Upfront I will advise this administration to steer far clear of any so-called petroleum sector “deregulation” come January 2022. The sentiment is tinder-dry, and I doubt they want another #EndSARS-scale demonstration, or worse, on their hands.I mean, it takes a lot of nerve to meet the petrol price at N97, take it first to N145 naira, then N162, and then propose to leave it at N380 or more. The first increase was done without apologies or care, as the President was merely riding on his fabled and now demystified the “Mai-Gaskiya” factor. Since the government came in 2015, what Nigerians have seen has been different. No matter what anyone says about that era, the majority of voters expressed hope in the Buhari-Osinbajo ticket, and part of that hope was that the economy would be fixed, while life would be easier for most Nigerians in terms of improved standards of living. Alas, what Nigerians paid for has been totally different from what has been delivered. And so, through a lot of disdain, refusal to interact with the people, talk downs such as Nigerian youths being lazy or agreeing with David Cameron, then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, that Nigerians were fantastically corrupt, the fuel price was increased, twice, to almost double what it was pre-2015. Before EndSARS, perhaps the worst nationwide riot in recent times was in January 2012, due to the tentative increase in fuel prices from N65 to N140 per litre in the name of deregulation. Then the government-backed down to N97. Nigerians would later find out that a few connected smart Alecs had swindled the country of N2.53 trillion in false subsidy claims. Some, like me, needed to know that that level of fraud did happen in this country. But not much has happened to those guys. They are still among us – rehabilitated big boys and girls.
On each occasion when petroleum prices were increased, the Buhari government claimed to have deregulated. Even the Jonathan government claimed to have deregulated in 2012. It wasn’t until later (in 2018) that the issue of subsidies crept back in again. This time, it was christened “under-recovery.” Of course, in spite of claiming to have “deregulated” the market, the national oil company, NNPC, remains the sole importer, and as I type this, the corporation says it has spent an excess of at least N1.6 trillion as at November 2021 (under-recovery), supplying just premium motor spirit (petrol) to Nigerians, compared to the amount it was able to get back from Nigerians. Why? They say the set price of N162 is way too low. So, we are back to the deregulation debate. The government has collapsed the Petroleum Equalization Fund (PEF) and the Petroleum Product Price Regulation Agency (PPPRA) into new regulatory entities, but in reality, we haven’t seen how that market would be fully and truly deregulated, or how the government hopes to manage the blowback of real deregulation – away from the usual deluded meetings they have in air-conditioned boardrooms. Is whatever is left of the PPPRA in the new entity still going to exercise any price control? Why did the government retain an agency that purports to control prices yet lied to the people that it had deregulated twice since 2015 and wanted to deregulate “again” in January 2022? Why should Nigerians trust this administration for anything at all? Is whatever is left of PEF in the new entity still interested in “equalizing” petrol prices all over the country “because we are one, the indivisible nation”? Is that how deregulated markets work? Or has the government shown Nigerians that it is ready for a market where the price of petrol in Victoria Island is higher than in Okekoto Agege, maybe because posh people live and work in VI and can pay more, and the price in Argungu or Jimeta may be significantly higher than in Port Harcourt because of the cost of logistics? Are we ready to liberalize importation from Maradi and elsewhere and allow people to sell at any price they want or that balance their books and turn them a good profit? Are we ready to rein in the oligopolies that will likely skin Nigerians alive in that sector with price-fixing, price gouging, blackmail, fraud, and what have you? A key player once told me, one-on-one, that there were no saints in their business.
I am not certain that we are ready, simply because primordial thinking about these issues is too ingrained in the minds of our leaders. I am not talking about Buhari alone. He has to convince state governors, traditional and religious leaders, and other so-called stakeholders to make them see what real deregulation is about. The first step of that process has not even been taken at all. In fact, we hear that the El-Rufai committee, set up to look into this issue, is proposing a price of N380, and it looks like that will be the landing point in January if this government is crazy enough to stick a fist in the mouth of Nigerians. The Minister of Finance, Hajia Zainab Ahmed, has proposed some palliatives, which turned out to be more expensive than the so-called subsidies, made no sense and show just how desperate the government is. The issue is not palliatives. We have been seeing palliatives since at least the time of the Petroleum Trust Fund, headed by no less than Buhari in the mid-1990s. For me, it is either the government deregulates or not. The palliatives are an avenue for massive fraud. But all that considered, this government should please not go near this project. The government has since spent whatever goodwill it brought in the first year of its advent. It should just ride out whatever time is left with Nigerians. Let it be another government’s liability to wrestle with the issue of deregulation of fuel prices, as desirable as it may be.
