication (Advert): “TO THE GLORY OF THE ALMIGHTY THE INJUSTICE OF NOVEMBER 16, 1990 STINNES: TISSUE OF OFFICIAL LIES. THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE TRIUMPH OVER INJUSTICE AND PERFIDY” The Guardian On Sunday August 7, 1994. Four well documented pages. He should also read my advert to celebrate “THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CELEBRATED ‘$57M’ CUP OF TEA/WRIST WATCH SAGA (From Limousine To Black Maria)” The Guardian On Sunday, November 16, 2000. Four pages well documented.
Furthermore, my book (copiously documented) “STINNES (THE ‘$57M’ – CUP OF TEA-WRIST WATCH SAGA) 212 pages had been ready for some time. Ready to go!
BAMA PRISON RE-VISITED
To demonstrate my empathy and sympathy for the inmates of terrible Bama Prisons I left behind, I visited the prison on 29 August, 1992 and donated cartons of different drugs to the inmates.
“Letter of Appreciation” by Officer Mohammed Musa Hinna dated 14 October, 1992. Ref. No.BMP/13/Vol. 1/44 refers.
As hinted earlier, Tony Egbulefu is “put on notice.” I don’t suffer fools gladly. Perhaps, I should also use this fitting occasion to also alert the following “on notice” for their own carelessness about my person or on issue very dear to me: E. K. Clark, Asari Dokubo, Rev. Ojo, Afegbua, Babangida, Aminu, Omoruyi, Saro Agbe, one ‘King’ Ogborosi of Bayelsa, Onuegbu, Ortsejafor. Indeed, in keeping with Abraham Lincoln: Never leave uncorrected any misrepresentation about you, especially printed permanent ones.
Egbulefu called me a “collaborator in military dictatorships.” He asked me to publish the “score-card” of my “performance as petroleum minister.”
Let me state right away that I have no apologies whatsoever serving the country either as Education Commissioner, Rivers State (1975-79) under General Zamani Lekwot or as Minister of Petroleum and Energy (1984-85) under General Buhari. In fact I remain very proud of these landmark years in my life. And I have all the good reasons to be so disposed.
I should make the following points, especially for people like “policy-analyst” Egbulefu: One, I never lobbied or jumped (as many I know) to these refreshing national recognitions. At the state level, General Lekwot, said he was prepared to wait for my “Yes” even up to the “eleventh second of the eleventh hour.” He is still very much alive. At the Federal level, Brigadier B. A. Idiagbon, Chief of Staff Supreme Headquarters, pleaded, “I am persuaded to believe that you would accept this request as a call to national duty, and I expect that you would gladly accept an invitation to serve.” His letter of 06 January, 1984. Ref: SHQ/COS/T.1 refers. I was greatly humbled by both Lekwot and Idiagbon. Independently. About a decade apart.
Two, it was my singular good fortune that at both State and Federal levels I worked under (cabinet) leaders with impeccable integrity, iron-cast discipline. Zero tolerance for corruption. Patriotic. Focused. Reliable. Leadership by examples.
It is incontestable that after Buhari and Lekwot the difference in these sterling virtues has remained rare. Very rare. I make bold to unequivocally say that after Lekwot (State level) and Buhari (Federal level) all their successors in office were moral invalids. From my records, the lonely exception at the federal level was General Abdulsalami A. Abubakar.
“Service to our nation brought Tam and I together and the (moral) values we shared in the course of that service have held us together” – General Buhari at the launching of my book “The Sixteen ‘Sins’ of General Muhammadu Buhari.” Port Harcourt 29 July, 2010. Three, I served for service id est the love of the fatherland, Nigeria. Not corrupt. Avoided compromisable situations: Not a single share in any oil company. Turned down building or car offers.
Four, My “ACCOUNTABILITY QUOTIENT” remained very positive. I developed this concept “Service to country divided by service to self” while in the Babangida-Aminu incarceration in terrible Bama Prison on 30 July, 1991. It was later published after my victory and triumph in the Weekend Telegraph April 23-29, 2005 page 8.
Five, a Governmental Regime is not bad simply because it is military. And contrariwise, good just because it is civilian. It all depends on the style and moral content of the regime; and flowing from its leadership.
Thus, the common quip: “The best military government is worse than the worst civilian government” is all arrant nonsense. Porous intellectualism.
My “Of Democracy in Military Governance.” This Day, November 28, 1996 page 6 refers. The great Allison Ayida’s polished, elegant, decorous rebuttal to Obasanjo: “Memo from AYIDA to OBASANJO,” Sunday Times, April 10, 1990 page 8 is also apropos of the “Democracy in Military Governance.”
Furthermore, General Olusegun Obasanjo, argued that military government is not an aberration. In his: “Africa Embattled” (1988) page 60.
Six, A Bullet Coup is not worse than a Ballot-Box Coup. In fact, the latter is even worse because of its hypocritical claims to correctness. I’ve argued before that election riggers are worse than armed robbers. Therefore capital punishment is also appropriate. Armed robber targets an individual. Election riggers target the nation.
As for my “score-card” I am constrained to provide the following very, very truncated list. I do this not out of immodesty. No. But for people like our great “policy-analyst,” Egbulefu, to be better educated since they hear they hear not; and see and see not. Too busy being apologist to non-performing, ill-focused failed governments. Let me be graphic:
One, there was no fuel importation via cartel or cabal of middlemen strangulation of the economy. No fraudulent preachments or sermons of “Removal of Fuel Subsidy.”
Two, we made IMF ostensible “Big brother” deceit totally irrelevant by our “Pre-Payment Strategy” of aggressive oil marketing. “Extraordinary attempt by Professor Tam David-West” to boost foreign receipts. Financial Times of London, August 1, 1984. NO IMF. World Bank collaborators or comprados.
Three, OPEC was founded on 15 September, 1960. Nigeria joined on 14 July, 1971. Nigeria pulled out a feat in July 1984: OPEC singled out Nigeria for special crude oil production increase. This feat. This record has not been equaled even to date – 51 years of OPEC history. We made extra (not “excess”) – some $2billion. Even if this special increase in our oil production lasted for only two months (as some interpreted) August/September Nigeria will make extra $210million in foreign exchange (London Financial Times, August 1, 1984 page 4).
“David-West’s Extraordinary Triumph,” The Guardian, July 12, 1984. Front Page Lead.
The Right Honourable Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe congratulates: “From an old timer and a great admirer of yours…. Congratulations on your achievement as one of the best most efficient Ministers produced by our Beloved Nation – Nigeria. Zik,” July 1984.
Four, I conceived and initiated the formation of the “African Petroleum Consultative Council,” which was later called “African Petroleum Producers Association” (APPA) in 1985. My telex (a CLARION CALL) OF 16 November, 1985 refers. I travelled round the continent.
The Guardian Editorial “African Petroleum Council” of July 27, 1986 Page 10 commended.
Thus, just like Venezuela’s Dr. Juan Pablo Alfonso MD (Johns Hopkins) conceived and initiated the formation of OPEC after also inspiring Saudi’s Dr. Abdullah Tariki, Chemistry and Geology, (University of Texas) so also I, a Nigerian Virologist, conceived and initiated the formation of the African Petroleum Consultative Council (or APPA at a later date). The body, a shining contribution of Nigeria to African States economic health is still alive.
Five, General Buhari approved our “Revitalisation” of the deep-frigged New Port Harcourt Refinery (The 4th Nigerian Refinery). We increased the capacity from 100,000 barrels of crude per day to 150,000 barrels per day. Rated one of the best on the continent.
Contractor: JGC (Japan) and Spibat (France). Cost: $521,716. No kickbacks. Abomination under General Buhari. Chief Michael Ibru (Chairman, Spibat) and his supportive wife, Mrs. Cecilia Ibru, can attest to this. I signed the contract.
Six, we stamped out bunkering and oil smuggling. Over 1,000 illegal oil bunkerers. There was only 18 official legal bunkerers. We saved some $3million each day from bunkering.
“The FMG’s clamp-down on smuggling has made for export an extra 100,000 barrels a day, worth even at the new prices some $1bn a year” Newsletter Nigeria A Frank Cass Publication, November 3, 1984.
Post Buhari illegal bunkering became the order of the day in government and out of government.
Seven, we revitalised (Dead like dodo before Buhari) and put on keel the LNG project. Changed the old philosophy of operation. Appointed, Chief Gamaliel Onosode, a management guru, Chairman. Captured the first global market for the Nigerian LNG.
•Professor David-West writes from Ibadan, Oyo State
Source> http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/politics/2012/jan/07/politics-07-01-2012-001.html
Saturday January 07, 2012
•Prof. Tam David West
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on this Section
Let me begin by ‘congratulating’ Tony Egbulefu for his attempt at being a Jonathan government apologist on the ‘subsidy’ question, which he himself rightly described as “subsidy conundrum” in his pro-‘subsidy’ article “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (Compass, December 8, 2011, page 8). The article even carried his pix smiling for a job well done. Well done? No! Rubbish.
