By
Joachim Ezeji
The primary objective of the Imo State 2011 budget proposal as recently enunciated by the state governor includes job creation, education and eradication of extreme poverty. Captioned ‘’Budget of consolidation and continuity’’, the budget had an 8 point policy direction, which consists of embargo on new projects; scaling down , continuation and/or completion of on-going projects; massive road rehabilitation in the 27 local government areas of the state; good governance, transparency, accountability, efficiency and training in the teaching and civil service and total automation of processes; total confrontation of the security problem in the state; job creation/ mass recruitment into government service; and finally, enhanced internally generated revenue.
Ambitious as the 2011 budget is, it offers negligible enthusiasm amongst the people for who it was drafted. This stems from past experiences, particularly, previous budgets which has failed repeatedly with little effort to learn from such failures. For example, the 2011 Imo budget in most aspects is similar to that of 2010. In 2010 the Imo State Government had a total budget estimate of N127, 260, 577, 253. The revenue component of that budget was estimated at 55.5% of the total budget while the capital receipt on the other hand was 44.4% of the total budget. Conversely, the recurrent expenditure constituted 41.6% while Capital expenditure was 58.3% of the total budget.
However, as at end of September 2010 the scorecard of the budget showed that only 50.04% of the estimated recurrent revenue of N70,705,678,311 was achieved while the capital receipts, a mere N18,581,787,844 of the projected sum of N56,554,898,942 i.e. less than 35% of the projected was generated. At 50.04% and 35% ratings, these components of the budget i.e. the revenue cannot be said to have done well in view of the huge expectations and development needs of the state.
On the other hand, the recurrent expenditure as at end of September 2010 stood at 56.8% of the total recurrent expenditure of N52,962,600,572 while the capital expenditure as at end of September 2010 was N36,324,865,583 representing 48.8% of total capital expenditure projection of N74, 297,976, 681. Again, at both 56.8% and 48.8% ratings these components of the budget does not inspire anybody.
In 2011, the governor has proposed a whopping budget of N124,475,132,834. The total recurrent revenue stands at N72,148,781,892 while the total recurrent expenditure stands at N60,675,238,007. The capital receipts this time is estimated at N52,326,350,942 or about 43% of the total budget while the recurrent revenue stands at N72,148,782,892 or 57%.
It is clear that the amount proposed for 2011 is a little less than that of 2010. It remains to be understood why this is so, could it be an adjustment to guide against failure as seen in the preceding year’s budget or a signal that little development would be pursued in the current year? Whatever it is, a coterie of questions still emerge, and some of these are: Why is the state government so much dependent on capital receipts knowing fully how precarious and unreliable it could be? Meeting the capital receipts components of any government budget would certainly require a lot of work which includes immense networking, diplomacy, good governance and transparency amongst others. Unlike recurrent revenue, they are not statutory.
The recurrent expenditure projections and profile of the government is neither plausible nor salutary. It smacks of anything but prudence in resource management for a government to expend 56.8% of its total projected recurrent expenditure at a time when it was merely generating 50.04% of the projected revenue. The amount expended on capital expenditure as at the end of September 2010 was not stated in the 2011 budget review of expenditure events of 2010. It remains to be understood if this omission was deliberate or intentional. Relevant questions should be asked at the follow up sessions on the budget at the House of Assembly.
It remains to be seen how the governor intends to achieve the lofty objectives of the 2011 budget with a fragile revenue base. Top on this objective is poverty alleviation and job creation. According to the governor, the poverty index in Imo State in 1996 was 56% but today it has dropped drastically to 48%. The governor had quoted the United Nations Human Development Index Report without dating the reference document to buttress this assertion. He argued that at 48%, that the poverty index in Imo is clearly above the Federal Government index of 72%, and that the reduction stems from the opportunities created by the massive investments in infrastructure, micro-credit as well as Human Development. He also argued that the establishment of a poverty alleviation bureau has tackled poverty in a multi-faceted manner, from skills acquisition to transportation as well as micro-credit schemes. The governor also revealed that his government had recently set up a committee to fish out the poorest of the poor in Imo State for proper documentation and adequate empowerment in 2011.
Poverty alleviation in Imo state should actually begin with the prompt payment of salaries and pensions. This is not intended to portray a superiority of these statutory payments over other state needs; but they can easily be monitored and measured unlike the so called claims of skills acquisition to transportation as well as micro-credit schemes by the government. Delays and protracted payments of statutory bills does not inspire confidence on the government, no matter what it claims to the contrary. Also, budgets that allocates over 40% of recurrent expenditure on overhead and personnel cost will certainly struggle to do well. This was the case in 2009, 2010 and sadly again in 2011.
What is the security vote of the governor? This important component of the budget is neither obvious nor clear from the wordings of the budget. I need to be shown where it is located and its subhead. However, is it the truth that the speaker of the Imo State House of Assembly has a security vote of N500 million, the secretary to the state government N250million, and the deputy speaker N200million? However, the budget 2011 had shown that the capital projects of the Imo State House of Assembly including its constituency projects is the sum of N470million, without any breakdown of what these are.
Government should be reminded that insensitive allocation of public funds to public office holders stirs envy and bad blood in the polity. It sounds so unreasonable to allocate as much as 40% of recurrent expenditure on top office holders be they members or part of the executive, legislature or judiciary. High level criminality such as kidnapping, armed robbery, contract inflation, graft and greed will remain eternal consequence of such allocations. Prudency should start from the top of the pyramid where the bulk of the resources are manipulated.
On education, the governor claims that as part of his effort to ensure the realisation of functional and qualitative education in the state, it released the sum of N18million for the procurement of science equipment, chemicals and reagents for the 2010 May/June NECO and SSCE practical examinations for the 31No public secondary schools in the state. He further claimed that his government has released the sum of N150million out of the N250million approved for the accreditation of all courses in the college of engineering of the Imo State University. He also asserted that has successfully returned forty-five secondary schools to the Missions, while discussions are on-going with voluntary agencies/private proprietors that have indicated interest to take back their schools. He further revealed that his government has instituted a special overseas postgraduate scholarship scheme for Imo indigenes. And that candidates with first class or second class upper degrees would be encouraged to enrol in the Ivy League Universities in the world. The purpose of this, according to the governor is to produce well trained first class graduates who would be future leaders of the state and are well equipped to play leadership roles.
The happenings in the educational sector of the state is nothing to cheer about. It defies common sense to return forty-five secondary schools to private organisations and missions, and then have government withdraw apposite responsibility just after 2 years of offsetting staff salaries. What does government intend to achieve? What is the primary objective of that action? Is it merely to offload government financial responsibility thereto and have the now accruing government revenue saved? What happens to it, will it be looted, frittered or prudently reinvested into governance? I think that the wholesale returning of schools to missions or private organisations is utterly a bad idea. The simple reason is that these missions lack the capacity to make these schools competitive. Missions may struggle to meet the requisite funding required to run them. Running of schools is another important public service that needs to be preserved and nourished. Investment in school infrastructure is as important as teacher motivation. Trying to save funds in the face of competing educational needs amounts to self destruction.
The revelation on the institution of a special overseas postgraduate scholarship scheme for Imo indigenes is a welcome development, though overdue. We need to have the modalities for this published with the relevant bureau set up. However, the issue of Ivy league universities as the centre point of the policy is outlandish and neither here nor there. People need to be supported to train abroad in various spheres where Imo lack skills. It must not necessarily be an Ivy league university. Moreover, there are just about 10 Ivy league universities and all of them are located in the USA hence limiting this policy on Ivy league universities smacks of utopian targets. As an international environmental scholar at Brown University, one of the Ivy league universities, I can humbly assert that there are many other great universities in the USA as well as other parts of the world in the likes of Oxford, Cambridge, Loughborough and even KTH in Sweden. Great leaders of the state in the future who are well equipped to play leadership roles can emerge from even modest schools. Tell me, what school did the greatest leader Imo State has ever i.e. Late Sam Mbakwe attend?