Indeed, what we are subsidizing is not the price of petroleum, but the fraud that permeates the entire ecosystem around fuel imports. A very tight confederacy exists around that sector, and no matter what the government has done, no one has been able to beat those guys. The opacity in the sector also stems from the fact that the market is international. What should provide transparency (international markets) also harbors the very elements of darkness that envelop that market. Which Nigerian will be able to interrogate the process of prospecting, exploration, production, storage, transportation, export, sale, import, and purchase of the products involved in that sector? Even successive presidents in Nigeria have learnt to sit and wait for whatever that corporation gracefully hands over to them, whether they appoint themselves minister of petroleum, or not. In spite of recent reforms, it will be awfully arduous to wrestle with such ingrained and perennial power, as those with power never wish to relinquish it. Therefore, beyond the several funny calculations that lead us into deficits running into trillions, what we suffer is the massive and mindless corruption in that sector, which could be confirmed by the sabotage of all our refineries. We could add to that the failure of our education to teach us anything tangible, or perhaps more aptly, our refusal to use our vaunted education to solve problems that matter. That is why we haven’t built anything in 72 years of higher education in this country that can help us refine petroleum. The last time I checked, Nigeria imports at least $12 billion worth of refined petroleum products yearly, while we are entitled to merely 35% of the $45 billion exported in crude oil yearly ($15 billion). What we import almost cancels out what we gain from exports. And this is before the huge administrative and operational expenses from our behemoth petroleum corporation and its many subsidiaries kick in. The fault is indeed in our stars.
The issues facing the Buhari-Osinbajo government are not limited to the petroleum sector and the upcoming deregulation. I viewed every other sector, and everywhere looked covered in crimson. If this government were a child, it would have been a very dull one—the type that gives its parents pangs of disappointment and apprehension for the future. The government would like to claim some successes in infrastructure building, though. The Chinese have helped us somewhat with the rail sector, with some nice airports (some kudos to Rotimi Amaechi) and I understand Minister Fashola will be opening some roads in the next year. Yet, Nigeria could not be called an infrastructure-sufficient nation. It’s just that our standards have dropped, and the bar has been totally lowered. Most of our villages remain from the 17th century when the earliest European adventurers met them. Our children are still out of school en masse as we waste their precious minds, and I have seen some so-called enlightened leaders even justify that situation, choosing to blame it on colonialists. We thank God for our physiological composition and adaptation over time; otherwise, we should have been sicker than people in “developed” economies. No matter how hard our interpreters tried, COVID-19 did not wreak the foretold and expected havoc.
But as fair as I tried to be, everything else looks woeful for this government, and I wonder where the miracles will come from, that the Buhari-Osinbajo regime will not be declared – officially and on the streets-as the worst government this country has ever seen. Add to this the attempt to leave fuel prices at N380, with prospects of reaching N500 or N600 once we have been left to the mercy of oligarchs, the fact that this government met the Naira officially exchanging at N199 to the US Dollar and has now devalued it to at least 410, while on the streets, what exchanged for N220 is now N570, and you begin to see the meaning of a calamitous disaster. I have consistently called this government a Buhari-Osinbajo administration because I now see that, indeed, Osinbajo is serious about coming in as president in 2023. It will be a natural transition for someone who has been part of the government for 8 years and within the same party. The idea will be to not upset the applecart at all. And indeed, Osinbajo is smart, savvy, hardworking, eloquent, fit, and very intelligent. But he can not extricate himself from the calamity on the ground. More so, per the constitution, the economy is under the Vice President, and he has had some good parts to play in how the economy has turned out. The two major devaluations that have occurred since 2016 – from N199 to N306 and then to N360 – occurred under his supervision and with his approval. Buhari was then busy repeating how he was never going to devalue the currency when he had absolutely no plan for what to do. Osinbajo has also been repeating the idea that the Naira should be floated. The Naira could only float in one direction for as long as the eyes could see – down. Add his flair and a soft spot for arcane economics like cryptocurrencies and the blinding success of fintechs and “investments,” and I’m afraid he may be playing a huge gamble if he comes in. I will write him another missive on this, seeking assurances. His economics are way too far to the right for the good of this country.
So, the Naira has tanked under this government and may tank some more. A nightmare scenario begins to unfold. What are the other indices by which economic performance may be measured? Inflation Yes, a growing economy will suffer from inflation, but the Nigerian economy has not grown since 2015. It’s been tales of woe, first due to a downturn in crude prices in 2016, and then COVID-19 in 2020. The spikes in crude oil prices in between have been liabilities to us. The higher crude oil prices, the higher PMS prices, and subsidies, and then riots or worse. The lower the crude oil prices, the more we have to devalue the naira and take loans we do not intend to pay back. More on debts shortly. But I priced a bag of Olam rice today (produced locally) and was told it was N26,500! Another one that looked imported (as it was written in Thai something or other) was priced at N28,500! We were complaining about N8,000 rice under Goodluck Jonathan. We have seen at least a 250% increase in the price of staples under this government. I recently went into a cornershop and bought a fairly large tin of Milo for N10,000! That is 60% of the minimum wage! Cooking gas has climbed from N3,000 to N9,000. Cement is closing in on N5,000. Even garri and beans are way up through the roof. And salaries have stagnated everywhere. Even those of us who do business have been unable to keep jerking up prices and fees arbitrarily in this fashion. I sometimes feel like something is eroding the very ground upon which I stand, closing in on my poor self, even though I know that the best opportunities are here in Nigeria. Things could be so much better if this government had not turned out the way it has. I also feel like something happened to Buhari that fundamentally allowed his alter-ego to kick in, like someone who suffers from a dual personality crisis. Not long after he was sworn in in 2015, the man changed against the people. A man who walked among the people simply stopped, showing that he held the people in disdain and was only happy among his fellow politicians, with whom he backslashed. When asked about his promises to the people in the couple of interviews that he granted, he scowled, grimaced, glowered and asked with dripping unconcern and disdain, “Did I cause the problem?”. I was beyond crestfallen. I knew less than six months into that government that it would bear ugly fruits and decided that we should organize ourselves around new political parties.