However, if he had taken some more time to do better and painstaking research, especially being a self-vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst,” he would have saved himself the monstrous embarrassment of manifest ignorance and inaccuracies on the one hand and the palpable disinformation on the other hand, which I intend to highlight under the above caption of this rebuttal.
I apologise for the longish caption. But each of the selected words has its own particular import to my theme or discourse. On a rather light note my caption could be said to be ‘pygmy’ when compared to the ‘giant’ 40-word caption of the controversy-laden Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB).
Tony Egbulefu, “Abuja-based policy analyst,” joined what looks to all the world as the team of government-sponsored “pro-‘subsidy’ removal” hatchet writers who in the past few months have surfaced in different guises and with varying doses of disinformation to the public: Paid multi-page colour adverts e.g. “Fuel Subsidy Frequently Asked Questions” by a said “Campaign Against Waste (CAW)” The Nation On Sunday, October 16, 2011 and The Guardian Sunday, October 23, 2011 “No (2)” (I missed the earlier No.1).
The very elaborate 6-page colour advert, “Let’s Change The Equation Remove Oil Subsidy…” This Day, October 21, 2011 Front Page Sensation! by a said “Mass Interest Project (MIP).”
Altruistic? Voluntary? No. Never. A page of colour advert costs between N300 and N400 (sometimes even more). Even a child can see through the cheap veil of government sponsorship. And these programmed propaganda adverts ran for some weeks. Who picked up the colossal bills? Santa Claus government.
In addition to the above there were many pro-‘subsidy’ articles with varying display of sophistry and spins. Some of them were broad-sides against me, an obdurate, implacable unapologetic “ANTI-‘SUBSIDY’.”
Of all of them, Egbulefu’s contribution was easily the cheapest, the most bereft of substance, the most careless (ad hominem and libelous) the most jejune, the most replete with inaccuracies and disinformation. The most flagrant display, nay parade of crass ignorance. It was also the most widely circulated. All of these will be addressed later on in this rebuttal. Certainly, not edifying for a vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst.”
His “Tam David-West’s metamorphosis” (The Nation, December 6, 2011); “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (This Day, December 9, 2011) “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of Tam David-West” (Compass, December 8, 2011 page 8) are all replete with all the above listed negatives.
He was apparently so pleased with himself for a splendid job of being Pro-government and “Pro-‘subsidy’ removal” his “metamorphosis” ‘thesis’ was widely circulated in the media both print (some half a dozen) and electronic (internet). I seem to wonder how much was paid for this job. Shoddy job as will be seen later.
It is therefore, my humble expectation and respectful appeal that similar gesture of robust generosity be extended also to me. “Balancing the equation” so to say. Equity. All for a balanced public good.
Before I take up the specifics, I must state categorically and with some measure of satisfaction and refreshing vindication that NONE of the “Pro-writers” have faulted me on the CRUCIAL FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE that THERE IS NO FUEL SUBSIDY. NONE. NEVER EXISTED.
The number of hatchet writers and commentators assembled against me is redolent of the situation of Albert Einstein and his ground-breaking “Relativity Theory.” The anti-Einstein even published a book, “100 Authors Against Einstein.” Einstein’s reaction? “If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!” Not “100”! (In: “A Brief History Of Time” by Stephen Hawking).
And so similarly on my well-considered position, which is buttressed with facts and figures and cogent argument that any talk of “Fuel Subsidy” is FRAUDULENT. LIE. CORRUPTION. DECEITFUL. NEVER EXISTED. All what is needed to humble me, disgrace me, expose me to public opprobrium is for the Jonathan government, especially his “de facto prime minister” (Wikipedia), Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, to accept my challenge for an Open-Space Public Debate on ‘SUBSIDY’ simpliciter. This is the ONLY way the public interest would be served.
No amount of government-sponsored adverts, articles, campaigns, lobby, threats, blackmail, bribing or “settlement,” economic Armageddon, doom prophecy on the Economy can change the fact of the NON EXISTENCE of fuel subsidy.
If 99 people out of 100 (99%) claim that the sun rises from the West and sets in the East; and only one person holds the opposite position, it does not ever mean that the 99 are right and the lonely one is in error.
In their frustration to muster effective counters against me, they resort to totally irrelevant and sterile diversionary red herring that being a Virologist, I may not fully understand the subsidy controversy.
My reaction? Arrant nonsense. I was oil minister. It was the annus mirabilis for the nation’s oil business. The records are there!
Besides, their Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Allison-Madueke, is B.Sc, Architecture, Howard University Washington DC. I am MSc (Yale) PhD (McGill) in Virology. The most celebrated oil minister in the world, Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani, Saudi Arabia oil minister for some 25 years, is a lawyer. Juan Pablo Perez Alfonso, the famous oil minister of Venezuela, who initiated the formation of OPEC, is a doctor, MD Johns Hopkins.
Virologist, yes. So why not accept my challenge to a public debate on your so-called ‘subsidy’ and disgrace me. Why lily-livered. Why chicken-hearted.
It is outrageous for government to misappropriate huge public funds (multi-millions) to sponsor and ‘merchandise’ lies and disinformation about their phantom fuel ‘subsidy’ through their hired hatchet writers. It is corruption, plain and simple. “Corruption is the use of public powers in order to achieve private goals” (Christopher Clapham). The “private goal” here is ego trip, the massaging of one’s sense of self. Jonathan, especially Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, his obtrusive ‘guardian angel.’
“Proponents of the removal of petroleum ‘subsidy’ are aflush with millions of Naira, as indicated in the flood of advertorials in the media.” In “Again, the petroleum ‘subsidy’ bogey” by Ojo Olorunleke, News Star, October 19, 2011. Back page.
Let me now debunk seriatim Tony Egbulefu, the great “Abuja-based policy-analyst. The government apologist.
I do this not because I am worried about his piece. Not even a bit. Truth is like cork, unsinkable.
However, first, I want to set the distorted records and disinformation straight for now and for posterity. Secondly, I wish to put him on notice (a fascinating legal phrase) on where he carelessly overstretched himself with actionable distortion about my integrity, which is pivotal to my very life. Because one’s good name is so much more superior to all the silver, gold and diamond in the whole world. Thirdly, among the eight President Abraham Lincoln’s “LINCOLN PRINCIPLES” are the following:
• One, “It is not entirely safe to allow a misrepresentation to go uncorrected.”
• Two, “Remember that truth is generally the best vindication against slander.”
• Three, “If you yield to even one false charge, you may open yourself up to other unjust attacks.” In, “Lincoln On Leadership” by Donald T. Phillips.
Finally, I wish to state quite honestly that I am not allergic to criticisms or counters to my strongly held positions. I am not, like any mortal, perfect or omniscient. These defining qualities are the exclusive preserve of the Almighty. But I detest intellectual laziness, which I am inexorably contemptuous of. I also, similarly, despise physical indolence. Hence my mantra as a social critic: Demolish me with facts. If you bring fiction I will demolish you.
On Egbulefu’s “metamorphosis,” I am completely at a loss to see where or how I ever metamorphosed. I’m not being simply pedantic. I am dead serious.
As a professional Research Scientist (Virologist) and as once a student of Biology I do know that “Metamorphosis,” is the biological progressive transformation of animal body from one post-embryonic form to another, usually from larva to adult. The word is derived from two Greek words: “meta” or “after” and “morphe” or “form.”
The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary defines it as “A process in which somebody or something changes completely into something different.”
I have been very consistent over the years (over five decades) as a social critic. Furthermore, I have only one personality. Constant. Not split. No persona. No façade. Transparently and reliably one me. I therefore, challenge Egbulefu or any other so disposed to confront me with any somersaults on my part. Any. I have always called a spade by its very name “spade” no matter who is involved. Constructively. And by His grace I am blessed with the freedom from fear and solid confidence in His Divine direction. Hence, I am often being vindicated.
My book, “My Controversies My Vindications” will soon be out by His grace.
Some 100. From Daily Paid Labour to Gowon’s Overthrow, to New Federal Capital, to Admission of Communist China to the UN, to the Fall of Apartheid, to America’s Middle East Misadventure, to One-Term Vice-Chancellors. Most of them some 5 or 10 even 20 years after my ‘Controversy.’ To Him be the glory.
For one of my latest ‘controversies.’ I wrote repeatedly that if President Musa Yar’Adua dies in office, Nigeria would have a profound crisis of leadership. Again, vindicated. The rest is now history.
The case of Dan Etete, Abacha’s Petroleum Resources Minister, is paradigmatic of my so-called controversies and their corresponding vindications. He is Ijaw (Bayelsa), like myself, and also similarly Jonathan (Bayelsa). He was easily the most carefree oil minister. From two pet lions at his Port Harcourt marble mansion at Woi Street GRA being fed two goats each day by NNPC, to $500,000.00 (Half Million Dollars) per day Estacada to the United States, to oil block (OMS 56) etc etc etc. My essay “The Imperial Minister” (This Day, January 23, 1997 page 6) and (City People, February 5, 1997 page 2) gave details of Etete’s prodigality and profligacy.
