Alleviating Poverty in Nigeria
By Anthony Maduagwu ( aka -Toniman )
The Nigerian government
is once again embarking on another
attempt to alleviate poverty. This
present one looks like it is
heading the same way the past
ones headed and subsequently failed.
Amongst the reasons why the past
poverty alleviation attempts failed were - (
1 ) the politics of personal rule
- a distinctive type of
political system in which the
rivalries and struggles of powerful
and willful men, rather than
impersonal institutions, ideologies, public
policies, or class interests, are
fundamental in shaping political life.
It is a monopolistic politics as
against pluralistic or multiparty politics.
It is usually a civilian one - party
state or a military dictatorship (
There is overwhelming believe that
Obasanjo' PDP government is shifting
towards a full blown one - party state
). It is the politics of Big -
Men who are a considerable distance
from the ordinary people. Politics of
no accountability, transparency and
responsibility. Other practices in personal
government are conspiracy, factional
politics, clientelism, and corruption, purges and
rehabilitations and secession manoeuvres. In this
type of monopolistic politics there is
little or no time for the
governed. When the governed, the
ordinary people, are eventually remembered,
a not - well - thought of system is
put in place to alleviate their
sufferings. At the end the
beneficiaries of the systems ( Poverty
Alleviation Programmes ) are the same big -
men that the political system is made -
up of. Nigerian politics since
independence ( perhaps, with the
exception of the Balewa government )
to the last military rule have
been monopolistic in practice. Hence
the lukewarm attitudes towards the
impoverished majority and the badly
managed programmes that supposed to
alleviate their sufferings.
( 2 ) the top-down-big-man from Lagos
(and now Abuja) approach - the master
and servant relationships associated with
the programmes to alleviate poverty.
Government claims to know and
understand what poverty is, who the
poor are and what they need in
order to alleviate their poverty. The
Abuja big men can not possibly
claim to understand what it is
to be poor. Only the poor
understands poverty and it is also
the poor that knows how their
poverty could be alleviated. A sick
man knows where it hurts him. So
it stands to reason that the
viable alternative to the big man
telling the small man what to
do, is the ordinary man telling
the big man his problems and how
he thinks the problems could be
solved. The fact is that the
poor usually have quite good
perceptions of their own needs and
goals and of what would be
required to satisfy and make progress
toward them. According to the theory
of Humble Approach to Development, it
is appropriate for government "to
ensure their citizen's active participation
in formulating and implementing projects
of which they are supposed to be
the beneficiaries".
Government should not presume that
they know what will benefit the
poor better than the poor themselves.
"Projects should be embarked upon
because the people need them., not
because some contractors (who stands to
profit from the projects) are pushing
for them. If development is about
people, it cannot happen without the
participation of the people. The
citizens should clarify their own
needs and priorities. They should
speak up and stand up for what
they consider their priorities, and
speak and act against white elephant
projects". It is also reasonable
that before forms and loans are
dished out to the public, the
government should do well to take
stock of the past attempts at
alleviating poverty in this country.
The point is that when a program
has been failing each time it is
attempted, the ideal thing to do
would be to study the past
attempts to see where the mistakes
lies. The concept of the above
analysis is sometimes referred to as -
participatory development, bottom - up,
sustainable livelihoods, humble development
approach, and so on.
Past Attempts to Alleviate Poverty
in Nigeria
Past governments have engaged in the
past time of glorifying poverty
alleviation on the pages of newspapers
and news conferences but have failed
to deliver. The earliest poverty
alleviation programmes were the 1972
Gen. Yakubu Gowon's National Accelerated
Food Production Programme and the
Nigerian Agricultural and Co-operative Bank,
entirely devoted to funding agriculture.
The NAFPP turned out to be a
colossal waste and nothing was
achieved. There was the much
publicised Operation Feed the Nation
in 1976 by the then military
strong-man, Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo,
"which expended much money and
effort in getting ill - prepared university
undergraduates to go to the rural
areas to teach the peasants farmers
how to farm. A kind of teaching
an old dog a new trick. A
theoretical farming graduate teaching a
farmer, who makes his/her living out
of farming, how to farm. The
scheme's only success was in creating
awareness of food shortage and the
need to tackle the problem.