Debt. foreign and domestic. This is another frightening reality that deserves its own separate analysis. Well, if we were to admit it, the Buhari-Osinbajo government has unfortunately combined bad luck with incompetence. The government will want us to believe that it has no choice but to borrow. Since the advent of COVID, yes. Every country, including the richest, is borrowing to claw its way out of an unprecedented crisis that has resulted in the near-permanent shutdown of at least a portion of every economy. But there are two issues. I recall that pre-COVID-19, Kemi Adeosun not only borrowed massively, she actively courted foreign loans, ignoring the obvious problem presented by exchange risks. We complained then too, and I wrote a number of articles about it. However, recently, we have consolidated on these foreign loans, whose liabilities even became larger as we devalued the currency. The liability (in naira) will be even larger as we continue to devalue. I think that the reason why we borrow revolves around our innate laziness (which manifests in the mental block that we are helpless and must go begging) and the unwillingness of people in government to do the right thing. Most people who have ascended to office at our national level seem to genuflect to their counterparts abroad and display some level of inferiority which translates to this “begging billionaire” syndrome. Our leaders cannot go after the principalities and powers to pay more taxes. No one is even ready to better organize society to earn more for the government by way of fees, levies, duties, fines, charges, rents, and what have you. And so, all the proposals for increases in sin taxes, excise duties, luxury taxes, property taxes, capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes, and what have you, have come to naught. We chose, very much under this administration, to mortgage the future of our unborn generations to come and be beggars in perpetuity to their mates abroad.
This is not to give a pass mark to former governments in Nigeria. I don’t do mediocrity. I also know how tough governance can be, but it must be said that this government fell under the weight of its own ignorant arrogance. Indeed, other governments have even tried to collaborate with others in forging some degree of unity through politics. Obasanjo coopted the Ume-Ezeokes, the Bola Iges, the Mahmuds, and Yar’Adua coopted many from the opposition. Ditto, Jonathan. But these ones came and thought they were superstars. The government will need a major miracle to heal the cancers it has caused in the Nigerian body polity. I haven’t even spoken about the total failures in security, in education, in the health sector, in the housing sector, in the environmental sector, and indeed anywhere that matters. For now, my conclusion is that anyone that has been closely associated with this administration should not dare to step out for the 2023 elections. It will be a mockery of the Nigerian people. 2015–2022 will be a period best written off for most Nigerians. How then do we ensure we don’t get it so, so wrong in 2023? frightening indeed. But we will outlive this one also. For the sake of the economy and our own very lives, we cannot afford to get it wrong.
Writing a regular newspaper column is a lot like dancing; it takes two to tango.
The year 2021 was an extraordinarily challenging one. Suffice it to say, while I’ve kept the flame alive these past enervating months via ceaseless articles detailing the bottomless gloom of 2021, I’m hopeful that 2022 may generally bring more positive things for us to (at the very least) begin to talk about. Some up-tempo music is in sight at last.
The last 12 months were undeniably very tough. While most citizens struggled to survive the harsh socioeconomic realities of the previous 12 months, their government(s) struggled to balance competing interests among various groups (political, economic, socio-cultural, and so on) in order to meet citizens’ expectations.
Unquestionably, the country has made some gains but could have done better if not for the sub-optimal, unprepared, incompetent, and corrupt leaders it parades. leaders whose performances in the office are not only questionable but also regrettable. They didn’t just fail in economic management, but also failed to manage the country’s multi-ethnic and multi-religious diversity or build inclusive political and economic institutions that are necessary for stability and prosperity.
Leaders who succeeded in widening the country’s existing fault lines, resulting in an unprecedented rise in insurgency, kidnapping, and banditry across the country. Similarly, leaders who presided over increases in absolute inflation, poverty, unemployment, and economic and social inequality
It is therefore not surprising, although sad, that the 2021 report on the Fragile States Index (FSI) ranked Nigeria as the 12th most fragile state in the world. Last year, the country was ranked the 14th most fragile state, which implied that the country had declined by two further steps. This gloomy result cannot be divorced from the country’s inability to address problems such as its factionalized elite, group grievance, economic decline, uneven economic development, human flight, and brain drain, state legitimacy, public services, human rights, and the rule of law, demographic pressures, and internal security problems, among several others.
To compound the problem, the prevailing economic downturn, worsened by the coronavirus pandemic, constrained the capacity of both the state and individuals, so much so that the necessities of life went far beyond the reach of most Nigerians. As conflict zones expanded, so did agitations. Sadly, the federal government almost lost its capacity to rein in sundry cartels of gunmen who went about terrorizing innocent citizens across the country, particularly in most parts of the North.
There is a common saying that “the seeds of the future lie in the present.” As we bid 2021 farewell, we must all remember that Nigeria’s future can never be given; we must consciously create it. Hence, this is a period for deep reflection, a period we should all set aside to imagine the unimaginable and think the unthinkable. Hence, I’ve decided to take time out to imagine the possibilities or scenarios for our dear country in 2022. The three scenarios are as follows: 1. Each to his or her own2. The Rise of the State. 3. Together we can.
Scenario 1: To each his or her own
In this scenario, Nigeria will continue on the same path as in 2021. Our pressing problems—unemployment, poverty, safety and insecurity, and poor public health and education delivery—will worsen. Our social fabric will further unravel as civil society organizations disengage and public trust in public institutions diminishes.