Relocating Imo State University and designating and developing a location for the new School of Engineering campus of the university needs to be reprioritized. I shudder to query the worthwhileness of these two major capital projects in the same budget timeline. Since the university currently have a campus in Owerri, efforts should rather be exerted to first develop a new School of Engineering campus of the university instead. Anything other than this will further weaken the budget.
The government’s proposals on the economic sector of the state ; consisting of agriculture, commerce, industry, works, transport, housing, petroleum , environment, public utilities and rural development are very salutary and needs commendation. Government capacity to generate jobs for the teeming unemployed is very possible provided utmost good fate is deployed. However, I am pained that the government is mute about the implication of climate change on the economic sector if ignored. This therefore calls to mind the imperativeness of adopting a policy stand on how to go about economic development in the state. In view of the uncertainties involved with climate change, it is important to identify low-cost, no-regret responses that enhance the choices available in the future. For example, economic cost-benefit analysis – which could include environmental values – would suffice if decisions are made primarily based on economic efficiency. If, however, sustainable development is a leading policy objective, developments of today would also have to be evaluated based on their effects on intergenerational and intragenerational equity, and should include consideration of environmental impacts.
Tourism in the state could also be made to transit to eco-tourism in order to safeguard the environment. In this regards the government should once again reappraise its position on the ‘disvirgining’ of the Oguta lake. There is a lot the government could learn from the civil society , particularly NGOs working on sustainable development in the state. Isolating NGOs or treating them with suspicion undermines sustainability.
Till the house reconvenes to deliberate on the budget, I join the governor to chorus that Imo is in the hands of God.
Showing posts with label Imo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Imo. Show all posts
Tuesday, 11 January 2011
Saturday, 28 August 2010
By
Joachim Ezeji
One governor in the current political dispensation in Nigeria that radiates high level mediocrity and ineptitude is the Abia Governor, Mr. Theodore Orji. Events in recent times portray this governor as a man who is very much unfit to remain a day longer in office in whatever capacity. I will rather suggest that the man deserves to be in jail for wasting the time and resources of Abia State.I would have preferred to refer to him as a well fortified fool sake for decency. The man possibly thinks that the rest of Abians’ are as foolish as himself. In civilized societies Mr Orji would have immediately resigned upon the revelation he made recently. While addressing the new commissioners he appointed in Umuahia recently, the Governor had described the ceremony as a crucial chapter in the life of the government and another step towards the consolidation of the government.He had also said that with the liberation of the state from political bondage, what they now have in the state was government of the people, for the people and by the people, and urged the new commissioners to work hard as the state was in a hurry to develop. He unequivocally stated that he was now in full control of the affairs of the state; saying that if it were in the past, all the commissioners would have been handed over to him from certain quarters. What a revelation! Prior to that event Mr. Theodore Orji had dissolved his cabinet which was reconstituted just about one year ago. The dissolution affected all commissioners and all other political appointees such as Special Advisers and Personal Advisers, including about 300 advisers that were appointed in May. Political observers in the state saw the action of Governor Orji as a step towards freeing himself from the alleged stronghold of former governor Kalu and his mother who had been having huge influence in the governance of the state since he came to power. But at what cost, who lost? Abians of course! And shortly after dissolving his cabinet, the governor quit his original party for the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). Speaking to newsmen in Umuahia, his aide on Print Media, Mr Joshua Ogbonna, had said the governor left the People Progressive Alliance, (PPA) as a result of the irreconcilable and crises that have bedeviled the party in recent times.The climax was that on July 2, the leadership of the party led by DIM Odimegwu Ojukwu, Peter Obi and National Chairman of the party, Chief Victor Umeh, all gathered in Umuahia to receive Governor Orji into their party. According to Mr. Joshua Ogbonna….. “Since they have made the party uncomfortable for him, he had no choice but to find solace in a more disciplined focused and people-oriented party which is APGA.Yet again, within a few weeks, the same man did quit APGA for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In doing so, he rubbished the personalities that graced his return to APGA on the previous occasion such as DIM Odimegwu Ojukwu. What we hear now is that the move was proper in order to realign Abia to national politics and optimize political benefits for the state. Some loyalists of the governor are also using every opportunity to blast our eyes on the need to keep Abia on the mainstream of national politics.Nevertheless one thing that is clear from this macabre dance is the desperation to remain in power at all cost, and this is irrespective of the wishes of the people. Governor Orji and his loyalist are fanatically inclined to the PDP ballot rigging machine and are hopeful of benefiting from there. The desperation to still remain in office despite woeful performance as governor is largely responsible for this so-called return to the PDP.This is synonymous with events in Imo State, two years ago when Mr. Ikedi Ohakim quit the PPA for the PDP. The same reasons adduced in Abia were also adduced in Imo. On both occasions, people of these two states were told that this was the only way to facilitate the actualization of the Igbo presidency. But these are fairy tales, good only for gullible minds as they need to be reminded that Igbo presidency can never be possible in an environment dominated by political underachievers and harlots whose only guaranty to victory is ballot fraud and judicial merchandise.I have never really taken Governor Orji serious because I had always seen him and his brother- governor Ikedi Ohakim as backwater governors who came into office through the back door without any iota of public scrutiny. Their coming to power was a catastrophic accident that took all and sundry by surprise. No sane political mind ever imagined that it could happen in the 21st century Nigeria. But it did, and we are collectively paying the high price.My consolation however, is the lessons to be learnt from this accident. One of them is the fact that the defection of these governors is a showcase of the nature of their characters, affiliations and backgrounds. And these consist of greed, avarice, lust and poverty of morality. On the surface one may query what actually took them to PPA in the first instance? And what level of relationship they did have with Orji Ozor Kalu the founder of PPA prior to and before defection? For Mr. Theodore Orji, one may also want to know why he defected to and quit APGA within a few weeks. An analysis of these questions will reveal these men as birds of the same feather that needs isolation from the civilized world. Behind the veil of government authority are politically amorphous men, enormously lacking in character, morality, genuine followership and social capital.Another lesson to be learnt is that as the Igbo nation remain hopeful of Igbo presidency, characters to look up to are those similar to, and proportional to those of the likes of Mr. Peter Obi of Anambra State. Governor Peter Obi understands very much how he came to power and has to a large extent lived up to the expectations of his people. His actions have facilitated enormous goodwill for him and his party in Anambra State which subsequently ensured his re-election as governor last year. He did not need defection to achieve re-election. To Peter Obi what should really matter while in political office is performance, not jumping around and making bizarre confessions without genuine atonement as we currently witness in Abia. Do Governors Fashola, Oshiomole and Mimiko need any defection to secure re-election? What then is actually the problem with these Igbo governors other than gullibility? Again, the PDP as a party in self denial is again in big dilemma as the events of 2011 unfolds. It has to subject itself to real democratic ethos which includes making the political field open, free and fair to all contestants. By this, it has to contend with organizing fair and free primaries as well as subjecting itself to free and fair national and state elections thereafter. But can this be possible with all these compromises here and there particularly with the influx of non- performing Governors Orji and Ohakim defecting to its fold?I am of the strong opinion that the likes of Governor Theodore Orji should out rightly be disqualified from presenting himself for re-election under any political platform, the PDP inclusive, based on his recent confessions that his government since 2007 has been serving the personal interests of himself and those of his godfather – Orji Uzor Kalu. The implication of those revelations are damning as it shows to the extent Abia State has been short-changed in the past 36 months. Well meaning Abia citizens should stand up and throw their gauntlet into the 2011 race and get this inferior man unelected as he attempts to re-present himself for the 2011 elections. Please fellow Abians’ let’s put a stop to this cascading stupidity.
Abia Kwenu!