I rounded up on Etete: “Etete Will Leave Office in Disgrace – David-West” (The Diet, May 12-18, 1997. Front Page; Page 12-14).
VINDICATION
One, “IG orders ex-minister Etete’s arrest” (This Day, February 20, 2003). Case referred to Interpol.
Two, “Dan Etete Police Inspector General declares former minister wanted” (The Comet, February 20, 2003. Front Page Lead). This was full 12 years after my so-called ‘controversy.’
Three, “ETETE CONVICTED French Appeal Court upholds ex-Petroleum Minister’s sentence. Fines him N2.5billion for money laundering,” Daily Sun, March 19, 2009. Front Page Lead.
I have never been a time-server. No amount of money – even all in our mint – can buy my conscience or derogate my principles. Impossibility!
But I am not unaware of some hatchet writers who I tag “Penny Per Column” or some “Scavenger Writers” who flock to government for sponsored or “Nairatised” articles. Indeed, like vultures flock around dead bodies. Such people are disservice to society and to the honourable profession of writing.
Egbulefu, quite rightly stated, “Facts are sacred.” But he repeatedly spun facts on their heads. Maybe he merely parroted the maxim without really understanding it, especially its profound moral implication.
For instance, it is totally false that General Buhari “luckily didn’t encounter the monster of petroleum products subsidy because he inherited three relatively new and functional refineries.” This is not good enough, in fact shameful, for a great “policy analyst.” During Buhari’s time there was iron-cast discipline. No corruption. No sabotage of refineries. No fuel importation. Not even one litre. We even exported. No problems at all with Turn Around Maintenance (TAM) of our refineries. Like vehicle owners who service their vehicles regularly.
It is also an embarrassing falsehood that as Chairman of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) Buhari believed in “fuel subsidy removal.” The great vaunted “policy analyst” is completely wet and crassly ignorant about the philosophy or rationale for the formation of the PTF as an “interventionist body” set up in 1994 by Abacha to use the quantum of price of fuel increase in visible positives for the economy. Plentitude of concrete records. Unlike the daydreaming and castles in the air, vacuous unreliable promises of Jonathan and Okonjo-Iweala. All these sweet nothings have been said before by corrupt governments. Déjà vu!
“Major-General Muhammadu Buhari, an extraordinary Nigerian, matched only by few in integrity and readiness to subject himself to the demands of public office…By all standards the PTF has been a success, able to reverse public cynicism in a very short time….” Testimony by General Abdusalami Abubakar, GCFR in his Forward to “Buhari: the PTF Years” (1990).
Like me, General Buhari has never supported the so-called ‘fuel subsidy removal:’ “Fuel subsidy is corruption…It is a big scam….There is no such thing in the country today…We must fix our refineries and refine our petroleum products locally.” Buhari. Daily Sun, October 20, 2011. Front Page/Page 5. “Fuel Subsidy Jonathan misquoted me – Buhari” Saturday Mirror, November 12, 2011.
“There is no fuel subsidy in Nigeria, says David-West”…“The concept of petroleum subsidy is fraudulent.” David-West. National Mirror, June 26, 2011. “Fuel Subsidy, a big fraud.” “Ex-petroleum minister opens up.” Saturday Sun, October 15, 2011. Front Page Lead.
Egbulefu, also lied that I said refineries “would become obsolete and money guzzling after 30 years of existence.” I never ever said so. What I said, and that repeatedly over the years, was that the experts inform me that new refineries could go on for some 20-30 years without major problems. Even vehicles well-maintained can go on for 20 years. For instance, I used my Peugeot for 22 years before I sold it to my driver’s brother. It is still on the street.
It is also shameful fabrication for Egbulefu, the great “Abuja-based policy analyst” to ever say that I am against private refineries. I seem to wonder if he really understood what he read or has been reading especially as a vaunted “policy analyst.”
What I said was that to build a refinery is so very cost intensive that no Nigerian businessman can single-handedly build one. He must need serious-minded foreign partners.
Inact, I was Chairman of the “VISION 2010” DOWNSTREAM Sub-Committee. Our report is there for any serious-minded policy-analyst to read.
On my said public lecture on ‘subsidy’ “delivered at the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI)…on Thursday November, 24.” (2011). This total inaccuracy, indeed monstrous lie, completely destroyed Egbulefu’s big claim, nay parade, as a “policy analyst.”
Now, I am for the very first time in my addressing the ill-conceived and misdirected piece quite infuriated by this so-called “Abuja-based policy analyst,” Tony Egbulefu, for making me take time off from my very heavy time schedule to rebut his nonsense.
He has shown or demonstrated beyond any reasonable reservation that he is both intellectually lazy and also physically indolent. It is all self-advertisement for patronage. He does not also even respect the dictum he recited that “Facts are sacred.” He fabricates with ease swank and utter abandon.
First, I never ever delivered any lecture at the “Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industries” and on “Thursday November 24.” It’s all infuriating shameless tissue of lies. I don’t even know where the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industries is situated.
My invitation Lecture on “OIL ‘SUBSIDY:’ FACTS, FICTION AND FRAUD” was at the “Lagos Country Club, Ikeja, Lagos.” And it was on “Wednesday 23rd November, 2011.”
Clearly, it is people like Egbulefu who constitute albatross to President Jonathan. But as Machiavelli said in “The Prince,” to be wisely advised the Prince should also be wise.
I have zero tolerance for people who parade intellectualism and knowledgibility with all sorts of self-serving “Non-Government Organisations” (NGO) or outfits. For instance, hear “policy analyst” Egbulefu, again: “But here we are in a democracy that has power to make even a leopard change its spots.” Arrant nonsense. Unqualified rubbish.
First, are we in a “Democracy?” No. Not even “Quasi-Democracy,” Finter. Secondly, our ‘Federalism’ is also a fraudulent parody. Thirdly, and more disgusting, no democracy, even that of classical Athens of Pericles can “make even a leopard to change its spots.”
“Democracy” is not the magician’s abracadabra invocation. Silly. Cheap. Puerile.
I urge the great “Policy analyst” to read Ben Nwabueze’s “How President Obasanjo Subverted The Rule of Law And Democracy” (2007). 415 pages. Flows in reading. It will make him to be much more serious-minded.
Still another “Egbulefian lie.” Babangida did not appoint me “Minister of Petroleum and Energy.” It was “Minister of Petroleum Resources.” Quite different. A serious “policy analyst” should be able to know this.
Yet, another one of the “Egbulefian lies” and embarrassing carelessness and physical indolence for a “policy analyst” who is expected to (and indeed mandatorily imperative) do serious research before talking or writing. I am not in “serious academics;” and I am not “saddled” with teaching. I retired from the university since 1991.
And more and more lies, the Egbulefuian. My relationship with military government did not come to a “screeching halt, when Babangida, in his own wisdom found him wanting on an alleged issue on infraction and best practices.”
The FACTS. SACRED FACTS. The TRUTHS:
First, there was never any suddenness or “screeching halt.” Between September 1986 when I left the government to the Babangida – Aminu inspired Special Military Tribunal in September 1990 when I appeared before the Tribunal was four years and eight months interval (almost 5 years) post – government.
Two, I was discharged and acquitted by the Special Appeal Tribunal, Chairman, The Honourable Justice Dahunsi Coker (Supreme Court retd) on 08 August, 1991:
“No iota of evidence on the charge of corruption.”
My victory and my triumph were hailed nationally and internationally. “David-West: A Victory for Justice” Editorial The Guardian, August 21, 1991.
“Tam’s Testimonial” by Ray Ekpu, Newswatch, August 26, 1991. My Birthday.
Why testimonial? The Special Appeal Tribunal showered encomiums on me and to all intents and purpose decorated me with tasty accolades and sprayed me with colourful sweet confetti.
“We observe and note the evidence that the accused as Minister and Chairman of NNPC performed his duties conscientiously and courageously. He is no doubt a person of very high intellect, hard working and conscientious…..”
Egbulefu, should read my First Anniversary of Bama Prison publication (Advert): “TO THE GLORY OF THE ALMIGHTY THE INJUSTICE OF NOVEMBER 16, 1990 STINNES: TISSUE OF OFFICIAL LIES. THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE TRIUMPH OVER INJUSTICE AND PERFIDY” The Guardian On Sunday August 7, 1994. Four well documented pages. He should also read my advert to celebrate “THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CELEBRATED ‘$57M’ CUP OF TEA/WRIST WATCH SAGA (From Limousine To Black Maria)” The Guardian On Sunday, November 16, 2000. Four pages well documented.
Furthermore, my book (copiously documented) “STINNES (THE ‘$57M’ – CUP OF TEA-WRIST WATCH SAGA) 212 pages had been ready for some time. Ready to go!
BAMA PRISON RE-VISITED
To demonstrate my empathy and sympathy for the inmates of terrible Bama Prisons I left behind, I visited the prison on 29 August, 1992 and donated cartons of different drugs to the inmates.