It is a scenario of “musical chairs” or “reshuffled elites”. It is triggered by the failure of our leaders across all sectors to deal with our critical challenges. This failure is the result of pervasive identity politics, weak and unaccountable leadership, weak capacity in government departments, and tightening economic constraints that are not dealt with realistically or inclusively. Hence, an increasingly disengaged civil society as public trust in public institutions diminishes. The state is increasingly bypassed by citizens, resulting in unaccountable groupings assuming power over parts of society. The gap between the leaders and the led grows. Citizens eventually lose patience and erupt in protest and unrest. The government, driven by its inability to meet citizens’ demands and expectations, responds brutally, and a spiral of resistance and repression is unleashed.
Scenario 2: The Rise of the State
In the second scenario, the Nigerian state leads and manages the process of addressing our challenges. Citizens either support strong state intervention or are submissive in the face of a more powerful state.
This is a scenario where the state assumes the role of leader and manager. State planning and coordination are seen as central mechanisms for accelerating the development and delivery of services to citizens, especially the poor, unemployed, and vulnerable. The ruling party argues that strong state intervention in the economy is in accordance with global trends, and the electorate, concerned about the impacts of the global economic crisis, gives the ruling party a powerful mandate. Strong state intervention crowds out private initiatives by business and civil society. The risks of this scenario are twofold: one is that the country accumulates unsustainable debt; the other is that the state becomes increasingly authoritarian.
Scenario 3: We Can Do It Together
In this third scenario, our challenges are addressed through active citizen engagement, a catalytic state, and strong leadership across all sectors.
This is a scenario of active citizen engagement with a government that is effective and that listens. It requires the engagement of citizens who demand better service delivery and government accountability. It is dependent on the will and ability of citizens to organize themselves and to engage the authorities, and on the quality of political leadership and its willingness to engage citizens. It entails a common national vision that cuts across economic self-interest in the short term. This is not an easy scenario. Its path is uneven – there is robust contestation over many issues, and it requires strong leadership from all sectors, especially from citizens.
Our today (2021) already contains the seeds of all three scenarios, and 2022 will not look like purely one or the other, but I have drawn the three apart to see the opportunities and risks that each path poses for our country’s future. A healthy democracy and strong socio-economic development require a healthy interface between an effective state and an alert and active citizenry. It is my belief that the nature of this interface will determine the future of our country. Nigerians are standing at a crossroads. Each one of us, citizens and leaders, must choose the kind of 2022 we desire. Through the steps we take, we will create our 2022.
I wish you all a prosperous 2022.
A few weeks ago, I watched the Minister for Finance and the GMD of NNPC try to justify the subsidy removal policy on a live National Television program. I was thrilled, but not surprised by their comments, that Nigeria can no longer underwrite subsidy payment, or what they just months ago refer to as under-recovery given the economic fundamental that makes such policy inevitable. Their arguments made me remember an old joke that pokes fun at economists and it goes like this:
Three people were stranded on a desert island and had no food. One was a chemist, the second a physicist, and the third an economist. A can of baked beans floated ashore. The chemist suggested that they rub two sticks together to start a fire which would then cause combustion to burst the can open. The physicist calculated a trajectory that would likely break the can open. The economist countered, “Assume we have a can opener.”
This joke says a lot about the recent policy decision of the PMB led administration, and the efforts of his team to convince Nigerians that subsidy removal is the best among all the policy options available to the government to be able to develop critical infrastructures required to enhance the country’s economy’s performance. All their argument for subsidy removal is centered on simple elegance economic assumptions, without weighing the unintended consequences.
Back in the days as a graduate student of public policy, I was taught the basic concepts and assumptions required to make sound public policy choices. I was also taught that for any policy decision of the government to gain popularity there is a need for those involved in drawing such policies to appreciate the power of the people and involve them in the entire process. Several years down the line, I am surprised that most of those who find themselves in government view policy-making processes and decisions from a narrow point of economics – which they even have very little or no knowledge of its philosophical foundations.
Although economics remains my first calling and still imposes discipline on my policy thinking process, hence it is necessary and dares I say that I have learned to make it a crucial part of my analysis skills repertoire – but it is not sufficient. Studying public policy however taught me that within the economic policy-making space, politics plays a very messy role in public policy choices, but politics is harder to discern than the simple elegance of economic assumptions as a reason for the total removal of subsidy. This does not however make politics less important than economics in the policy process.
That the duo of the Minister for Finance and GMD of the NNPC still justify subsidy removal policy from the narrow perspective of abstract economic theories and assumptions without considering its socio-political implications really baffle me. I would have expected them to have applied multi-dimensional logic to argue their point. Doing this will have enabled the government they serve to build different scenarios around the possible implications and consequences of the policy decisions and to determine whether the policy will be acceptable or was inclined to fail. It will have also helped citizens to analyze or critically evaluate the policy from several perspectives and if need be, make their inputs.