Joachim Ezeji
One governor in the current political dispensation in Nigeria that radiates high level mediocrity and ineptitude is the Abia Governor, Mr. Theodore Orji. Events in recent times portray this governor as a man who is very much unfit to remain a day longer in office in whatever capacity. I will rather suggest that the man deserves to be in jail for wasting the time and resources of Abia State.I would have preferred to refer to him as a well fortified fool sake for decency. The man possibly thinks that the rest of Abians’ are as foolish as himself. In civilized societies Mr Orji would have immediately resigned upon the revelation he made recently. While addressing the new commissioners he appointed in Umuahia recently, the Governor had described the ceremony as a crucial chapter in the life of the government and another step towards the consolidation of the government.He had also said that with the liberation of the state from political bondage, what they now have in the state was government of the people, for the people and by the people, and urged the new commissioners to work hard as the state was in a hurry to develop. He unequivocally stated that he was now in full control of the affairs of the state; saying that if it were in the past, all the commissioners would have been handed over to him from certain quarters. What a revelation! Prior to that event Mr. Theodore Orji had dissolved his cabinet which was reconstituted just about one year ago. The dissolution affected all commissioners and all other political appointees such as Special Advisers and Personal Advisers, including about 300 advisers that were appointed in May. Political observers in the state saw the action of Governor Orji as a step towards freeing himself from the alleged stronghold of former governor Kalu and his mother who had been having huge influence in the governance of the state since he came to power. But at what cost, who lost? Abians of course! And shortly after dissolving his cabinet, the governor quit his original party for the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). Speaking to newsmen in Umuahia, his aide on Print Media, Mr Joshua Ogbonna, had said the governor left the People Progressive Alliance, (PPA) as a result of the irreconcilable and crises that have bedeviled the party in recent times.The climax was that on July 2, the leadership of the party led by DIM Odimegwu Ojukwu, Peter Obi and National Chairman of the party, Chief Victor Umeh, all gathered in Umuahia to receive Governor Orji into their party. According to Mr. Joshua Ogbonna….. “Since they have made the party uncomfortable for him, he had no choice but to find solace in a more disciplined focused and people-oriented party which is APGA.Yet again, within a few weeks, the same man did quit APGA for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In doing so, he rubbished the personalities that graced his return to APGA on the previous occasion such as DIM Odimegwu Ojukwu. What we hear now is that the move was proper in order to realign Abia to national politics and optimize political benefits for the state. Some loyalists of the governor are also using every opportunity to blast our eyes on the need to keep Abia on the mainstream of national politics.Nevertheless one thing that is clear from this macabre dance is the desperation to remain in power at all cost, and this is irrespective of the wishes of the people. Governor Orji and his loyalist are fanatically inclined to the PDP ballot rigging machine and are hopeful of benefiting from there. The desperation to still remain in office despite woeful performance as governor is largely responsible for this so-called return to the PDP.This is synonymous with events in Imo State, two years ago when Mr. Ikedi Ohakim quit the PPA for the PDP. The same reasons adduced in Abia were also adduced in Imo. On both occasions, people of these two states were told that this was the only way to facilitate the actualization of the Igbo presidency. But these are fairy tales, good only for gullible minds as they need to be reminded that Igbo presidency can never be possible in an environment dominated by political underachievers and harlots whose only guaranty to victory is ballot fraud and judicial merchandise.I have never really taken Governor Orji serious because I had always seen him and his brother- governor Ikedi Ohakim as backwater governors who came into office through the back door without any iota of public scrutiny. Their coming to power was a catastrophic accident that took all and sundry by surprise. No sane political mind ever imagined that it could happen in the 21st century Nigeria. But it did, and we are collectively paying the high price.My consolation however, is the lessons to be learnt from this accident. One of them is the fact that the defection of these governors is a showcase of the nature of their characters, affiliations and backgrounds. And these consist of greed, avarice, lust and poverty of morality. On the surface one may query what actually took them to PPA in the first instance? And what level of relationship they did have with Orji Ozor Kalu the founder of PPA prior to and before defection? For Mr. Theodore Orji, one may also want to know why he defected to and quit APGA within a few weeks. An analysis of these questions will reveal these men as birds of the same feather that needs isolation from the civilized world. Behind the veil of government authority are politically amorphous men, enormously lacking in character, morality, genuine followership and social capital.Another lesson to be learnt is that as the Igbo nation remain hopeful of Igbo presidency, characters to look up to are those similar to, and proportional to those of the likes of Mr. Peter Obi of Anambra State. Governor Peter Obi understands very much how he came to power and has to a large extent lived up to the expectations of his people. His actions have facilitated enormous goodwill for him and his party in Anambra State which subsequently ensured his re-election as governor last year. He did not need defection to achieve re-election. To Peter Obi what should really matter while in political office is performance, not jumping around and making bizarre confessions without genuine atonement as we currently witness in Abia. Do Governors Fashola, Oshiomole and Mimiko need any defection to secure re-election? What then is actually the problem with these Igbo governors other than gullibility? Again, the PDP as a party in self denial is again in big dilemma as the events of 2011 unfolds. It has to subject itself to real democratic ethos which includes making the political field open, free and fair to all contestants. By this, it has to contend with organizing fair and free primaries as well as subjecting itself to free and fair national and state elections thereafter. But can this be possible with all these compromises here and there particularly with the influx of non- performing Governors Orji and Ohakim defecting to its fold?I am of the strong opinion that the likes of Governor Theodore Orji should out rightly be disqualified from presenting himself for re-election under any political platform, the PDP inclusive, based on his recent confessions that his government since 2007 has been serving the personal interests of himself and those of his godfather – Orji Uzor Kalu. The implication of those revelations are damning as it shows to the extent Abia State has been short-changed in the past 36 months. Well meaning Abia citizens should stand up and throw their gauntlet into the 2011 race and get this inferior man unelected as he attempts to re-present himself for the 2011 elections. Please fellow Abians’ let’s put a stop to this cascading stupidity.
Abia Kwenu!
Monday, 14 June 2010
The Ohakim Legacy: The Nworie River dredging
By
Joachim Ezeji
Hitherto, Imo people have been inundated by arguments on the urgency of dredging the Nworie River and why the project could not be delayed. Arguments proffered have ranged from abatement of pollution by medical waste, to security and inland freshwater transportation etc. But are these worth the whopping sum of N8billion allegedly spent to dredge a stream of less than 15km length in the face of other pressing priorities? Also, now that the controversy generated seems to have gone down can business as usual in government continue?
Telling lies such as those of recovering dead bodies from the sites is not necessary as insecurity to life is never solved by dredging of Rivers. Gladly, the Imo State police command denied such claim as no report was ever brought to it about that. On the other hand, no journalist is yet to come up with a photograph on such gory scene.
It is also germane to point out that the Nworie River is incapable of serving as an inland transport medium as being suggested by those forcing the dredging contract down our throats as the extent of the coverage is so small. How far can such transportation go without an enormous investment in rebuilding the road blockings on Assumpta Avenue and Egbeada Road?
Discussing the controversial dredging of the Nworie River at a time of economic recession and peril of both the government and citizens is germane. First, the Nworie River provides a strategic ecological service to the city of Owerri vis-à-vis its role as a major hydrological catchment for both flood and storm waters emanating from rainfalls across the adjoining uplands or hills that serve as its catchment areas. Its valley location makes its ability to perform this task seem effortless as all generated runoffs from paved roads and concreted buildings find their way into it. A similar task is perfomed by the Iyi echu stream in Okigwe town, and many other Rivers and Streams everywhere.
This hydrological function has a lot of benefits, one of which, as already mentioned is flood control. But then, there is also the benefit of sediment transport and hydrological stabilization which though very gradual and minimal, enables the Otammiri River and its surrounding landscapes to recover from the anthropologic effects of sand mining that is currently ravaging it. This natural process provides a natural balance to the entire ecosystem both terrestrial and the freshwater.