“Letter of Appreciation” by Officer Mohammed Musa Hinna dated 14 October, 1992. Ref. No.BMP/13/Vol. 1/44 refers.
As hinted earlier, Tony Egbulefu is “put on notice.” I don’t suffer fools gladly. Perhaps, I should also use this fitting occasion to also alert the following “on notice” for their own carelessness about my person or on issue very dear to me: E. K. Clark, Asari Dokubo, Rev. Ojo, Afegbua, Babangida, Aminu, Omoruyi, Saro Agbe, one ‘King’ Ogborosi of Bayelsa, Onuegbu, Ortsejafor. Indeed, in keeping with Abraham Lincoln: Never leave uncorrected any misrepresentation about you, especially printed permanent ones.
Egbulefu called me a “collaborator in military dictatorships.” He asked me to publish the “score-card” of my “performance as petroleum minister.”
Let me state right away that I have no apologies whatsoever serving the country either as Education Commissioner, Rivers State (1975-79) under General Zamani Lekwot or as Minister of Petroleum and Energy (1984-85) under General Buhari. In fact I remain very proud of these landmark years in my life. And I have all the good reasons to be so disposed.
I should make the following points, especially for people like “policy-analyst” Egbulefu: One, I never lobbied or jumped (as many I know) to these refreshing national recognitions. At the state level, General Lekwot, said he was prepared to wait for my “Yes” even up to the “eleventh second of the eleventh hour.” He is still very much alive. At the Federal level, Brigadier B. A. Idiagbon, Chief of Staff Supreme Headquarters, pleaded, “I am persuaded to believe that you would accept this request as a call to national duty, and I expect that you would gladly accept an invitation to serve.” His letter of 06 January, 1984. Ref: SHQ/COS/T.1 refers. I was greatly humbled by both Lekwot and Idiagbon. Independently. About a decade apart.
Two, it was my singular good fortune that at both State and Federal levels I worked under (cabinet) leaders with impeccable integrity, iron-cast discipline. Zero tolerance for corruption. Patriotic. Focused. Reliable. Leadership by examples.
It is incontestable that after Buhari and Lekwot the difference in these sterling virtues has remained rare. Very rare. I make bold to unequivocally say that after Lekwot (State level) and Buhari (Federal level) all their successors in office were moral invalids. From my records, the lonely exception at the federal level was General Abdulsalami A. Abubakar.
“Service to our nation brought Tam and I together and the (moral) values we shared in the course of that service have held us together” – General Buhari at the launching of my book “The Sixteen ‘Sins’ of General Muhammadu Buhari.” Port Harcourt 29 July, 2010. Three, I served for service id est the love of the fatherland, Nigeria. Not corrupt. Avoided compromisable situations: Not a single share in any oil company. Turned down building or car offers.
Four, My “ACCOUNTABILITY QUOTIENT” remained very positive. I developed this concept “Service to country divided by service to self” while in the Babangida-Aminu incarceration in terrible Bama Prison on 30 July, 1991. It was later published after my victory and triumph in the Weekend Telegraph April 23-29, 2005 page 8.
Five, a Governmental Regime is not bad simply because it is military. And contrariwise, good just because it is civilian. It all depends on the style and moral content of the regime; and flowing from its leadership.
Thus, the common quip: “The best military government is worse than the worst civilian government” is all arrant nonsense. Porous intellectualism.
My “Of Democracy in Military Governance.” This Day, November 28, 1996 page 6 refers. The great Allison Ayida’s polished, elegant, decorous rebuttal to Obasanjo: “Memo from AYIDA to OBASANJO,” Sunday Times, April 10, 1990 page 8 is also apropos of the “Democracy in Military Governance.”
Furthermore, General Olusegun Obasanjo, argued that military government is not an aberration. In his: “Africa Embattled” (1988) page 60.
Six, A Bullet Coup is not worse than a Ballot-Box Coup. In fact, the latter is even worse because of its hypocritical claims to correctness. I’ve argued before that election riggers are worse than armed robbers. Therefore capital punishment is also appropriate. Armed robber targets an individual. Election riggers target the nation.
As for my “score-card” I am constrained to provide the following very, very truncated list. I do this not out of immodesty. No. But for people like our great “policy-analyst,” Egbulefu, to be better educated since they hear they hear not; and see and see not. Too busy being apologist to non-performing, ill-focused failed governments. Let me be graphic:
One, there was no fuel importation via cartel or cabal of middlemen strangulation of the economy. No fraudulent preachments or sermons of “Removal of Fuel Subsidy.”
Two, we made IMF ostensible “Big brother” deceit totally irrelevant by our “Pre-Payment Strategy” of aggressive oil marketing. “Extraordinary attempt by Professor Tam David-West” to boost foreign receipts. Financial Times of London, August 1, 1984. NO IMF. World Bank collaborators or comprados.
Three, OPEC was founded on 15 September, 1960. Nigeria joined on 14 July, 1971. Nigeria pulled out a feat in July 1984: OPEC singled out Nigeria for special crude oil production increase. This feat. This record has not been equaled even to date – 51 years of OPEC history. We made extra (not “excess”) – some $2billion. Even if this special increase in our oil production lasted for only two months (as some interpreted) August/September Nigeria will make extra $210million in foreign exchange (London Financial Times, August 1, 1984 page 4).
“David-West’s Extraordinary Triumph,” The Guardian, July 12, 1984. Front Page Lead.
The Right Honourable Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe congratulates: “From an old timer and a great admirer of yours…. Congratulations on your achievement as one of the best most efficient Ministers produced by our Beloved Nation – Nigeria. Zik,” July 1984.
Four, I conceived and initiated the formation of the “African Petroleum Consultative Council,” which was later called “African Petroleum Producers Association” (APPA) in 1985. My telex (a CLARION CALL) OF 16 November, 1985 refers. I travelled round the continent.
The Guardian Editorial “African Petroleum Council” of July 27, 1986 Page 10 commended.
Thus, just like Venezuela’s Dr. Juan Pablo Alfonso MD (Johns Hopkins) conceived and initiated the formation of OPEC after also inspiring Saudi’s Dr. Abdullah Tariki, Chemistry and Geology, (University of Texas) so also I, a Nigerian Virologist, conceived and initiated the formation of the African Petroleum Consultative Council (or APPA at a later date). The body, a shining contribution of Nigeria to African States economic health is still alive.
Five, General Buhari approved our “Revitalisation” of the deep-frigged New Port Harcourt Refinery (The 4th Nigerian Refinery). We increased the capacity from 100,000 barrels of crude per day to 150,000 barrels per day. Rated one of the best on the continent.
Contractor: JGC (Japan) and Spibat (France). Cost: $521,716. No kickbacks. Abomination under General Buhari. Chief Michael Ibru (Chairman, Spibat) and his supportive wife, Mrs. Cecilia Ibru, can attest to this. I signed the contract.
Six, we stamped out bunkering and oil smuggling. Over 1,000 illegal oil bunkerers. There was only 18 official legal bunkerers. We saved some $3million each day from bunkering.
“The FMG’s clamp-down on smuggling has made for export an extra 100,000 barrels a day, worth even at the new prices some $1bn a year” Newsletter Nigeria A Frank Cass Publication, November 3, 1984.
Post Buhari illegal bunkering became the order of the day in government and out of government.
Seven, we revitalised (Dead like dodo before Buhari) and put on keel the LNG project. Changed the old philosophy of operation. Appointed, Chief Gamaliel Onosode, a management guru, Chairman. Captured the first global market for the Nigerian LNG.
•Professor David-West writes from Ibadan, Oyo State
Source> http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/politics/2012/jan/07/politics-07-01-2012-001.html
Saturday, 12 November 2011
Jonathan’s all motion, no movement…I regret voting for him –Agbaje
Sunday Interview
By WILLY EYA
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Not many people who voted for President Goodluck Jonathan in last April’s general election are happy with his achievements so far. For such people, he has failed to meet the expectations of majority of Nigerians who enthusiastically supported him in the exercise. One of those in this school of thought is constitutional lawyer and human rights activist, Fred Agbaje. In this interview, he bares his mind on various national issues. Excerpts…
With the year gradually coming to an end, how do you feel with the state of the nation especially with regards to insinuations that some states are bankrupt?
You must look at the factors threatening Nigeria’s political economy first. Do not forget that the constitution in section 3 has described Nigeria as a federation. If the nation is a federation, it means that the states that constitute the federating units must continue to remain as a federation. I keep saying it that the problem of this great country is not the constitution. There is no constitution that is perfect.
Our problem has to do with our leaders and the implementers of our constitution. A good man in the saddle of political administrative affairs will turn around a bad constitution to achieve good for the people. When I was growing up, my grandfather told me that if you give a bad hoe to a good farmer, he could still turn it around to achieve success. The implication of this should not be lost to us. Can we amend Nigeria’s constitution today to abolish those we think are economically and financially unviable states? Apart from the constitutional hurdle such an exercise would entail, what about the money required to carry out such an exercise? What about the political socio-cultural pressure that would be associated with it?