The point I am trying to make is that, within the Nigerian socio-economic and political context, petrol subsidy removal must happen, but at this moment, it is an irrational policy decision given the challenges of the high cost of living, growing poverty, and inequality as well as the perception of the majority of Nigerians. As it is today, the PMBs government has lost its social capital. Nigerians do not trust the government and believe that their commonwealth is used for the private gain of politicians or their private sector co-travelers. A cogent reason for the hushed cry for the non-removal of subsidies by Nigerians is valid. For years now, most of those who have held senior positions in government never disputed the fact that it is the inefficiency and incompetence of those in government to properly think through and refine the ‘subsidy’ or is it ‘under-recovery’ that made the policy fail. This means that subsidy, as it is today is the only benefit ordinary poor Nigerians gain or get from our insincere political leaders as a credible redistribution of the commonwealth.
The goal of this article is not to argue for or against the economic rationality of subsidy removal. Rather, to let us know that subsidy is not a one-size-fits-all policy prescription that can be explained with economic models or assumptions, given the existing structural rigidities in our economy, and because there is nothing in economic theory that unequivocally supports the policy. But since the government had already made up its mind to go ahead with the policy irrespective of the pains and untold hardship it will bring forth, one will have expected that the well-thought-out policies and programs to help cushion the impact of the subsidy removal, rather than the proposed 5000-naira cash transfer or palliatives been proposed.
Finally, those who may wish to play politics with this piece will only see one side of the story. Nigeria’s problem is not a subsidy, rather it is a canker of corruption, nepotism, failure of government, high level of incompetence of those holding political office among several others. What is important at this point in time is for the government to proactively tackle and eliminate these problems because for now most low- and middle-income earning Nigerians are not ready or willing to pay for the government’s inefficiency and incompetence.
Olusegun Obasanjo, (born March 5, 1937, Abeokuta, Nigeria), Nigerian general, statesman, and diplomat, was the first military ruler in Africa to hand over power to a civilian government. He served as Nigeria’s military ruler (1976–79) and, as a civilian, as president (1999–2007).
Olusegun Obasanjo is the father of modern Nigeria due to his contribution to national development during his two-term tenure.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in 1990, there emerged a changed notion of the concept of development which holds that people must be the centre of all development or national development in other words national development must be to ensure the advancement of human flourishing and expanding the richness of human life.
Looking at the role of Olusegun Obasanjo in Nigeria national development we could see that Obasanjo role has helped in acquiring human wellbeing and welfare which has inspired and informed solutions and policies across the world and in Nigeria.
Let us look at these contributions and understand properly how there have impacted lives and flourish human lives…
The Obasanjo administration initiated and executed projects that positively impacted the lives of Nigerians, irrespective of status.
His administration launched Nigeria on the path of political, social and economic growth. A few of the achievements recorded during his tenure include:
anti-corruption campaign/recovery of loots from national treasury from past and serving government functionaries;
the renegotiation and eventual settlement of Nigerian debts;
consolidation of the banking industry;
the institutionalisation of transparency in the financial sector;
the opening up of the telecommunication industry;
Liberalisation of the education sector and the opening up of space for private sector participation and investment in tertiary education.
Significant improvements were also recorded in the following areas:
The space technology programme – the launch of two satellites, SAT 3 and NICOMSAT
The energy programme and nuclear programmes
Education sector
ICT programme
Biotechnology programmes
Agriculture programme
Poverty Eradication Programme
Niger Delta Development Commission
Universal Basic Education and the general improvement of infrastructure amongst others
GSM communication network: telephone services were a thing for the rich in society. I remember NOT NINE NOT (090) in those days and it cost #350,000 naira when the exchange rate of dollar to naira was under #20 to $1. It cost #50,000 monthly to maintain it. This is a time when neighbouring countries like Benin and Togo were already using GSM. Prior to 1998, one cannot even remember how we were living without phones, it was a nightmare and the fact we can even be chatting over the internet like this, networking to even put this retreat together is the direct result of Obasanjo policy thank you, sir.
Obasanjo backs agric-driven economic development
as an attempt to revamp the nation’s economy through the non-oil sector, particularly agriculture, which he said would redirect the economy of Nigeria.
He also said that it had become clear that agriculture was the only sustainable business in the country capable of withstanding any season.
This we all can testify to and am also a beneficiary to most of this agricultural plan
Emmanuel Ajao
Farm manager lightline55farm
National development would not have been better achieved without a pivotal role played and being played by Nigeria’s former president, Chief Olusegun Aremu Okikiolu, Obasanjo. 5 March 1937, Ibogun, Nigeria.
The highly-confident former president touched every aspect of Nigeria’s Nation’s development ranging from economic, political, security, peace and reconciliation, SMEs, Telecommunications, Anti-corruption, Banking reform, Power sector, Debt relief, Tax reforms, Democracy, freedom of the press, e.t.c,
A closer look at Nigeria’s development today would reveal that Chief Olusegun Obasanjo did not just lay the foundation, but he took an active part in nurturing them.
He gave licenses to telecommunication operators to roll out GSM sim cards for Nigerians thereby breaking the monopoly of NITEL The current tech development in Nigeria could not have been possible without GSM.
He established the EFCC and ICPC to fight institutional corruption which was very successful.
He established the Justice Oputa panel to reconcile Nigerians who were aggrieved and it helped in healing a lot of wounds.
Workers’ life after retirement would have remained uncertain if not for his establishment of the Pension Reform Act in 2004.
He privatized the power sector leading to the unbundling of NEPA into Generation companies, Transmission companies, and Distribution companies that we have today.