In this regards, one may need to ask why erosion and landslide have remained a major problem around the point the Nworie River joins the Otammiri River that is around Nekede? The simple answer is that the surrounding landscapes, having been deprived of the stabilization effects of incoming sediments, exerts a balancing pressure on surrounding landscapes , the result being the massive erosion and landslides we have in that area today. This situation would have been worse without the Nworie River. Sediments from Nworie River support Otammiri River to build some level of resilience.
Secondly, beyond this role, the stream has an intrinsic value which also serves as a primary role and this is the life and habitation it provides to biodiversity. Biodiversity in simple terms means the plants (flora) and animals (fauna) varying from the very microscopic to the very large inhabiting the waters of this small River. As a source of life, water bodies naturally provide this ecological service in support of mother earth. Hydrology is a key determinant of specie distribution, wetland productivity and nutrient cycling and availability.
Globally, when environmentalists oppose river dredging, it is often premised on reasons such as those cited above. This makes River dredging a very controversial issue anywhere it is planned and raises the necessity for an Environmental Impacts Assessment (EIA). Such an EIA enables all stakeholders to appraise all their options including mitigation. For a coastal delta environment such as the Niger Delta this could become a life and death issue as is currently the case with the recently commissioned dredging in the Niger Delta.
I am keen to see and read the EIA for the Nworie River dredging or was there none? I will be most surprised if there was none. If there actually was one, then I am keen to know the level of participation of stakeholders and what their inputs were. Stakeholders in this instance include the Nekede community, the fisher men, the sand dredgers, the NGOs, land owners and farmers within the banks of the Rivers etc.
I need to point out that dredging at whatever scale causes serious environmental damage as it significantly degrades water quality and can harms fisheries. During dredging, sediment, soil, and vegetation along the way are removed and deposited as dredge spoils. Toxic substances attached to sediment particles can enter aquatic food chains, cause fish toxicity and mortality and make the water unfit for drinking. Research has proven that waste material from dredging when dumped on the river banks disrupts the environment.
Often, these wastes are acidic and if it leaches into the water, pose as a further source of contamination. While oil companies are responsible for significant dredging activities in the Niger Delta, dredging of rivers is also done by other local businesses and government, such as the Nworie River by the Imo State Government. There have been reports of human induced saline contamination at Isaka near Port Harcourt where the dredging of the Port Harcourt harbour admitted saline water into the aquifer in the area.
Canalization particularly short-cut canals have often resulted in intrusion of saline waters into fresh water swamps and groundwater. Similarly, dredging activities of Chevron Nigeria Limited allegedly resulted in salt water intrusion into an otherwise freshwater swamp forest, leading to the complete destruction of vast areas of land (over 20 km2) in the Opuekeba area of Tsekelewu, Rivers State.
Therefore, I doubt the wisdom of the Imo State Government in dredging the Nworie River. I am of the opinion that what was actually needed was tougher environmental regulation around the River in order to protect its catchment. This would have included regulated sand mining in the Otammiri River; absolute stopping of medical and sanitary waste discharge into the River and the setting up of a watershed management for both the Otammiri and Nworie Rivers.
Watershed management in this case as is practiced in Sweden and other developed countries would have seen to the planting of trees along and within at least 100 meter periphery of the Rivers as well as restricting residential buildings within this periphery especially residential buildings with on-site sanitation systems including septic pits or tanks. Without these strategies in place the dredging would end up a futility.
I am also of the opinion that the weeds on the Nworie River and the accompanying silts would have been removed manually. By so doing the state government would not have spent as much as it has done and Imo people, particularly those to be engaged in the work would have tremendously benefited; instead of paying such a colossal amount to an alien or offshore contractor who has little or no stake in the state.
Joachim Ezeji
Hitherto, Imo people have been inundated by arguments on the urgency of dredging the Nworie River and why the project could not be delayed. Arguments proffered have ranged from abatement of pollution by medical waste, to security and inland freshwater transportation etc. But are these worth the whopping sum of N8billion allegedly spent to dredge a stream of less than 15km length in the face of other pressing priorities? Also, now that the controversy generated seems to have gone down can business as usual in government continue?
Telling lies such as those of recovering dead bodies from the sites is not necessary as insecurity to life is never solved by dredging of Rivers. Gladly, the Imo State police command denied such claim as no report was ever brought to it about that. On the other hand, no journalist is yet to come up with a photograph on such gory scene.
It is also germane to point out that the Nworie River is incapable of serving as an inland transport medium as being suggested by those forcing the dredging contract down our throats as the extent of the coverage is so small. How far can such transportation go without an enormous investment in rebuilding the road blockings on Assumpta Avenue and Egbeada Road?
Discussing the controversial dredging of the Nworie River at a time of economic recession and peril of both the government and citizens is germane. First, the Nworie River provides a strategic ecological service to the city of Owerri vis-à-vis its role as a major hydrological catchment for both flood and storm waters emanating from rainfalls across the adjoining uplands or hills that serve as its catchment areas. Its valley location makes its ability to perform this task seem effortless as all generated runoffs from paved roads and concreted buildings find their way into it. A similar task is perfomed by the Iyi echu stream in Okigwe town, and many other Rivers and Streams everywhere.
This hydrological function has a lot of benefits, one of which, as already mentioned is flood control. But then, there is also the benefit of sediment transport and hydrological stabilization which though very gradual and minimal, enables the Otammiri River and its surrounding landscapes to recover from the anthropologic effects of sand mining that is currently ravaging it. This natural process provides a natural balance to the entire ecosystem both terrestrial and the freshwater.
In this regards, one may need to ask why erosion and landslide have remained a major problem around the point the Nworie River joins the Otammiri River that is around Nekede? The simple answer is that the surrounding landscapes, having been deprived of the stabilization effects of incoming sediments, exerts a balancing pressure on surrounding landscapes , the result being the massive erosion and landslides we have in that area today. This situation would have been worse without the Nworie River. Sediments from Nworie River support Otammiri River to build some level of resilience.
Secondly, beyond this role, the stream has an intrinsic value which also serves as a primary role and this is the life and habitation it provides to biodiversity. Biodiversity in simple terms means the plants (flora) and animals (fauna) varying from the very microscopic to the very large inhabiting the waters of this small River. As a source of life, water bodies naturally provide this ecological service in support of mother earth. Hydrology is a key determinant of specie distribution, wetland productivity and nutrient cycling and availability.
Globally, when environmentalists oppose river dredging, it is often premised on reasons such as those cited above. This makes River dredging a very controversial issue anywhere it is planned and raises the necessity for an Environmental Impacts Assessment (EIA). Such an EIA enables all stakeholders to appraise all their options including mitigation. For a coastal delta environment such as the Niger Delta this could become a life and death issue as is currently the case with the recently commissioned dredging in the Niger Delta.
I am keen to see and read the EIA for the Nworie River dredging or was there none? I will be most surprised if there was none. If there actually was one, then I am keen to know the level of participation of stakeholders and what their inputs were. Stakeholders in this instance include the Nekede community, the fisher men, the sand dredgers, the NGOs, land owners and farmers within the banks of the Rivers etc.
I need to point out that dredging at whatever scale causes serious environmental damage as it significantly degrades water quality and can harms fisheries. During dredging, sediment, soil, and vegetation along the way are removed and deposited as dredge spoils. Toxic substances attached to sediment particles can enter aquatic food chains, cause fish toxicity and mortality and make the water unfit for drinking. Research has proven that waste material from dredging when dumped on the river banks disrupts the environment.
Often, these wastes are acidic and if it leaches into the water, pose as a further source of contamination. While oil companies are responsible for significant dredging activities in the Niger Delta, dredging of rivers is also done by other local businesses and government, such as the Nworie River by the Imo State Government. There have been reports of human induced saline contamination at Isaka near Port Harcourt where the dredging of the Port Harcourt harbour admitted saline water into the aquifer in the area.