In any case, why did government not consider those factors like economic viability of such states; in order words, what we call the financial sustainability of such states before creating them. Because the government of that time just wanted to score cheap political point, it started turning local governments to states and hamlets to local governments and states where they are supposed to create more local governments, they refused. The same principle was applied to state creation. Areas that are supposed to have more states, they refused to give them. I come from Akoko edo, the oldest local government in Nigeria today. It was created out of the old western region as far back as 1957.
It is the largest and the oldest local government in Nigeria today. Akoko edo is almost three local governments merged in one. Etsako that is nearest to us has been split into three but because the people of Akoko edo local government do not have anybody in government to speak for them, we lost that opportunity. What I am trying to establish is that there were no clear cut criteria; otherwise if there were such criteria, why was Akoko edo not created into two or three local governments like its neighbour, Etsako or Owan local government which has also gone into two or three?
I am not going to mention states and I agree with your question that there are states in this country that are only called states for the purposes of collection of federal revenue. In practical terms of their viability, they are not better than local governments. There is no other source of money that goes to such state apart from the federal allocation. In such states, Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) is nill. You can imagine such a situation where you create such states and even give them more local governments. In other words, you are creating more local governments for the states as well as the innocent Nigerians at large.
This is because we are going to use part of my tax to develop such states. I am not from there. To make matters worse, some of these states said drinking of alcohol is bad and prohibited but they partake in sharing from the tax paid on alcohol produced in other states. They enact unworkable laws to retard their states and yet revenue coming from other states that have liberalized their economy, that have allowed brewery to be established in their states, and for people to consume alcohol and for people to pay tax, those who do not want such a liberal economy would come and share in the tax.
Where are the equity, morality and fairness? That is why I said when you see such things particularly when it comes to going to Abuja to collect federal allocation, they remember their states. Ask them, what other thing do they do to generate money other than waiting for the federal allocation. Like in the Anglican Communion where I come from because my father died as an Arch Bishop of the Anglican Communion, one of the things he told me was that when people begin to ask for diocese in the Anglican community, in those days, they created them but these days, we ask them do you have the resources to back the diocese you are asking for? Can you pay the Bishop’s salary? Can you pay the staff of the Bishop? Can you pay the staff of the Cathedral? I am only giving you a background to my argument.
What is preventing the Federal Government from doing the same thing? Oh! If you want Anioma State, the question is do you have the resources to sustain the state or you think you would be sharing the resources of the other states to sustain it. Like a state that has 57 local government areas sharing the resources of 20, how does that work? That is why there is no development anywhere in the local governments of Lagos States. This is because it is just logical that you do not give food meant for two people to five. How will it work out? Some people would go hungry. But like I told you, it is all for political reasons. Those who are clamouring that the states should be merged, yes, let us merge them but it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for such a merger to succeed.
This is because they have tasted what is referred to as statehood. They have worn the garb being called a state. I was not surprised when in a seminar I attended recently, somebody was calling for the country to go back to the three regions. His argument was that the states developed better under the old three regions. This splinter look you call states has become the sword of Damocles that would mar the nation’s political and socio-economic growth. It has retarded Nigeria. Three states that would have been one and harnessing their resources together and ensuring their growth, you have split them so that one out of the three viable states is sustaining others. The law of osmosis does not work that way.
Osmosis would tell you that there is always a movement of water from the weaker to the stronger. That should not happen to state creation. We are practicing federalism and the Federal Government is controlling all the resources and the constitution disallowed the states from reaping the benefits of their natural endowments. Constitutionally, the Federal Government is in control of all the resources. That is thievery; your are robbing Peter to pay Paul. How does that work? The constitution sanctions the Federal Government to give oil producing states 13 per cent under the principle of derivation. If you give 13 per cent to the states that produce oil, what happens to the remaining 87 per cent? That is why there is do-or-die for federal appointments, the Federal Government and the control of Abuja.
Everybody wants to be relevant in Abuja because they know there is so much there in a country that calls itself a federation. I want to say that instead of 13 per cent to the oil-producing states, it should be the other way round. Give the Federal Government 13 per cent and the states 87 per cent. When this happens, let us see whether the states would not develop. The implication would be far reaching. The issue of do-or-die for Abuja would reduce. The clamour for the control of Aso Rock would reduce. The state would now be able to develop. A state like Rivers and others in the Niger Delta area would now be able to develop at their own pace. I can assure you that such states would even have their own Central Banks because they would have excess and other states can now borrow and pay interest.
Those who have abandoned the production of groundnut and cocoa would go back to them immediately. The groundnut pyramid, where are they? The cocoa industry, where are they today? We have abandoned our natural endowments. How can a country grow like that? That is why I say that unless there is a restructuring of our federal pattern in favour of more resources to the states, Nigeria is not likely to move forward.
When you look at the exclusive legislative list, it does not even help matters. This is because matters that are ordinarily supposed to be for the states are all lumped under that exclusive legislative list. How can a country develop when in areas that a state could effectively legislate on for their growth, you take it off them and give them to the Federal Government. That is why I laugh at some of our constitutional drafters. As far as I am concerned, they have overburdened the Federal Government and made the principle of federalism to stand on its head.
What is your opinion on the intended removal of oil subsidy?
To answer your question, I want to be guided by the constitution so that Nigerians would know who is at fault. On the removal of fuel subsidy, I can only justify my position constitutionally. Of course, as a constitutional lawyer, I must be backed by my constitution. Section 14(1)(B) of the constitution says the federal republic of Nigeria shall be a state based on the principle of democracy and social justice and that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government. It did not just stop there. Section 17(1&2) of the same constitution says that the state’s social order shall be founded on the ideals of freedom, equality and justice. It went further to say that governmental actions shall be humaned.
The same constitution went further to say that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria. In other words, sovereignty does not belong to the government or to some people in government. It belongs to everybody whether you are in government or on Ikorodu road as a peasant work. If sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria and the constitution says the security and welfare of Nigeria shall be the primary purpose of government, and that constitutionally the actions of government must be humaned, why will the government start talking of oil subsidy removal when the people of Nigeria to whom sovereignty lies say we do not want it? I do not know whether you are following my argument.
Various organizations including Non Governmental Organisation, the labour and the rest of them say they do not want it because it would further aggravate our poverty level. It would lead to increase in inflation. If you remove subsidy, prices of commodity would skyrocket. Even those who are flying would also incur the wrath of this economic mindlessness on the part of the government. Everybody is united in saying no to oil subsidy removal. But because the Federal Government and the state governments are intellectually lazy and economically arid, they believe that the only way they can pay the N18,000 minimum wage is to adopt hook, line and sinker the proposal that have been forced down the government throat by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through the office of the Finance Minister, Mrs Ngozi Okonjo Iweala.
One of the things the Finance Minister has told them when she was coming to serve is that she must implement the IMF policy which is the removal of the oil subsidy. That is what the government is doing. She said if you are not going to do it, I am not going to serve in your government and the Federal Government foolishly and sheepishly acceded. Let them go ahead and they would see the wrath of Nigerians. They would actually know that constitutionally, the concept of sovereignty can be effectualised and realized by the people of this country. What I am saying in effect is that by the time the government begins to say they want to remove the oil subsidy, is the policy not contrary to section 17(1) C of the constitution which enjoins governmental action to be humane. We are not talking about foreigners here who will benefit from this mad economic policy.
People say they do not want it and you say government must go ahead; let us see who has the sovereignty. But let me say this; President Goodluck Jonathan has every opportunity to make a name for himself and not allow his economically backward policies that are being forced down his throat to ruin his government. There is no sense in the so-called oil subsidy removal. In fact, Professor Tam David West who was former minister of petroleum has told the whole world that there is nothing like that. There is no subsidy anywhere in the first instance not to talk of removal. Do you remove what does not exist?
Even we lawyers say you do not give what you do not have. It is just a fraud on Nigeria when you begin to talk about subsidy. If there is any subsidy, what happened to the ones that had been removed in the past? Who swallowed and pocketed it? Are they not the same people in government? Those who are responsible for the decay in our refineries, have you arrested them? Have you prosecuted them under the economic mismanagement policy particularly under the Economic and Financial Crimes Commisson(EFCC)? Economic saboteurs who are always smiling to the banks at the detriment of Nigerians are advising the government to remove the oil subsidy. They are not doing the government any good.
The cartel in the oil sector believes that it is their birthright to continue to import oil and be smiling to the banks at the expense of the people. They do not care a hoot whether you and I survive or not. It is unfortunate that government has allowed what I would call the economic vampires that have held the oil sector in the jugular. And ironically, because the government is weak, these are the same caliber of Nigerians who will be taking the President and other Aso Rock members on retreat so that at the end, the government would be handicapped and powerless to challenge their activities frontally.