Under the leadership of President Olusegun Obasanjo (GCFR), he recognized that small and medium enterprises are major contributors to the diversification of our economy, and a vital tool for the creation of wealth, poverty alleviation, employment generation, and rural development and as such created the Small and Medium Development Agency of Nigeria(SMEDAN).
In 1977, he formed the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), organized the second World Black and African Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC ’77), established the Egbin, Ughelli, and Afam thermal power stations; set up the Corrupt Practice Bureau; and through his government’s efforts, independence was achieved for Angola and later Zimbabwe.
He introduced the National Pledge to stoke up Nigerian nationalism and indigenized the lyrics of the national anthem. He set up the Constitution Drafting Committee and the Constituent Assembly; introduced the N20 currency in honor of his friend and predecessor, the Late General Murtala Muhammed, and introduced the controversial Land Use Decree on March 29, 1978. General Obasanjo also confirmed the movement of the Federal Capital from Lagos to Abuja in accordance with the Murtala-Obasanjo policy program.
General Obasanjo was the first Head of State and Government on the African continent to ever relinquish power to a democratically elected government peacefully and voluntarily.
The single-mindedness and determination with which General Obasanjo kept to the Muhammed-Obasanjo administration’s word of handing over the reins of office to a democratically elected government and the zeal he deployed into executing the political program that terminated on October 1, 1979, impressed Nigerians and the international community at a time many military rulers elsewhere
Yekini Iskilu Ojo
He is no doubt a force to be reckoned with in Nigeria and beyond. Chief Olusegun Obasanjo is one of the most respected and influential leaders in the country and on the African continent.
Described by many as one of the luckiest Nigerians, as he had the privilege of leading the country twice – first as a military head of state and later as an elected president, he did his best to better a lot of Nigerians while in office.
More than 14 years after leaving office, the 84-year-old elder statesman still commands respect from many Nigerians because the positive impact of his leadership has not stopped reverberating. Some of his notable contributions to national development are highlighted below.
Today, the country is able to join the growing number of countries rolling out 5G network, the latest advancement in wireless technology, because the Obasanjo administration laid the foundation 20 years ago by kick-starting the Global System for Mobile Communications revolution.
The National President, National Association of Telecoms Subscribers, Chief Adeolu Ogunbanjo, was quoted in an October 16, 2021 report by PUNCH as saying, “GSM has been a blessing and this was brought about by the Obasanjo administration; he blazed the trail and gave us GSM to align with the rest of the world. That was something commendable and we should continue to appreciate him for this.”
Another remarkable feat the Obasanjo-led government achieved was the debt relief he secured for Nigeria. He was relentless and undaunted in his efforts to tackle the country’s external debt burden of about $36 billion, most of which was owed to the Paris Club creditors. In October 2015, Nigeria and the Paris Club announced a final agreement for debt relief worth $18 billion and an overall reduction of Nigeria’s debt stock by $30 billion. The deal was completed on April 21, 2006, when Nigeria made its final payment and its books were cleared of any Paris Club debt, according to the Center for Global Development.
Obasanjo, in his address to the nation on June 30, 2005, said, “This debt relief offered to us, I am pleased and proud to say, is the direct product of our relentless and persistent endeavor over the past six years.”
A few months ago, the country celebrated the passage of the much-delayed Petroleum Industry Bill, which seeks to reform the oil and gas industry.
It is worthy of note that the reform efforts started in April 2000, when Obasanjo inaugurated the Oil and Gas Reform Implementation Committee, with a mandate to review and streamline all petroleum laws and advise on establishing a regulatory framework for the sector.
Out of office, Obasanjo has continued to show his commitment to the country’s development in word and deed. He has written at least a letter to every president after him, voicing his concerns about critical national issues.
Love him or loathe him, Obasanjo has distinguished himself as one of Nigeria’s, nay Africa’s, living legends.
To many, National development is about philanthropic ideas such as ‘Doing something for humanity, ‘Changing the world for better, ‘Improving the lives of the poor, or even the ‘Leave no one behind’ principle of global development.
National development does not necessarily follow these morals, it is sometimes the wolf in sheep clothing but one thing is clear, you’d see through that sheep sooner rather than later.
In practice, the process of development involves a great number of interactions between actors of different status with varying resources and goals, but “the endpoint of any developmental thinking or process must be the welfare and wellbeing of the people themselves”.
Beginning with the colonial development plan (1958-1968), Nigeria has a unique background in national development planning— Long-term prejudice, political instability, and corruption, among other things, are stumbling blocks to Nigeria’s development.
Nigeria has tried to promote national development through major strategic initiatives – such as the Structural Adjustment Programme; the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy; the Strategy for Attaining the Millennium Development Goals; and the 7-Point Agenda – which were not seen to have been effectively implemented mainly as they lacked the critical essence of continuity as administrations changed.
With the 1979 election, while still a military dictator, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo redefined national development in modern-day Nigeria by handing over the authority of the country to the newly elected civilian president, Shehu Shagari.
Despite protesting his innocence, he was arrested in 1995 and convicted of being a part of a planned coup against the Abacha dictatorship. He achieved a higher level of spirituality while imprisoned, with providential having a profound influence on his eventual worldview.
The reality that the lessons and pathways built yesterday define our course today necessitates a review of some of the initiatives taken by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo to put Nigeria on the road to inclusive development.