Canalization particularly short-cut canals have often resulted in intrusion of saline waters into fresh water swamps and groundwater. Similarly, dredging activities of Chevron Nigeria Limited allegedly resulted in salt water intrusion into an otherwise freshwater swamp forest, leading to the complete destruction of vast areas of land (over 20 km2) in the Opuekeba area of Tsekelewu, Rivers State.
Therefore, I doubt the wisdom of the Imo State Government in dredging the Nworie River. I am of the opinion that what was actually needed was tougher environmental regulation around the River in order to protect its catchment. This would have included regulated sand mining in the Otammiri River; absolute stopping of medical and sanitary waste discharge into the River and the setting up of a watershed management for both the Otammiri and Nworie Rivers.
Watershed management in this case as is practiced in Sweden and other developed countries would have seen to the planting of trees along and within at least 100 meter periphery of the Rivers as well as restricting residential buildings within this periphery especially residential buildings with on-site sanitation systems including septic pits or tanks. Without these strategies in place the dredging would end up a futility.
I am also of the opinion that the weeds on the Nworie River and the accompanying silts would have been removed manually. By so doing the state government would not have spent as much as it has done and Imo people, particularly those to be engaged in the work would have tremendously benefited; instead of paying such a colossal amount to an alien or offshore contractor who has little or no stake in the state.
Sunday, 13 June 2010
No, to caretaker committees and JAAC!
By
Joachim Ibeziako Ezeji
Can we really compare our local government councils with their peers elsewhere? Perhaps I will make an attempt since a local council is supposed to be a kind of “door-step government” due primarily to its nearness to the citizens.
Charnwood Borough Council is in Leicestershire County of England. It is an equivalent of a local government in Nigeria. To monitor the impact of its environmental sanitation programs, it decided to conduct a survey amongst its residents to get their feedback and improve performance. The survey result however showed that less than half of residents in Charnwood were satisfied with street cleaning.
The survey found out that 87% of residents were satisfied with refuse and recycling, while only 47% were satisfied with street cleaning; and that cleanliness in the borough was 11-10% better than the previous year. The survey which was carried out by the council was also ‘peer reviewed’ (backed up) by an Independent Environmental Campaigns group.
In response to this survey, the council’s head of environmental services Neil Greenhalgh had said “The satisfaction rating is very important because it is the public perception at the end of the day, and you can’t get away from the fact that 47% is not good result. No matter how effective, I think the service we provide is the bottom line. We are here to serve the people of Charnwood and if they are not happy, then we need to do something about it”.
….He continued “We are now looking at more effective monitoring and training with the staff, putting more resources in there, and making them more visible to the public. At the end of the day we are here to listen. So, if there are any issues we can resolve then I welcome comments from members of the public”
Good talk! Isn’t it? I was particularly intrigued by those lines: “Putting more resources in there, and making them more visible to the public”. To me, this is the bottom of governance i.e. using public funds wisely, and for the greater common good.
But did I hear you mutter; Not in Nigeria! Why not Nigeria? What exactly is the problem? What factors currently mitigate the progress of Nigeria’s 774 local government councils?
To say that the period 1999 to date have remained the worst era in local government administration in Nigeria is to say the least. Within this period we have witnessed all sorts of strange events that have undermined that tier of government.
Many factors such as the sheer looting and siphoning of local council funds by the state governments (at first instance) and local government chairman (at second instance) are on top of the problems.
I was therefore elated with the recent courageous call of the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) on the National Assembly to expunge the states/local government joint allocation accounts system, as well as other sundry issues that would prevent the third tier of government from delivering dividends of democracy to the citizenry.
The NULGE’s request contained in a communiqué issued at the end of its national executive council (NEC) specifically noted that the joint account was a channel used by the state government to siphon local council’s resources.
I can’t agree less with NULGE. They are right, albeit at first instance!
Currently we are being inundated with the mantra of the rule of law by the Shehu Yar Adua led Federal Government of Nigeria. There is every need to really put this mantra to test by doing what is right at that level of government otherwise this doctrine of the Rule of law will run the risk of a stillbirth.
This is already inevitable with the continued act of state governments to appoint caretaker, transition or management committees at the expiration of the tenure of every elected local council, and the sheer inertia to conduct free elections at that level.
It should however be noted that Section 7 of the 1999 constitution explicitly provides for democratically elected councils, and any system that infringes upon this is an aberration to the doctrine of the Rule of law.
I am also of the view that the National Assembly should urgently bar local councils under caretaker administrations from benefiting from the monthly statutory allocation because such administrative system is unknown to the constitution.
Making monthly allocations to local councils through state governments should be stopped by the National Assembly because this is culpable for the poor funding and non-performance at the local government level.
A source close to the councils, once confided to me that often, the council chairmen were mandated to sign for the real value as announced, but were made to collect amounts of money far less that real value, by the state governors.
The Joint Allocation Accounts Committee (JAAC) between states and the LGAs is a crude fraud and should be abrogated immediately because it has done more harm than good. It has annihilated the councils in no small measure. It has been hijacked, it has failed. Allowing it to still exist is antithetical to the much desired sustainable development at the local level. Those who encourage it are crooks.
According to section 162 (2) of the 1999 constitution, “Any amount standing to the credit of the federation account shall be distributed among the federal and state governments and the local government councils in each state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly’’.
Also section 162 (5) provides that “the amount standing to the credit of local government councils in the federation account shall also be allocated to the state for the benefit of their local government councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly”.
In view of these contexts, I implore the National Assembly to quickly apply these sections of the constitution, bearing in mind the non-subordinate status of all tiers. This remains the only way to ensure proper funding of the councils which would in turn ensure rapid development of the rural areas across the country.
Good governance should be encouraged through this amendment.
Joachim Ibeziako Ezeji
Can we really compare our local government councils with their peers elsewhere? Perhaps I will make an attempt since a local council is supposed to be a kind of “door-step government” due primarily to its nearness to the citizens.
Charnwood Borough Council is in Leicestershire County of England. It is an equivalent of a local government in Nigeria. To monitor the impact of its environmental sanitation programs, it decided to conduct a survey amongst its residents to get their feedback and improve performance. The survey result however showed that less than half of residents in Charnwood were satisfied with street cleaning.
The survey found out that 87% of residents were satisfied with refuse and recycling, while only 47% were satisfied with street cleaning; and that cleanliness in the borough was 11-10% better than the previous year. The survey which was carried out by the council was also ‘peer reviewed’ (backed up) by an Independent Environmental Campaigns group.
In response to this survey, the council’s head of environmental services Neil Greenhalgh had said “The satisfaction rating is very important because it is the public perception at the end of the day, and you can’t get away from the fact that 47% is not good result. No matter how effective, I think the service we provide is the bottom line. We are here to serve the people of Charnwood and if they are not happy, then we need to do something about it”.
….He continued “We are now looking at more effective monitoring and training with the staff, putting more resources in there, and making them more visible to the public. At the end of the day we are here to listen. So, if there are any issues we can resolve then I welcome comments from members of the public”
Good talk! Isn’t it? I was particularly intrigued by those lines: “Putting more resources in there, and making them more visible to the public”. To me, this is the bottom of governance i.e. using public funds wisely, and for the greater common good.
But did I hear you mutter; Not in Nigeria! Why not Nigeria? What exactly is the problem? What factors currently mitigate the progress of Nigeria’s 774 local government councils?
To say that the period 1999 to date have remained the worst era in local government administration in Nigeria is to say the least. Within this period we have witnessed all sorts of strange events that have undermined that tier of government.
Many factors such as the sheer looting and siphoning of local council funds by the state governments (at first instance) and local government chairman (at second instance) are on top of the problems.
I was therefore elated with the recent courageous call of the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) on the National Assembly to expunge the states/local government joint allocation accounts system, as well as other sundry issues that would prevent the third tier of government from delivering dividends of democracy to the citizenry.