The purpose of government is not to make anti-people socio-economic policies. These are policies that would further pauperise the people. It is the duty of government to ensure that the political economy operates in a manner that an ordinary man can survive. But unfortunately, instead of embarking on poverty alleviation programme, what the government is doing is embarking on policies that would consolidate poverty in the land.
You do not seem to sound optimistic about President Jonathan’s administration. What’s your impression about his government?
Incidentally, I am one of the people that voted for him because I felt that he was a better candidate and that he would move this country forward. But the man has been there since April and it is like the same old song. It is like if you ask me to go back to cast my vote again, I would have withdrawn my vote for Jonathan. I am sure most Nigerians would regret it because right now, what we are seeing is all motion, no movement. They said they have improved power supply to 4,000 and there is no light anywhere. Look at the state of roads everywhere particularly the federal roads not to talk of state roads.
The people in the East have almost been eroded out of their land space by the uncompromising position of erosion in the area and the Federal Government is not even bothered. Look at Lagos/Ibadan road, Lagos/Benin, Lagos/Ilorin, these are all death traps and yet we have Federal Government that is pocketing 87 per cent of the nation’s economic resources. Ask them what are they doing exactly with the resources? That is why I keep clamouring that they should reverse it.
The truth of the matter is that one would have expected that as President Jonathan has been in power since April and as somebody who has been there and completed Late Umaru Yar’Adua’s term, he has no reason not to perform. Instead of belabouring himself with economically retrogressive policies, he should embark on progressive policies that would enhance job creation, address the question of inflation and above all infrastructural decay must be addressed. This is what we need and not the minister of power talking about generating 4,000 megawatts of electricity. Where is it? And incidentally, they are the same people talking about economic sabotage. Who is sabotaging who? Are you telling me that those economic saboteurs are more equipped than the government? Then why are you called a government.
You cannot address the question of insecurity, not to talk of welfare. You have forgotten that one feeds the other one. When you address welfare, you are indirectly attacking the issue of insecurity because they are siamese twins. You must marry the two of them, other wise, you would be a political joker if you think you can address one and leave the other one. If somebody is economically handicapped, the next thing to think is to resort to criminality and unleash terror on the society. Which of the governments, whether federal or state, has any plans on how to tackle the dangerous level of unemployment in the country.
I am an employer of labour and I know how many applications I get here everyday even with our small practice here as if we have become an extension of ministry of justice. This is because the government has not provided the right atmosphere.
http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2011/nov/13/national-13-11-2011-002.html
By WILLY EYA
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Not many people who voted for President Goodluck Jonathan in last April’s general election are happy with his achievements so far. For such people, he has failed to meet the expectations of majority of Nigerians who enthusiastically supported him in the exercise. One of those in this school of thought is constitutional lawyer and human rights activist, Fred Agbaje. In this interview, he bares his mind on various national issues. Excerpts…
With the year gradually coming to an end, how do you feel with the state of the nation especially with regards to insinuations that some states are bankrupt?
You must look at the factors threatening Nigeria’s political economy first. Do not forget that the constitution in section 3 has described Nigeria as a federation. If the nation is a federation, it means that the states that constitute the federating units must continue to remain as a federation. I keep saying it that the problem of this great country is not the constitution. There is no constitution that is perfect.
Our problem has to do with our leaders and the implementers of our constitution. A good man in the saddle of political administrative affairs will turn around a bad constitution to achieve good for the people. When I was growing up, my grandfather told me that if you give a bad hoe to a good farmer, he could still turn it around to achieve success. The implication of this should not be lost to us. Can we amend Nigeria’s constitution today to abolish those we think are economically and financially unviable states? Apart from the constitutional hurdle such an exercise would entail, what about the money required to carry out such an exercise? What about the political socio-cultural pressure that would be associated with it?
In any case, why did government not consider those factors like economic viability of such states; in order words, what we call the financial sustainability of such states before creating them. Because the government of that time just wanted to score cheap political point, it started turning local governments to states and hamlets to local governments and states where they are supposed to create more local governments, they refused. The same principle was applied to state creation. Areas that are supposed to have more states, they refused to give them. I come from Akoko edo, the oldest local government in Nigeria today. It was created out of the old western region as far back as 1957.
It is the largest and the oldest local government in Nigeria today. Akoko edo is almost three local governments merged in one. Etsako that is nearest to us has been split into three but because the people of Akoko edo local government do not have anybody in government to speak for them, we lost that opportunity. What I am trying to establish is that there were no clear cut criteria; otherwise if there were such criteria, why was Akoko edo not created into two or three local governments like its neighbour, Etsako or Owan local government which has also gone into two or three?
I am not going to mention states and I agree with your question that there are states in this country that are only called states for the purposes of collection of federal revenue. In practical terms of their viability, they are not better than local governments. There is no other source of money that goes to such state apart from the federal allocation. In such states, Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) is nill. You can imagine such a situation where you create such states and even give them more local governments. In other words, you are creating more local governments for the states as well as the innocent Nigerians at large.
This is because we are going to use part of my tax to develop such states. I am not from there. To make matters worse, some of these states said drinking of alcohol is bad and prohibited but they partake in sharing from the tax paid on alcohol produced in other states. They enact unworkable laws to retard their states and yet revenue coming from other states that have liberalized their economy, that have allowed brewery to be established in their states, and for people to consume alcohol and for people to pay tax, those who do not want such a liberal economy would come and share in the tax.
Where are the equity, morality and fairness? That is why I said when you see such things particularly when it comes to going to Abuja to collect federal allocation, they remember their states. Ask them, what other thing do they do to generate money other than waiting for the federal allocation. Like in the Anglican Communion where I come from because my father died as an Arch Bishop of the Anglican Communion, one of the things he told me was that when people begin to ask for diocese in the Anglican community, in those days, they created them but these days, we ask them do you have the resources to back the diocese you are asking for? Can you pay the Bishop’s salary? Can you pay the staff of the Bishop? Can you pay the staff of the Cathedral? I am only giving you a background to my argument.
What is preventing the Federal Government from doing the same thing? Oh! If you want Anioma State, the question is do you have the resources to sustain the state or you think you would be sharing the resources of the other states to sustain it. Like a state that has 57 local government areas sharing the resources of 20, how does that work? That is why there is no development anywhere in the local governments of Lagos States. This is because it is just logical that you do not give food meant for two people to five. How will it work out? Some people would go hungry. But like I told you, it is all for political reasons. Those who are clamouring that the states should be merged, yes, let us merge them but it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for such a merger to succeed.
This is because they have tasted what is referred to as statehood. They have worn the garb being called a state. I was not surprised when in a seminar I attended recently, somebody was calling for the country to go back to the three regions. His argument was that the states developed better under the old three regions. This splinter look you call states has become the sword of Damocles that would mar the nation’s political and socio-economic growth. It has retarded Nigeria. Three states that would have been one and harnessing their resources together and ensuring their growth, you have split them so that one out of the three viable states is sustaining others. The law of osmosis does not work that way.
Osmosis would tell you that there is always a movement of water from the weaker to the stronger. That should not happen to state creation. We are practicing federalism and the Federal Government is controlling all the resources and the constitution disallowed the states from reaping the benefits of their natural endowments. Constitutionally, the Federal Government is in control of all the resources. That is thievery; your are robbing Peter to pay Paul. How does that work? The constitution sanctions the Federal Government to give oil producing states 13 per cent under the principle of derivation. If you give 13 per cent to the states that produce oil, what happens to the remaining 87 per cent? That is why there is do-or-die for federal appointments, the Federal Government and the control of Abuja.
Everybody wants to be relevant in Abuja because they know there is so much there in a country that calls itself a federation. I want to say that instead of 13 per cent to the oil-producing states, it should be the other way round. Give the Federal Government 13 per cent and the states 87 per cent. When this happens, let us see whether the states would not develop. The implication would be far reaching. The issue of do-or-die for Abuja would reduce. The clamour for the control of Aso Rock would reduce. The state would now be able to develop. A state like Rivers and others in the Niger Delta area would now be able to develop at their own pace. I can assure you that such states would even have their own Central Banks because they would have excess and other states can now borrow and pay interest.
Those who have abandoned the production of groundnut and cocoa would go back to them immediately. The groundnut pyramid, where are they? The cocoa industry, where are they today? We have abandoned our natural endowments. How can a country grow like that? That is why I say that unless there is a restructuring of our federal pattern in favour of more resources to the states, Nigeria is not likely to move forward.
When you look at the exclusive legislative list, it does not even help matters. This is because matters that are ordinarily supposed to be for the states are all lumped under that exclusive legislative list. How can a country develop when in areas that a state could effectively legislate on for their growth, you take it off them and give them to the Federal Government. That is why I laugh at some of our constitutional drafters. As far as I am concerned, they have overburdened the Federal Government and made the principle of federalism to stand on its head.
What is your opinion on the intended removal of oil subsidy?
