BY OMONIYI SALAUDEEN
Chief Supo Sonibare belongs to the Awo School of Thought and will not for any reason compromise the old ideology of the late sage. In this interview, the chieftain of the Afenifere gives an outline of some basic issues the Buhari administration needs to address urgently to achieve a stable polity. Excerpts:
How do you see the sudden resurgence of agitation for Biafra?
I think we need to restructure in a way and manner that will reduce struggle for resources at the centre. What some of us in Afenifere have actually suggested is a three-tier government-federal government, regional government (consisting of six geo-political zones) and states. Once you have created states, you can’t wish them away. The Federal Government will be an entity that will guarantee security by maintaining the army and ensuring protection of common interest of all the regions.
The reason Afenifere has suggested regional government is that the Federal Government at the moment is performing functions of the various states. We think those functions can be better performed by the regional government, while we allow regions to create as many states as their resources can cater for. Ultimately, I think we will still need to go back to the issue of devolution of power.
The national confab came up with resolutions and suggestions that can empower the various entities in Nigeria. I think this government will be best advised to look into the resolutions of that confab. We need to devolve power to enable people to hold individual politicians within their geo-political zones responsible for corrupt practices. The problem we have now is that there is youth unemployment and it is not too difficult for people who see a state of hopelessness in the Nigerian state to be convinced that if they are in charge of managing their resources, their economic wellbeing will be improved. So, I think agitation for self determination is probably based on people’s desire to manage their own resources. The issue of Nigeria being one entity is fairly settled provided everyone sees fairness with the entity. This is not to say that you won’t find individual agitation for self determination.
But if the entity is fair to all, the majority will see their interest better protected in that fair entity. One way of actually showing fairness is to allow component parts to manage their own resources. That way, they won’t hold any part of the country responsible for mismanagement of their resources. I think we need to look into the issue of devolution and see how we fare on that. Devolution is very critical even in countries that are more developed than we are. In the United Kingdom, for instance, Scotland is asking for devolution. So, it is not surprising that people are asking for self determination. I am still very convinced that if we devolve power very quickly, it will be easy to maintain the Nigerian state.
Looking at the revelations coming out of the arms scandal involving the former national security adviser, do you think the present anti-corruption crusade can actually lead Nigeria out of the woods?
Corruption is pervasive and endemic. If government is serious about the issue of infrastructural deficit that we have, I think corruption has to be in the agenda of any government that is in place in Nigeria. I think combating corruption is a critical agenda to pursue. Apart from combating corruption, they also have to reduce the cost of running the government. It is also critical that the process of combating corruption does not appear selective. I accept the premise that it is better to be selective than not to do it at all. If government can actually combat corruption, I think we can address some of the root causes of our stunted development provided the government has a blueprint on economic management. The blueprint is not yet out. A lot of us believe government can still cut the cost of running the government.
One will hope that the National Assembly will also cut the cost of exercising legislative functions beyond what we have heard them do. We are in dire straights. Our income has dropped to half of what it was two years ago. The question to ask now is whether or not the foreign exchange we are earning is being spent on subsidizing fuel. Yes, we need to combat corruption. But if we don’t get the economy right, then the poverty level will be such that it will be difficult to manage the nation state. It is important to focus on the economic management of the country as well as corruption.
The budget presented by President Muhammadu Buhari has already given some indications of a hard time in this new fiscal year with the proposed Naira devaluation and the attendant austerity measure. What’s the hope for the common man?
I am from the economic school of thought that disagrees with devaluation approach to economic management. We have done that for about 20 years, I have not seen the real benefits. Over 80 percent of our earning depends on oil which price is not determined by us. So, I don’t think devaluation is the best way forward. The poor and the subordinate class in this country have not had any benefit of such move over the years. At present, majority of Nigerians are part of the underclass, earning less than $1 daily. So, there is no austerity measure that can be put in place that will assuage majority of Nigerians. What is important is for the government to address the issue of developing our agricultural base, open up the Nigerian market, and have some liberal approach to the management of our foreign exchange.
One will hope that with the renewed fight against corruption, the rent economy that allows wrong use of foreign exchange and the malpractices that drain our resources will be done away with. We also need to focus on having better educational system to take care of manpower base of the country to drive the economy. For several years, our educational system has been very poor. We may need to recruit people from other countries to assist us at the stage that we are now because I don’t believe we have enough manpower resources to be able to man our educational system to the standard we had in the 60s and 70s.
Since some of us were born, the common attitude of government is to tell Nigerians to prepare for hard times. When will the common man actually feel the positive impact of government?
This time around, government strategy should include not just doling out N5,000 for unemployed graduates; it should also include focusing on meeting our infrastructural deficit requirements to an extent that is beyond what has been done by previous regimes. It should focus on education and not to make it expensive. The kind of fees being paid in some universities is not affordable to majority of Nigerians. We need to allow people from economically disadvantaged background to be able to, at least, send their children to school. If we are able to do that, then we will be able to alleviate the effects of austerity measures on the poor in the society, while at the same time we reduce government expenditure. In any event, government’s expenditure has always been shared by the few. So, the austerity measure will only affect those taking our money for themselves and their families. Apart from Lagos and Abuja where we buy petrol at controlled price, people pay higher prices for petrol. So, if you give the people a choice between liberalization of the petroleum sector and accessible education and healthcare delivery, I am sure they will support liberalization policy because there is more real value and obvious larger reach for the poor in the polity than petroleum subsidy.
In the past, diesel was thought to be a critical element in haulage business, but it’s been liberalized for some time now and the price has actually dropped from what it was when it was being subsidized. I think government should look again and review policy of subsidizing fuel just for the rich because the affluent ones are actually the ones getting the best benefits of petroleum subsidy.
Poverty is the root of general restiveness in the country. What is the way forward?