The NULGE’s request contained in a communiqué issued at the end of its national executive council (NEC) specifically noted that the joint account was a channel used by the state government to siphon local council’s resources.
I can’t agree less with NULGE. They are right, albeit at first instance!
Currently we are being inundated with the mantra of the rule of law by the Shehu Yar Adua led Federal Government of Nigeria. There is every need to really put this mantra to test by doing what is right at that level of government otherwise this doctrine of the Rule of law will run the risk of a stillbirth.
This is already inevitable with the continued act of state governments to appoint caretaker, transition or management committees at the expiration of the tenure of every elected local council, and the sheer inertia to conduct free elections at that level.
It should however be noted that Section 7 of the 1999 constitution explicitly provides for democratically elected councils, and any system that infringes upon this is an aberration to the doctrine of the Rule of law.
I am also of the view that the National Assembly should urgently bar local councils under caretaker administrations from benefiting from the monthly statutory allocation because such administrative system is unknown to the constitution.
Making monthly allocations to local councils through state governments should be stopped by the National Assembly because this is culpable for the poor funding and non-performance at the local government level.
A source close to the councils, once confided to me that often, the council chairmen were mandated to sign for the real value as announced, but were made to collect amounts of money far less that real value, by the state governors.
The Joint Allocation Accounts Committee (JAAC) between states and the LGAs is a crude fraud and should be abrogated immediately because it has done more harm than good. It has annihilated the councils in no small measure. It has been hijacked, it has failed. Allowing it to still exist is antithetical to the much desired sustainable development at the local level. Those who encourage it are crooks.
According to section 162 (2) of the 1999 constitution, “Any amount standing to the credit of the federation account shall be distributed among the federal and state governments and the local government councils in each state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly’’.
Also section 162 (5) provides that “the amount standing to the credit of local government councils in the federation account shall also be allocated to the state for the benefit of their local government councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly”.
In view of these contexts, I implore the National Assembly to quickly apply these sections of the constitution, bearing in mind the non-subordinate status of all tiers. This remains the only way to ensure proper funding of the councils which would in turn ensure rapid development of the rural areas across the country.
Good governance should be encouraged through this amendment.
Nuclear Plant in Owerri: Matters arising (1)
By
Joachim Ezeji
I have always insisted on the need for Nigeria to build resilience into its energy sector as this is one guaranteed way to safeguard its development process which has been hampered by inconsistent power supply. Meeting Nigeria’s energy needs will require a broad mix of energy sources and this naturally should also include renewable energy and nuclear energy as a complement to the hydro and hydrocarbon sources currently in use in the country.
Uranium based nuclear energy comes into context at this time based on current attempts by the government in the south eastern city of Owerri Nigeria to try it out. Though a highly controversial technology, it nonetheless already powers roughly one sixth of the world’s electricity production including one fifth of USA Electricity production and around 80 percent of France’s electricity.
Japan has 51 commercial nuclear power reactors that provide one-third of the country's electricity. With few natural resources of its own, Japan imports nearly all its fuel oil. Since the oil crisis of 1973, successive governments have made concerted efforts to become self-sufficient. By the year 2010, Japan wants to produce 42% of its energy in nuclear plants. The long term potential is vast, alongside other energy sources.
Nuclear power offers another potential, though one that is exceedingly, perhaps unsolvably, complicated by its intertwined links with nuclear weapons. As is well known, there are two potential forms of long-lasting nuclear energy, fission based (utilizing the energy released by splitting uranium and other radioactive materials) and fusion based (utilizing the energy released by the fusion of two hydrogen atoms into a helium atom, as happens in the sun). Only fission exists in commercial form. Fussion power is likely decades away from commercial exploitation but could be a vast source of energy in the twenty second century and beyond.
Drawing from these scenarios I see the wisdom in Imo Governor Mr. Ikedi Ohakim talking about generating electricity from nuclear plants in Imo state. As was reported recently in national newspapers Governor Ikedi Ohakim, had while on a recent visit to Washington D.C. USA, signed Memorandum of Understandings, MOUs, with three American companies. The companies are Barnett Holding Company, Foxcor Incorporates and Patten Boggs Inc.
The MOUs are for the installation of nuclear modular reactors for generating electricity, provision of mass housing and conversion of palm trees into plywood, respectively. Mr. John Barnett of Barnett Holding Company signed on behalf of his company, Mr. John Fox, for Foxcor Incorporates, while Roy Lessy and Robert Horn, signed on behalf of Patten Boggs Inc.
Speaking on the occasion, Ohakim said his government had taken a bold step at solving the perennial energy problem facing Imo State. “You know our people are very industrious and they are technologically minded, but the lack of energy and power has almost brought the economy of our country to its knees,” Ohakim said.
“The good thing about this technology of nuclear modular reactor is that it is a short time measure that you don’t require fuel until after seven years of its use and it can be deployed primarily to energy spots. They will be deployed to Owerri Township, the new city development in Ogwu town, where we are citing most of our industrial ventures and other industrial and civic centers, which would require between five to 20 megawatts respectively,” Ohakim added.
In discussing the generation of electricity from nuclear plants or reactors it is germane to stress that several issues particularly those of raw materials, cost and waste remain critical concerns and should of course be taken into consideration at this time.
Across the world, public acceptance is still skewed against nuclear energy plants out of deep fears of leakages of radiation, as in Chernobyl catastrophe; the difficulties of disposing of nuclear waste products; and the ability to convert and divert nuclear plant materials (both inputs and waste products) into weapons-grade nuclear materials.
The expanded use of nuclear power is all but inevitable, notably in China, India, Japan and several other countries. The biggest fear is that the expansion of nuclear power in some countries, especially the crisis-ridden Middle East, can be a pretext for the development of a nuclear weapon industry as well.
A flashback to Chernobyl will suffice; Reactor Four at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant began to fail in the early hours of 26 April, 1986. Seven seconds after the operators activated the 20-second shut down system, there was a power surge. The chemical explosions that followed were so powerful that they blew the 1,000 ton cover off the top of the reactor. Design flaws in the power plant's cooling system probably caused the uncontrollable power surge that led to Chernobyl's destruction.
Serious mistakes had also been made by the plant operators, who had disengaged several safety and cooling systems and taken other unauthorized actions during tests of electrical equipment. With procedures intended to ensure safe operation of the plant operating less than effectively, the Chernobyl unit was even more vulnerable to unforeseen power discharges.
The Chernobyl plant did not have an effective containment structure, and without that protection, radioactive material escaped into the wider environment. The crippled reactor is still encased in a hurriedly constructed concrete sarcophagus, which is growing weaker over time. The accident that destroyed the reactor in Unit Four killed 31 people almost immediately.
Soviet scientists estimate that about 4% of the 190 tons of uranium dioxide products escaped and began to spread unevenly across the surrounding countryside, affected by the vagaries of the weather. Both Soviet and Western scientists agree that most of the contaminating material affected Belarus, but that 40% spread to other nearby areas, including Ukraine.
Immediately after the accident, the main health concern involved levels of radio-iodine radiation. Although the 600,000 workers involved in the recovery and clean-up after the accident were exposed to high doses of radiation, the exact amount cannot be accurately measured. The workers, many of them volunteers, were not equipped with measuring instruments to monitor the dosages they were receiving, but estimates of about 165 millisieverts have been made.
Joachim Ezeji
I have always insisted on the need for Nigeria to build resilience into its energy sector as this is one guaranteed way to safeguard its development process which has been hampered by inconsistent power supply. Meeting Nigeria’s energy needs will require a broad mix of energy sources and this naturally should also include renewable energy and nuclear energy as a complement to the hydro and hydrocarbon sources currently in use in the country.
Uranium based nuclear energy comes into context at this time based on current attempts by the government in the south eastern city of Owerri Nigeria to try it out. Though a highly controversial technology, it nonetheless already powers roughly one sixth of the world’s electricity production including one fifth of USA Electricity production and around 80 percent of France’s electricity.