To answer your question, I want to be guided by the constitution so that Nigerians would know who is at fault. On the removal of fuel subsidy, I can only justify my position constitutionally. Of course, as a constitutional lawyer, I must be backed by my constitution. Section 14(1)(B) of the constitution says the federal republic of Nigeria shall be a state based on the principle of democracy and social justice and that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government. It did not just stop there. Section 17(1&2) of the same constitution says that the state’s social order shall be founded on the ideals of freedom, equality and justice. It went further to say that governmental actions shall be humaned.
The same constitution went further to say that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria. In other words, sovereignty does not belong to the government or to some people in government. It belongs to everybody whether you are in government or on Ikorodu road as a peasant work. If sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria and the constitution says the security and welfare of Nigeria shall be the primary purpose of government, and that constitutionally the actions of government must be humaned, why will the government start talking of oil subsidy removal when the people of Nigeria to whom sovereignty lies say we do not want it? I do not know whether you are following my argument.
Various organizations including Non Governmental Organisation, the labour and the rest of them say they do not want it because it would further aggravate our poverty level. It would lead to increase in inflation. If you remove subsidy, prices of commodity would skyrocket. Even those who are flying would also incur the wrath of this economic mindlessness on the part of the government. Everybody is united in saying no to oil subsidy removal. But because the Federal Government and the state governments are intellectually lazy and economically arid, they believe that the only way they can pay the N18,000 minimum wage is to adopt hook, line and sinker the proposal that have been forced down the government throat by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through the office of the Finance Minister, Mrs Ngozi Okonjo Iweala.
One of the things the Finance Minister has told them when she was coming to serve is that she must implement the IMF policy which is the removal of the oil subsidy. That is what the government is doing. She said if you are not going to do it, I am not going to serve in your government and the Federal Government foolishly and sheepishly acceded. Let them go ahead and they would see the wrath of Nigerians. They would actually know that constitutionally, the concept of sovereignty can be effectualised and realized by the people of this country. What I am saying in effect is that by the time the government begins to say they want to remove the oil subsidy, is the policy not contrary to section 17(1) C of the constitution which enjoins governmental action to be humane. We are not talking about foreigners here who will benefit from this mad economic policy.
People say they do not want it and you say government must go ahead; let us see who has the sovereignty. But let me say this; President Goodluck Jonathan has every opportunity to make a name for himself and not allow his economically backward policies that are being forced down his throat to ruin his government. There is no sense in the so-called oil subsidy removal. In fact, Professor Tam David West who was former minister of petroleum has told the whole world that there is nothing like that. There is no subsidy anywhere in the first instance not to talk of removal. Do you remove what does not exist?
Even we lawyers say you do not give what you do not have. It is just a fraud on Nigeria when you begin to talk about subsidy. If there is any subsidy, what happened to the ones that had been removed in the past? Who swallowed and pocketed it? Are they not the same people in government? Those who are responsible for the decay in our refineries, have you arrested them? Have you prosecuted them under the economic mismanagement policy particularly under the Economic and Financial Crimes Commisson(EFCC)? Economic saboteurs who are always smiling to the banks at the detriment of Nigerians are advising the government to remove the oil subsidy. They are not doing the government any good.
The cartel in the oil sector believes that it is their birthright to continue to import oil and be smiling to the banks at the expense of the people. They do not care a hoot whether you and I survive or not. It is unfortunate that government has allowed what I would call the economic vampires that have held the oil sector in the jugular. And ironically, because the government is weak, these are the same caliber of Nigerians who will be taking the President and other Aso Rock members on retreat so that at the end, the government would be handicapped and powerless to challenge their activities frontally.
The purpose of government is not to make anti-people socio-economic policies. These are policies that would further pauperise the people. It is the duty of government to ensure that the political economy operates in a manner that an ordinary man can survive. But unfortunately, instead of embarking on poverty alleviation programme, what the government is doing is embarking on policies that would consolidate poverty in the land.
You do not seem to sound optimistic about President Jonathan’s administration. What’s your impression about his government?
Incidentally, I am one of the people that voted for him because I felt that he was a better candidate and that he would move this country forward. But the man has been there since April and it is like the same old song. It is like if you ask me to go back to cast my vote again, I would have withdrawn my vote for Jonathan. I am sure most Nigerians would regret it because right now, what we are seeing is all motion, no movement. They said they have improved power supply to 4,000 and there is no light anywhere. Look at the state of roads everywhere particularly the federal roads not to talk of state roads.
The people in the East have almost been eroded out of their land space by the uncompromising position of erosion in the area and the Federal Government is not even bothered. Look at Lagos/Ibadan road, Lagos/Benin, Lagos/Ilorin, these are all death traps and yet we have Federal Government that is pocketing 87 per cent of the nation’s economic resources. Ask them what are they doing exactly with the resources? That is why I keep clamouring that they should reverse it.
The truth of the matter is that one would have expected that as President Jonathan has been in power since April and as somebody who has been there and completed Late Umaru Yar’Adua’s term, he has no reason not to perform. Instead of belabouring himself with economically retrogressive policies, he should embark on progressive policies that would enhance job creation, address the question of inflation and above all infrastructural decay must be addressed. This is what we need and not the minister of power talking about generating 4,000 megawatts of electricity. Where is it? And incidentally, they are the same people talking about economic sabotage. Who is sabotaging who? Are you telling me that those economic saboteurs are more equipped than the government? Then why are you called a government.
You cannot address the question of insecurity, not to talk of welfare. You have forgotten that one feeds the other one. When you address welfare, you are indirectly attacking the issue of insecurity because they are siamese twins. You must marry the two of them, other wise, you would be a political joker if you think you can address one and leave the other one. If somebody is economically handicapped, the next thing to think is to resort to criminality and unleash terror on the society. Which of the governments, whether federal or state, has any plans on how to tackle the dangerous level of unemployment in the country.
I am an employer of labour and I know how many applications I get here everyday even with our small practice here as if we have become an extension of ministry of justice. This is because the government has not provided the right atmosphere.
http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2011/nov/13/national-13-11-2011-002.html
Okorocha floors Ohakim again
•We’ll appeal – PDP
From VAL OKARA, Owerri
Sunday, November 13, 2011
There was jubilation in Owerri, Imo State capital, yesterday as the election petition tribunal upheld the election of Governor Rochas Okorocha.
Supporters of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), his party, took to the streets immediately after news of the judgment upholding election of the governor filtered into town.
Okorocha was elected governor of the state on May 6, 2011, supplementary election after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared the April 26 governorship polls inconclusive.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had filed a petition challenging Okorocha’s emergence in the May 6, 2011, election and urged the tribunal to uphold the aborted April 26 governorship polls and declare its candidate, Chief Ikedi Ohakim, winner as he scored majority of the lawful votes cast. It also urged the tribunal to declare the May 6 supplementary election illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.
The three-man panel headed by Justice E.N. Kpojime upheld the results of April 26 polls and declared that the May 6 supplementary election that produced Okorocha as governor of the state was a continuation of the April 26 inconclusive polls.
In the three-hour painstaking judgment, Justice Kpojime said since the April 26 poll was inconclusive and no winner emerged, the May 6 supplementary election organized by INEC was legitimate and constitutional.
She said that INEC had constitutional power to cancel poll and pick a new date for such election if it has cogent reason to call off an election. The tribunal said there was glaring evidence of pockets of violence in four local government areas where the polls were cancelled.
Justice Kpojime, who relied on submissions of both parties involved, submitted that the April 26 poll results remained legal and unchallenged.
According to her, the total number of eligible voters disfranchised in the four affected councils, Oguta, Ohaji/ Egbema, Ngo Okpala and Mbaitoli as well as Orji in Owerri North LGA during April 26 election would have been much to ignore and such may have led to serious breach of peace in the state.
“The May 6, 2011 supplementary election was a continuation of the April 26, 2011 election and this tribunal is convinced of the evidence of violence in the four local government councils as given by the petitioner’s witness”, she said.
She added that the petitioner failed to prove that election took place in the four affected areas and a ward in Owerri North and equally observed that the petitioner failed to prove that its candidate, Chief Ohakim scored the majority of lawful votes cast on April 26.
According to her, she stated that the supplementary election was in compliance with 1999 constitution as amended and 2010 Electoral Act as amended.
She pointed out that the petitioner only succeeded in dumping a worthless evidence before the tribunal and therefore, declared that the petition lacked merit and dismissed it accordingly.
Chief Awa Kalu (SAN), one of the lead counsel of the PDP, said that the next line of action would be determined by the petitioner.
But, the legal adviser to the PDP, Chief C.O.C Akaolisa, told reporters that the party would appeal against the judgment.
From VAL OKARA, Owerri
Sunday, November 13, 2011
There was jubilation in Owerri, Imo State capital, yesterday as the election petition tribunal upheld the election of Governor Rochas Okorocha.
Supporters of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), his party, took to the streets immediately after news of the judgment upholding election of the governor filtered into town.
Okorocha was elected governor of the state on May 6, 2011, supplementary election after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared the April 26 governorship polls inconclusive.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had filed a petition challenging Okorocha’s emergence in the May 6, 2011, election and urged the tribunal to uphold the aborted April 26 governorship polls and declare its candidate, Chief Ikedi Ohakim, winner as he scored majority of the lawful votes cast. It also urged the tribunal to declare the May 6 supplementary election illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.