To combat corruption in Nigeria, Obasanjo established the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), as well as strengthening the Code of Conduct Bureau, after inheriting a deeply divided, indebted, corrupt, and insecure country.
The depoliticization of the military, as well as the expansion of the police and mobilization of the army to battle widespread ethnic, religious, and separatist violence, produced results that were not followed up on by later administrations.
To reduce the country’s spiraling debt, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo privatized various public firms while receiving an $18 billion debt relief from the Paris and London clubs.
Influenced by Pan-Africanist ideas, he was a keen supporter of the formation of the African Union and served as its chair from 2004 to 2006.
Obasanjo, who has been dubbed “one of the great figures of the second generation of post-colonial African leaders,” has been lauded for overseeing Nigeria’s transition to representative democracy in the 1970s as well as his Pan-African efforts to promote cooperation not only within the country but across the continent.
Obasanjo sought to alleviate poverty, reduce government corruption, and establish a democratic system which he followed with action, results of which we still see today in form of the institutions he established.
If there is one thing that Chief Olusegun Obasanjo will be remembered for, it will be his part in ensuring that Nigeria’s telecoms sector thrived.
What then is our takeaway from all this?
A lot I must say, but one thing I’d take away from all these is that development is only possible if there is a willingness from the very tip of power to make sure it happens.
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo Exemplifies this narrative.
Despite rapid and extensive advancements in areas such as science, technology, and medicine over the past half a century, education is one of the few sectors that a time traveler from the first industrial revolution would still recognize. Apart from marginal innovations, and despite islands of excellence in research and a few experimental models, the fundamental model used in the vast majority of teaching and learning spaces has not changed for centuries. This is why the sector has been primed for disruption for decades.
Although disruption may seem negative by definition to the uninitiated or ideologically trapped, the field of innovation, however, demonstrates that systems that are receptive to disruption are rendered thus by outdated offerings, social conditions, and the needs of the market; a study of radical innovations also reveals that such disruptions are often born outside the boundaries of the traditional system. In Nigeria, that disruptor is the vibrant private sector, which has read and adapted to the societal landscape, of which education should be part.
When covid-19 struck, the system behaved the way all rigid systems do: it battened down the hatches and reverted to what it considers it’s core. Curriculum continuity and curriculum centricity were its guiding lights. And when experts in the field measured the losses, metrics were largely done against curriculum completion levels. That showed the emergence of the digital elite, as those with access to technology could continue learning while those less technologically inclined could not.
This poses some interesting questions: The mind naturally wanders to whether learning and education ground to a halt with previous crises, when technology was less evolved. Did society, at all its levels, simply stop learning? It seems unlikely. The resultant questions are even more probing: why do we even have an education system in the first place? What role should it play in society, and how may it be designed in a more agile, less fragile way? And, critically, who will lead the charge?”
Education is traditionally considered to be a public good, but to depend on the government alone for quality education is to deprive society of the potential richness of potential offerings. “This is especially critical in a country like Nigeria, where a number of significant characteristics are present to advance education beyond a government-centric paradigm, and where the public good may be served by many role players. Indeed, a vibrant society, like any healthy system, allows for requisite variety and a spectrum of diversity essential for multiple perspectives and networked stability for greater sustainability.
However, the future is often mistakenly interpreted as a single entity on a linear development path; in other words, the future is often conceived of as one thing. Consider, for example, the language of ‘the’ future of education. “But in strategic foresight or scenario thinking, multiple futures are always recognized, and one reason for this is that more than one future is always possible and the seeds of various futures already exist. As such, depending on the drivers of complexity, such as choice and speed, a spectrum of possible futures may be produced, even from the current trends alone – not to mention the trends yet to come!
Another cogent reason for assuming multiple futures is that no single reality can explain even the present: Is education today public or private? Is it online or in-person? Is it available to the rich or the poor? Is it available to all or some? In all those cases, the answer is an incontrovertible ‘both’. The future, therefore, will equally reveal a spectrum of reality.”
Education is thus entering an era of increasing privatization and therefore growing competition, and while some form of competition has always existed, even among public education providers, this new stage will see a much sharper focus and notable advancements in customer service. Primary, secondary and tertiary schools have always had to serve customers, but the power differential between customer and provider is shifting in a marked way. Increased private sector participation will lead to increased options for the customer, and that will necessitate a vastly overdue understanding of real and real-time customer needs.
The Educational Competitive Model reveals an intricate framework of seven key dimensions of educational competitiveness: the mental and intellectual domain, the physical dimensions of education, the personal, social and cultural domains, the professional domain, the educational infrastructure, the philosophical drivers and, of course, the brand and prestige. It is anticipated that these elements will operate at various levels of significance for various strata of education, but that all will be relevant to some degree for all offerings, from early childhood development through to masters and Ph.D. levels. The model proposes that a holistic competitive strategy in private education must encompass all seven elements.
There will be a rapid emergence of new brands of educational providers. In the traditional system, it was mainly the age of the institution, its geographical location and its notable alumni that established its reputation, and such a reputation took many decades, sometimes even centuries to cultivate.” Today, however, the phenomenon of ‘unicorn companies’ (privately owned with $1-billion plus valuations) have shown that reputations can be established in previously unimagined timeframes. Despite global calls for equality, status is an obdurate dimension of societal architecture, and brands in education will serve this universal human need.