Japan has 51 commercial nuclear power reactors that provide one-third of the country's electricity. With few natural resources of its own, Japan imports nearly all its fuel oil. Since the oil crisis of 1973, successive governments have made concerted efforts to become self-sufficient. By the year 2010, Japan wants to produce 42% of its energy in nuclear plants. The long term potential is vast, alongside other energy sources.
Nuclear power offers another potential, though one that is exceedingly, perhaps unsolvably, complicated by its intertwined links with nuclear weapons. As is well known, there are two potential forms of long-lasting nuclear energy, fission based (utilizing the energy released by splitting uranium and other radioactive materials) and fusion based (utilizing the energy released by the fusion of two hydrogen atoms into a helium atom, as happens in the sun). Only fission exists in commercial form. Fussion power is likely decades away from commercial exploitation but could be a vast source of energy in the twenty second century and beyond.
Drawing from these scenarios I see the wisdom in Imo Governor Mr. Ikedi Ohakim talking about generating electricity from nuclear plants in Imo state. As was reported recently in national newspapers Governor Ikedi Ohakim, had while on a recent visit to Washington D.C. USA, signed Memorandum of Understandings, MOUs, with three American companies. The companies are Barnett Holding Company, Foxcor Incorporates and Patten Boggs Inc.
The MOUs are for the installation of nuclear modular reactors for generating electricity, provision of mass housing and conversion of palm trees into plywood, respectively. Mr. John Barnett of Barnett Holding Company signed on behalf of his company, Mr. John Fox, for Foxcor Incorporates, while Roy Lessy and Robert Horn, signed on behalf of Patten Boggs Inc.
Speaking on the occasion, Ohakim said his government had taken a bold step at solving the perennial energy problem facing Imo State. “You know our people are very industrious and they are technologically minded, but the lack of energy and power has almost brought the economy of our country to its knees,” Ohakim said.
“The good thing about this technology of nuclear modular reactor is that it is a short time measure that you don’t require fuel until after seven years of its use and it can be deployed primarily to energy spots. They will be deployed to Owerri Township, the new city development in Ogwu town, where we are citing most of our industrial ventures and other industrial and civic centers, which would require between five to 20 megawatts respectively,” Ohakim added.
In discussing the generation of electricity from nuclear plants or reactors it is germane to stress that several issues particularly those of raw materials, cost and waste remain critical concerns and should of course be taken into consideration at this time.
Across the world, public acceptance is still skewed against nuclear energy plants out of deep fears of leakages of radiation, as in Chernobyl catastrophe; the difficulties of disposing of nuclear waste products; and the ability to convert and divert nuclear plant materials (both inputs and waste products) into weapons-grade nuclear materials.
The expanded use of nuclear power is all but inevitable, notably in China, India, Japan and several other countries. The biggest fear is that the expansion of nuclear power in some countries, especially the crisis-ridden Middle East, can be a pretext for the development of a nuclear weapon industry as well.
A flashback to Chernobyl will suffice; Reactor Four at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant began to fail in the early hours of 26 April, 1986. Seven seconds after the operators activated the 20-second shut down system, there was a power surge. The chemical explosions that followed were so powerful that they blew the 1,000 ton cover off the top of the reactor. Design flaws in the power plant's cooling system probably caused the uncontrollable power surge that led to Chernobyl's destruction.
Serious mistakes had also been made by the plant operators, who had disengaged several safety and cooling systems and taken other unauthorized actions during tests of electrical equipment. With procedures intended to ensure safe operation of the plant operating less than effectively, the Chernobyl unit was even more vulnerable to unforeseen power discharges.
The Chernobyl plant did not have an effective containment structure, and without that protection, radioactive material escaped into the wider environment. The crippled reactor is still encased in a hurriedly constructed concrete sarcophagus, which is growing weaker over time. The accident that destroyed the reactor in Unit Four killed 31 people almost immediately.
Soviet scientists estimate that about 4% of the 190 tons of uranium dioxide products escaped and began to spread unevenly across the surrounding countryside, affected by the vagaries of the weather. Both Soviet and Western scientists agree that most of the contaminating material affected Belarus, but that 40% spread to other nearby areas, including Ukraine.
Immediately after the accident, the main health concern involved levels of radio-iodine radiation. Although the 600,000 workers involved in the recovery and clean-up after the accident were exposed to high doses of radiation, the exact amount cannot be accurately measured. The workers, many of them volunteers, were not equipped with measuring instruments to monitor the dosages they were receiving, but estimates of about 165 millisieverts have been made.
Investing or Doing Business in Imo?
By
Joachim Ezeji
What else could be more damning than the recent report - “Doing business in Nigeria 2010” which was launched last week in Abuja by the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (IFC)?
An irony that played out within the week was that while the report was being launched in Abuja; an investment forum was also being held in Owerri. Ironically, the Abuja report had ranked Imo and Ogun States as the most difficult states to do business in Nigeria based on four indicators of: Starting a business; dealing with construction permits; registering property and in enforcing contracts etc. Conversely, Jigawa state topped the table on ‘ease of doing business in Nigeria’, with Gombe and Borno following closely.
I do not have the statistics to appropriately discuss issues such as corruption as a basic factor the makes doing business ultra-difficult in Imo State. However, one glaring factor in Imo is the sheer state of poor governance and abysmal management of state resources by those in authority. The result is ill-motivation and dampening of the spirit of all those who become casualties as a result.
A visit to the Imo State secretariat to transact a business or secure any document is pretty a herculean task. Everybody seems annoyed and on a revenge mission. The result is that we have all become aliens in our own state as nothing simply works. There are neither simplified procedures nor clear – cut and transparent pathways to guarantee any sure expectation. In Imo state, everything has become a gamble as hawks have taken over its leadership.
One retired Permanent Secretary, a lady, in one of the top ministries had told me how she was almost beaten up by her commissioner, a man. The commissioner had shouted and called the poor woman names, threatening to slap the hell out of her; simply because the poor woman had insisted on adherence to procedure. But the Commissioner, an Almighty commissioner and appointee of an Almighty Governor Ohakim would have none of that.
When Ikedi Ohakim was foisted on Imo as Governor, the signs of hard and tough things to come were well ominous. It took off with the appointment of Willy Amadi and the subsequent destruction and vandalism of people’s properties in the utter disguise of environmental sanitation.
But one really amazing thing is the enhanced futility and waste that has become the resources so far expended by Ikedi Ohakim, travelling all over the world to look for investors to develop Imo. The Governor has in the past one year alone, had combined visits to the USA and South Africa more than any past Imo Governor, in their entire tenures. A friend had told me that the governor is merely using his position to expand his private business interests.
It is germane to remind Governor Ohakim that there is a lot of work waiting to be done in other areas such as improved electricity, water supply, education, positive investment policy and intensive agriculture; if other Nigerians and even other Imo citizens are to stop seeing Imo as economically backward.
Beyond all the rhetoric, it remains to be seen how determined the Imo State Government is, at providing a conducive environment for investment to thrive, and addressing the infrastructure challenges militating against the sustainable growth of the real sector of the state’s economy beyond all these “New Face of Investment in Africa Summits”. We need to see actions, not hear words on mere plans and intentions; because Imo is in a hurry to develop.
I am doubtful of the capacity of the summit at guiding the future of the state in becoming the Investment Capital of Africa. Till basic things are achieved, all these summits and trips would simply remain self-serving.
While I do not disagree with Mr. Ikedi Ohakim that all the strides of his administration like Clean and Green Initiatives, Operation Festival Security Outfit, Imo Rural Roads Maintenance Agency (IRROMA), are not ends in themselves, but instead means to open up the state to investors and propel the economic development of the state; it is germane to however remind him that these things can never work in isolation of the people. Imo people must be able to trust their governor in order to buy into his programs and move in tandem with them. The new face should become real, not abstract.