The three-man panel headed by Justice E.N. Kpojime upheld the results of April 26 polls and declared that the May 6 supplementary election that produced Okorocha as governor of the state was a continuation of the April 26 inconclusive polls.
In the three-hour painstaking judgment, Justice Kpojime said since the April 26 poll was inconclusive and no winner emerged, the May 6 supplementary election organized by INEC was legitimate and constitutional.
She said that INEC had constitutional power to cancel poll and pick a new date for such election if it has cogent reason to call off an election. The tribunal said there was glaring evidence of pockets of violence in four local government areas where the polls were cancelled.
Justice Kpojime, who relied on submissions of both parties involved, submitted that the April 26 poll results remained legal and unchallenged.
According to her, the total number of eligible voters disfranchised in the four affected councils, Oguta, Ohaji/ Egbema, Ngo Okpala and Mbaitoli as well as Orji in Owerri North LGA during April 26 election would have been much to ignore and such may have led to serious breach of peace in the state.
“The May 6, 2011 supplementary election was a continuation of the April 26, 2011 election and this tribunal is convinced of the evidence of violence in the four local government councils as given by the petitioner’s witness”, she said.
She added that the petitioner failed to prove that election took place in the four affected areas and a ward in Owerri North and equally observed that the petitioner failed to prove that its candidate, Chief Ohakim scored the majority of lawful votes cast on April 26.
According to her, she stated that the supplementary election was in compliance with 1999 constitution as amended and 2010 Electoral Act as amended.
She pointed out that the petitioner only succeeded in dumping a worthless evidence before the tribunal and therefore, declared that the petition lacked merit and dismissed it accordingly.
Chief Awa Kalu (SAN), one of the lead counsel of the PDP, said that the next line of action would be determined by the petitioner.
But, the legal adviser to the PDP, Chief C.O.C Akaolisa, told reporters that the party would appeal against the judgment.
This govt is wasteful, lacks management skills – Chief Olu Falae
“What reasons were given for the destruction of toll gates by Obasanjo in the first place? Obasanjo did not give any reson for destroying them and the media did not challenge him at that time. So, to me it is a restoration of what used to be. But let me say that in conjuction with the removal of the so-called fuel subsidy, even if it is economically justifiable, the timing is wrong and the government does not exercise political judgement in introducing such measures.”
Chief Olu Falae
The government argument for the policy is that revenue that will accrue from the tolling will be ploughed back into road maintenance and rehabilitation. Chief Falae dismissed that with a wave of hand saying “the question that we should ask is that what have they done with the trillions of naira budget for the past 12 years? I live in Akure and yet I don’t see any sign here that there is a federal government here.
So, if the trillions of naira budget have no impact on my life, why should the toll gate revenue have any impact in my life.” This government is extremely wasteful, they over paid themselves, they waste public funds, the additional harship this will inflict is not going to be justified by any additional services the government is going to render. I don’t have confidence in this government’s ability to manage the economy for the good of the masses. I don’t like that argument at all,” he said.
Most argument being put forward by the pro government toll policy advocates is that government has no funding capacity to put the roads in good shape and to further sustain the needed maintainance culture required.
Chief Falae immediately countered the argument saying: “What has this government got any capacity for? He queried. “Is it security, so much that the President cannot go to Eagle Square and some other places? Security operatives now determine what he does and what he doesn’t do. Is it to provide employment for Nigerians?
What has this government got the capacity to do? that is the question. I don’t think the government has the capacity to do very much in any area.”
Suggesting the way forward, he said it is not just having better roads in Nigeria but a better economy. “The roads are just a part of the economy, it is a part of the transportaion sector.
In that sector, there are other means like rail, air and water. All these are in a shambles. So, the transport sector is in a mess. Trasnport system is the very life wire of every economy because whatever you produced has to be transported and not just road but the entire transport sector.
“We have been advocating the articulation of National Development Plan Programme on each sector. What does this government want to do in the sector for the next four years and why?
What do they want to do in education that we can see and feel in the next four years? Ditto for health, Agriculture and others. They don’t tell us. They only tell us 20-2020, ‘we want to catch up with the rest of the world without power’.
It is a joke. Power is the key to economic development, to the survival of our people. We don’t have 3000 mega watts. In 1975-78, we advocated 6000 mega watts by 1980. This is 35 years later. What kind of government is that and what kind of economy is that? ”
The septugenerian noted: “The present situation is bad enough. I don’t see any ray of hope really and I don’t see any light at the end of that tunnel of indecisiveness, of lack of any programme. A lot of money is stolen and lots are wasted. I am sorry, I am in a very depressed mood about the Nigerian economy and government.”
Falae argued that though it is true that the practice all over the world is that tolls are collected and revenue ploughed back into road maintenance, he said that is a theory but do we do it here? “With what we are getting from oil (over a $100), yet, we can’t make any impact and why is the removal of subsidy that will bring a marginal revenue be the one that will make a difference.
If you can’t manage the bulk of the revenue, why should we expect you to be able to manage the additional revenue that we’ve got today. This government has no confidence and managment skills. Nothing drives it that you can recognise. Bringing in Okonjo-Iweala, she is a technocract, economist and all that, but one thing is particular about political leadership.
The leadership indicates the direction We are to go and the technicians follow. It appears everything has been left for Okonjo-Iweala and she is not the one we voted for. It is unfair to her for government to virtually abandon leadership roles and ask her to just carry on doing the role of both a leader and technocrat. It is not right and it is unfair,” he stated.
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/11/return-of-toll-gates-this-govt-is-wasteful-lacks-management-skills/
Chief Olu Falae
The government argument for the policy is that revenue that will accrue from the tolling will be ploughed back into road maintenance and rehabilitation. Chief Falae dismissed that with a wave of hand saying “the question that we should ask is that what have they done with the trillions of naira budget for the past 12 years? I live in Akure and yet I don’t see any sign here that there is a federal government here.
So, if the trillions of naira budget have no impact on my life, why should the toll gate revenue have any impact in my life.” This government is extremely wasteful, they over paid themselves, they waste public funds, the additional harship this will inflict is not going to be justified by any additional services the government is going to render. I don’t have confidence in this government’s ability to manage the economy for the good of the masses. I don’t like that argument at all,” he said.
Most argument being put forward by the pro government toll policy advocates is that government has no funding capacity to put the roads in good shape and to further sustain the needed maintainance culture required.
Chief Falae immediately countered the argument saying: “What has this government got any capacity for? He queried. “Is it security, so much that the President cannot go to Eagle Square and some other places? Security operatives now determine what he does and what he doesn’t do. Is it to provide employment for Nigerians?
What has this government got the capacity to do? that is the question. I don’t think the government has the capacity to do very much in any area.”
Suggesting the way forward, he said it is not just having better roads in Nigeria but a better economy. “The roads are just a part of the economy, it is a part of the transportaion sector.
In that sector, there are other means like rail, air and water. All these are in a shambles. So, the transport sector is in a mess. Trasnport system is the very life wire of every economy because whatever you produced has to be transported and not just road but the entire transport sector.
“We have been advocating the articulation of National Development Plan Programme on each sector. What does this government want to do in the sector for the next four years and why?
What do they want to do in education that we can see and feel in the next four years? Ditto for health, Agriculture and others. They don’t tell us. They only tell us 20-2020, ‘we want to catch up with the rest of the world without power’.
It is a joke. Power is the key to economic development, to the survival of our people. We don’t have 3000 mega watts. In 1975-78, we advocated 6000 mega watts by 1980. This is 35 years later. What kind of government is that and what kind of economy is that? ”
The septugenerian noted: “The present situation is bad enough. I don’t see any ray of hope really and I don’t see any light at the end of that tunnel of indecisiveness, of lack of any programme. A lot of money is stolen and lots are wasted. I am sorry, I am in a very depressed mood about the Nigerian economy and government.”
Falae argued that though it is true that the practice all over the world is that tolls are collected and revenue ploughed back into road maintenance, he said that is a theory but do we do it here? “With what we are getting from oil (over a $100), yet, we can’t make any impact and why is the removal of subsidy that will bring a marginal revenue be the one that will make a difference.
If you can’t manage the bulk of the revenue, why should we expect you to be able to manage the additional revenue that we’ve got today. This government has no confidence and managment skills. Nothing drives it that you can recognise. Bringing in Okonjo-Iweala, she is a technocract, economist and all that, but one thing is particular about political leadership.
The leadership indicates the direction We are to go and the technicians follow. It appears everything has been left for Okonjo-Iweala and she is not the one we voted for. It is unfair to her for government to virtually abandon leadership roles and ask her to just carry on doing the role of both a leader and technocrat. It is not right and it is unfair,” he stated.
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/11/return-of-toll-gates-this-govt-is-wasteful-lacks-management-skills/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)