Yes, almost every state has some degree of restiveness. It is critical that the government, as a matter of urgency, begins to implement quickly, policies that will alleviate the hardship on the poor in our society. We need a mass employment project. In particular, government needs to achieve mass employment project in densely populated states so that we can somehow put our young restive populace in the form of employment that will enable them have access to some resources. Almost every year, we are adding more eligible youth that are looking for jobs either after leaving secondary school or tertiary institution. The problem is compounded every month, every day, every hour. Of course, putting in measures now will not resolve the entire trend totally, but at least we begin to reduce the number of restive unemployed youths who, if we don’t do something quickly, will resort to some self help to maintain some forms of existence. So, government needs to address those issues fairly very quickly. That issue is even more critical than the issue of subsidy.
A government that came in under the mantra of change has spent six months in office and yet it has not unveiled its blueprint on the economy. Can the nation afford the luxury of prolonged waiting?
I am sure the president himself is aware of the need to make a difference as quickly as possible. But I suppose at the end of the day, it is better to be late and actually have an impact on the lives of the people than to urgently attempt to do something without good results. At the end of the day, he will be judged by whatever success he is able to achieve after, may be, a two-year period. He’s brought a novel approach to governance and obviously he will take responsibility for the consequences of the approach he’s brought and from the results that emanates from governance. We will soon begin to see the results of all the choices he has made.
How do you see the call by the PDP for a truth commission on corruption in Nigeria?
At some stage, there has to be some legislation that deals with how we apply public funds to political parties’ affairs. We see political party activities that we all know have some support of public funds. I think this cuts across all political parties. So, the question is ‘how do we reduce public funding for political parties?’ Public funds belong to all of us collectively and it is not all of us that belong to political parties. All of us know that all political parties have some degree of funding. At the end of the day, there should be some consensus of all stakeholders in Nigeria about private funding for political parties. There must be some degree of transparency that allows us to trace how political parties are able to raise funds for campaigns and activities. We need to actually sit down at some stage and address that issue of funding because really, funds that should have been used for health, education and other needs of the society are being used by political parties for their activities.
In view of revelations coming from the trial of former NSA, Sambo Dasuki, is there any likelihood of former President Goodluck Jonathan being called upon to explain his role in the disbursement of security funds because the buck stops on his table?
There is a stage of responsibility of whoever is in charge of public affairs at any point in time. Then, there is a degree of responsibility for individual ministers and head of security outfit and the money put under their care. The point we are now is the allegation against the former national security adviser. I will wait to see what his defense is. We have to wait and see that the sums are actually what the ex-NSA acknowledged that he disbursed. So, we should wait and see the outcome of the process. It will be a good thing for us to go back to the beginning of this republic and look into how the office of the NSA operated prior to the appointment of Dasuki so that we can be sure there was no template in place that he followed. For me, it appears incredible that disbursement of funds can be done in such a careless manner. We should be fair to Dasuki to hear his own defense before apportioning blame or exonerating any individual.
If the president is found culpable in all of these, can the former president be charged with corruption?
Yes, if it can be proved that the president has engaged in corrupt practices. Government can bring him to trial once he is no longer president.
It appears Afenifere is tending towards a particular political ideology. Isn’t it?
Afenifere is always of a left-to-the-centre ideology. Afenifere is Action Group with a left-to-the-centre ideology. Individuals within it may go in any direction they elect, Afenifere is a Yoruba description of a social democratic movement. It is a left-to-the-centre political movement. As I said, Afenifere was a name for Action Group. Those of us that joined Afenifere joined because the attraction to us was its left-to-the-centre political persuasion. Any other attempt to transform Afenifere to something else will not work.
In the run up to the last election, a section of Afenifere opted for the Social Democratic Party (SDP) of which you are a member.
(Cuts in)..Yes, SDP was a party that Afenifere had adopted. It is not even a section; the group had adopted SDP as a political party. What actually happened was that when there was a move to have a coalition of political parties to oppose PDP, Afenifere was at the forefront of that initiative in 2009. If you remember, the one that was being attempted at that time was a mega party arrangement which included President Buhari. It was that initiative that led to the alliance of Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and other groups that came together to form All Progressives Congress (APC). We were involved in it, but then, the other groups decided to continue and we were not invited. So, we stayed in our SDP. Some of us have personal relationships with President Buhari from the previous attempts he made to be president. Afenifere had actually supported him twice in his efforts to be president. He is not a stranger to our group. But when last year’s election approached, Afeniere felt that devolution of power was actually what can reduce the propensity of leaders at the centre to take chunks out of the system. We looked at the various attempts to combat corruption, which had failed.
The philosophy of Chief Awolowo was devolution of power to the entities within the federal structure. Those of us in Afenifere subscribed to that political structuring as the covenant for a stable Nigeria. So, we championed a national conference and we thought any candidate subscribing to should be supported by the group. That was what happened at that time. And President Buhari had supported the issue of national conference before and had even engaged Afenifere. He had been with Afenifere to ask for their support. Like I said, some of us had relationships with him but we didn’t really engage the relationship of Afenifere. But President Jonathan came to them to say that he had convened the national confab as he had promised and was willing to implement all the resolutions.
Why was the group divided on the issue of which candidate to support?
There were three schools of thoughts-those who didn’t believe Jonathan was going to implement the confab report, those who felt Jonathan had done what they wanted by convening the national conference and those who didn’t want to hear anything about Jonathan whether he was doing good or not. Southwest was divided into those three groups. As a matter of fact, Southwest was the only zone where you have a bit of balance in the voting pattern. Whatever it is, we have President Buhari now who will be there for the next four years. It is in our own collective interest to do what we can for the government to succeed because failure of government will have an impact on everyone of us whether you supported him or not.
0 comments :
Post a Comment