Private providers will also have to keep up and will need a deep talent pool to respond to notable shifts. Already members of the new generation of ‘coronials’ have proven themselves to be autodidactic and capable of absorbing content in non-linear ways, often a-synchronous with the teaching schedule.
Even within private education itself, which will not be available to all, a spectrum of options will emerge. It may be reasonably expected that private providers will work towards differentiation, and different institutions will likely specialize in a selection of domains in order to compete. Hence, it is also conceivable that future students, at all levels, will choose different providers for different services.
In that scenario, students will not “attend” only one but many simultaneous institutions: A student may attend mental and intellectual development at an international institution while procuring physical development closer to home where physical infrastructure may be accessed more conveniently. This option will become increasingly available as international providers enter the Nigerian market, as has already started to occur. It is also a minor leap for the imagination to see that, even within the same institution, different models will be offered on the educational menu. Some will certainly offer more comprehensive menus than others and many will have modular offerings, meaning that some providers will allow students to make a selection from the domains, with a commensurate modular pricing structure.
We must admit that fact the government monopoly on education is rapidly coming to an end. Despite potential ideological entrenchment which emphasizes the risks of competition, the pitfalls of more private sector participation, and the merits of equality, the attractiveness of the opportunities in the Nigerian education sector will lead to a spectrum of disruptive and highly competitive educational offerings. Such sectoral evolution may contribute greatly to much-needed innovation. Nor will nostalgia for the school days of yore or ensconcing of the outdated model offer sustainable relief. For a system that has been disruption-receptive for decades, the perfect storm has made landfall.
The state of Nigerian roads poses an economic emergency because transportation of goods and services from producer to consumer constitutes the lubricant of the economy. And since more than 90 percent of transportation in Nigeria is done on roads, good roads are sine qua non to economic growth and development.
But it is obvious that the attention given to roads is not adequate to oil the economy. Many Nigerian roads are still not paved, which makes it harder to boost the transport industry.
Depending on the source of statistics, Nigeria can boast of between 193,000 and 195,000 kilometers of roads, segmented into Trunk “A”, Trunk “B”, and Trunk “C”.
According to the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), Nigeria has about 195,000 km of road network out of which a proportion of about 32,000 km are federal roads while 31,000km are state roads; local government roads make up 132,000 kilometers, divided into 774 areas.
Out of this, only about 60,000km is paved, constituting 30.7 percent. Yet, of the paved roads, large proportions are in a very poor, unacceptable condition due to insufficient investment and lack of adequate maintenance.
It is this large portion of dilapidated roads, which make many impassable that inform other sources to contend that barely 28,980km (15 percent) is paved.
Considering the fact that Nigeria has ratified the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), the state of the country’s roads has implications for competitiveness as the entire continent evolves into one market. The poor quality of Nigerian roads acts as a stumbling block to development in the country.
A World Bank assessment showed that road users bear the true cost of poor road maintenance in Nigeria. Essentially, bad roads mean that drivers spend more on their cars and road users spend more on transport fares. Transporting goods across the country also becomes more expensive, contributing to Nigeria’s long-term inflation problem. The effect is lower consumption of goods and services, especially in rural areas; and with a little over 50 percent of the population situated in rural areas, the effect on trade cannot be favorable.
Further afield in the AfCFTA market, the bad roads situation in the country may engender reduced competitiveness for Nigerian goods, especially agricultural products consequent to transportation cost implications, as well as wastage consequent to long hours conveying perishable goods from farm to market.
So, increased investment in paving and maintaining roads would help mitigate high transport costs, which will trickle down to the effect of lower prices in the economy, particularly in hard-to-reach rural areas, and by extension, the wider AfCFTA market.
A World Bank working paper points to this precise effect, showing that by upgrading the primary road network connecting major cities, countries in Sub-Saharan Africa can increase regional trade by $250 billion in 5 years.
A highway network can be likened to the human cardiovascular system. Good pavement and minimal construction zones keep a local economy moving, healthy, and growing, but potholes and slow-moving construction projects are like plaques that render regional commerce sclerotic.
When interstate highways are pockmarked by rough, vehicle-ruining roads, it takes longer to deliver goods in and out of the region. Delivery vehicles will be damaged more often (flat tires, bent tire rims, broken axles, etc.) and need more repairs.
Labour and fuel costs increase when traffic moves slowly, due, simply too bad conditions, or lane closures during extended resurfacing projects – causing drivers, their goods, and passengers to endure more time per trip. For a promising and competitive AfCFTA market, slow delivery and high cost of goods owing to high transportation costs would easily put Nigerian businessmen and women out of competition.
Many rural areas are already hard to reach because they are far away from central cities and state capitals. Such areas are usually cut off because of the distance needed to cover to reach them, and also because the roads leading to these areas are not paved thereby making it much harder to access them. Consequently, these areas have challenges and limitations in getting essential goods, commodities, and services delivered to them. The difficulty in accessing these areas also reduces their chances for commercialization and industrialization.
When rural China was made accessible by improved road conditions, for example, it resulted in lower transport costs, which in turn resulted in increased household income. Rural areas saw increases in per capita consumption as a result of increased road investments which opened rural areas to domestic and international markets.
Imagine how many years of manhours, goods, and services have been wasted on the Lagos/Badagry road or the Mokwa-Bida-Lambata road that connects the South-west to the North due to neglect over the past decade.