For example, despite being an oil producing state with increased revenue from federal sources, much greater than many other states of the Nigerian federation, Imo State is still reeling under common ills such as those of limited electricity and water supplies. Imo State is one state in Nigeria where residents and consumers of electricity i.e. customers of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) still contribute money to either buy new transformers or repair faulty ones.
Just like in other places elsewhere, lack of access to modern energy services entails more than our not being able to enjoy some of the comforts of life that are taken for granted in developed countries. In Imo State, it is indeed, one of the greatest impediments to social and economic progress including doing business or residency.
Verily, energy poverty stalls progress on Imo development programs including the quest to achieve the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It is a vicious cycle as ensuring sustainable and affordable energy is already beyond the reach of the average poor in Imo.
Another case is the issue of water supply in Imo. Just like electricity, Imo households and businesses have to provide their own water supply. The result today is arbitrary sinking and developing of private water wells and boreholes. This no doubt, imposes difficulties or high budgetary costs for businesses. A task that ordinarily should have been provided by the state water corporation is now being informally driven. No big cities or societies ever achieved growth with such arrangements.
One friend of mine once described poverty as the non-availability of basic needs of life, and as the inadequacy of the means to satisfy the basic necessities of a healthy living. He went ahead to identify food, housing, clothing, health, education etc as some of those basic necessities. People who are no longer involved in economic activities are also in the poverty bracket. Also people with low educational qualification are likely to be grouped in the poverty bracket.
This same friend of mine further argues that poverty exists because there is great inequality in money and opportunities occasioned by social, economic, political and cultural environments. And that poverty is rife in Imo State, despite huge resources via federal allocations, internally generated revenue, ecological funds, informal revenue in form of deductions etc. because amongst other factors that the per capita income is low, greatly because human and land resources of this State have remained under utilized; and that population of Imo State is roughly 4.5 million people hence contributing to the poverty of the people. He was however mute on outright looting of limited state resources by those in government and the near state of anarchy via rising cases of criminality and insecurity.
I had wondered the irony of a damning report coinciding with an important event like the Imo investment forum, both holding back to back in the same week and country. The World Bank/IFC report is timely and should really serve as a mirror for all those currently calling the shot or those with interest and potential to do so in the future. But, whatever, it still behooves the current leadership of Imo State to prove that is not merely playing to the gallery.
Joachim Ezeji
What else could be more damning than the recent report - “Doing business in Nigeria 2010” which was launched last week in Abuja by the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (IFC)?
An irony that played out within the week was that while the report was being launched in Abuja; an investment forum was also being held in Owerri. Ironically, the Abuja report had ranked Imo and Ogun States as the most difficult states to do business in Nigeria based on four indicators of: Starting a business; dealing with construction permits; registering property and in enforcing contracts etc. Conversely, Jigawa state topped the table on ‘ease of doing business in Nigeria’, with Gombe and Borno following closely.
I do not have the statistics to appropriately discuss issues such as corruption as a basic factor the makes doing business ultra-difficult in Imo State. However, one glaring factor in Imo is the sheer state of poor governance and abysmal management of state resources by those in authority. The result is ill-motivation and dampening of the spirit of all those who become casualties as a result.
A visit to the Imo State secretariat to transact a business or secure any document is pretty a herculean task. Everybody seems annoyed and on a revenge mission. The result is that we have all become aliens in our own state as nothing simply works. There are neither simplified procedures nor clear – cut and transparent pathways to guarantee any sure expectation. In Imo state, everything has become a gamble as hawks have taken over its leadership.
One retired Permanent Secretary, a lady, in one of the top ministries had told me how she was almost beaten up by her commissioner, a man. The commissioner had shouted and called the poor woman names, threatening to slap the hell out of her; simply because the poor woman had insisted on adherence to procedure. But the Commissioner, an Almighty commissioner and appointee of an Almighty Governor Ohakim would have none of that.
When Ikedi Ohakim was foisted on Imo as Governor, the signs of hard and tough things to come were well ominous. It took off with the appointment of Willy Amadi and the subsequent destruction and vandalism of people’s properties in the utter disguise of environmental sanitation.
But one really amazing thing is the enhanced futility and waste that has become the resources so far expended by Ikedi Ohakim, travelling all over the world to look for investors to develop Imo. The Governor has in the past one year alone, had combined visits to the USA and South Africa more than any past Imo Governor, in their entire tenures. A friend had told me that the governor is merely using his position to expand his private business interests.
It is germane to remind Governor Ohakim that there is a lot of work waiting to be done in other areas such as improved electricity, water supply, education, positive investment policy and intensive agriculture; if other Nigerians and even other Imo citizens are to stop seeing Imo as economically backward.
Beyond all the rhetoric, it remains to be seen how determined the Imo State Government is, at providing a conducive environment for investment to thrive, and addressing the infrastructure challenges militating against the sustainable growth of the real sector of the state’s economy beyond all these “New Face of Investment in Africa Summits”. We need to see actions, not hear words on mere plans and intentions; because Imo is in a hurry to develop.
I am doubtful of the capacity of the summit at guiding the future of the state in becoming the Investment Capital of Africa. Till basic things are achieved, all these summits and trips would simply remain self-serving.
While I do not disagree with Mr. Ikedi Ohakim that all the strides of his administration like Clean and Green Initiatives, Operation Festival Security Outfit, Imo Rural Roads Maintenance Agency (IRROMA), are not ends in themselves, but instead means to open up the state to investors and propel the economic development of the state; it is germane to however remind him that these things can never work in isolation of the people. Imo people must be able to trust their governor in order to buy into his programs and move in tandem with them. The new face should become real, not abstract.
For example, despite being an oil producing state with increased revenue from federal sources, much greater than many other states of the Nigerian federation, Imo State is still reeling under common ills such as those of limited electricity and water supplies. Imo State is one state in Nigeria where residents and consumers of electricity i.e. customers of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) still contribute money to either buy new transformers or repair faulty ones.
Just like in other places elsewhere, lack of access to modern energy services entails more than our not being able to enjoy some of the comforts of life that are taken for granted in developed countries. In Imo State, it is indeed, one of the greatest impediments to social and economic progress including doing business or residency.
Verily, energy poverty stalls progress on Imo development programs including the quest to achieve the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It is a vicious cycle as ensuring sustainable and affordable energy is already beyond the reach of the average poor in Imo.
Another case is the issue of water supply in Imo. Just like electricity, Imo households and businesses have to provide their own water supply. The result today is arbitrary sinking and developing of private water wells and boreholes. This no doubt, imposes difficulties or high budgetary costs for businesses. A task that ordinarily should have been provided by the state water corporation is now being informally driven. No big cities or societies ever achieved growth with such arrangements.
One friend of mine once described poverty as the non-availability of basic needs of life, and as the inadequacy of the means to satisfy the basic necessities of a healthy living. He went ahead to identify food, housing, clothing, health, education etc as some of those basic necessities. People who are no longer involved in economic activities are also in the poverty bracket. Also people with low educational qualification are likely to be grouped in the poverty bracket.
This same friend of mine further argues that poverty exists because there is great inequality in money and opportunities occasioned by social, economic, political and cultural environments. And that poverty is rife in Imo State, despite huge resources via federal allocations, internally generated revenue, ecological funds, informal revenue in form of deductions etc. because amongst other factors that the per capita income is low, greatly because human and land resources of this State have remained under utilized; and that population of Imo State is roughly 4.5 million people hence contributing to the poverty of the people. He was however mute on outright looting of limited state resources by those in government and the near state of anarchy via rising cases of criminality and insecurity.
I had wondered the irony of a damning report coinciding with an important event like the Imo investment forum, both holding back to back in the same week and country. The World Bank/IFC report is timely and should really serve as a mirror for all those currently calling the shot or those with interest and potential to do so in the future. But, whatever, it still behooves the current leadership of Imo State to prove that is not merely playing to the gallery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)