The 1979 Shehu Shagari's Green
Revolution Programme had the twin
objectives of curtailing food importation
while boosting crop and fibre
production. The overall objective was
big (mechanised) farming. " Many senior civil
and military officers, both in and
out of office, used their access
to the state to the advantage of
the wide range of facilities committed
to the Green Revolution. These bureaucrats -
cum - farmers were also joined by many
private businessmen. Some new-breed farmers
were only interested in getting
Certificate of Occupancy for large
tracks of land. The land can
then be used for speculative purposes,
for example, as collateral for
securing loans". When the programme
ended in 1983, 2 billion naira tax
payers' money was wasted. That is
more than two hundred billion naira
in today's exchange rate.
Buhari's government introduced the Go
Back to Land programme with variations
such as the former Rivers - State
governor, Fidelis Oyakhilome's School to
Land programme and his Lagos - State
counterpart, Gbolahan Mudashiru's Graduates
Farming Scheme. Initially the Oyakhilome's
scheme worked wonders in Rivers, made
headline news in some newspapers. But
like everything, Nigerian, it fizzled
out and died. There is a believe
that one of the major reasons
for the failure of all these
agricultural/poverty reduction programmes was
that they were based on "faulty
philosophy". The belief is that
food programmes such as the Gen.
Gowon's National Accelerated Food Production
Programme; the Gen. Obasanjo's Operation
Feed the Nation; the Shehu Shagari's
Green Revolution, and the Gen.
Buhari's Go Back to Land Programme
"failed because of the far - fetched
objectives of making farmers out of
all Nigerians, and that no country
attains self - sufficiency in food by
seeking to turn all its citizens in
to farmers, that farming should be
left for those whose business it
is to farm".
In 1986 Gen. Babangida established
the Directorate of Food, Roads and
Rural Infrastructure ( DFRRI ) for rural
development. This was meant to provide
feeder roads, electricity, and potable water and toilet
facilities for the rural dwellers. The
projects gulped N1.9b ( about N80 billion
today's value ) without Nigerians benefiting
from them. Various projects were set
up for poverty alleviation purposes.
Amongst them, are the Peoples Bank
of Nigeria and the Community Bank
of Nigeria. Neither did these
financial institutions lived up to
their expectations, nor did they
actualised their aims and purposes.
Babangida's wife, Maryam, also went in
to the business of caring for
the Nigerian poor. She set up
Better Life Programme and ended up
making millionaires out of the BLP
officials and friends. The better life
for rural women became the better
life for rich women. The Nigerian
poor did not know what hit them,
before the poor could say "Food
At Last", the food was taken
away from them, they were left
gapping and hungry as usual.
In 1993 Abacha and his wife found
a gold - mine in the business of
pretending to care for the poor.
The Family Support Programme and the
Family Economic Advancement Programme were
set up. The Nigerian poor, again,
were taking for a ride. According
to the Tell magazine of 3/8/98
"FSP gulped over N10 billion of
tax payers money at a time her
husband, Abacha, was retrenching hapless
civil servants
nation-wide".
Would this present measure by
Obasanjo be any different? Would there
be succour at last for the poor?
The previous measures all started like
today's own. The Better Life for
Rural Women, the Family Support
Programme and the Peoples Bank were
particularly interesting because they were
directed to the poor. Shame that
the government's objectives and purposes
ran parallel to the Nigerian poor
expectations. Shame that they were
bent on taking the Nigerian poor
for a ride.
Corruption and Poverty Alleviation
I was one of the Nigerians
who sincerely believed in Babangida's
economic policies. When, in 1986, he
embarked on the structural adjustment
programmes and some people criticised
the idea, I was one of those
who believed Nigeria needed SAPs
because I had (and still have)
the opinion that if each time
"Peter" (Nigeria) is in need of
money he goes to his neighbour
"Paul" (USA or Europe) to lend
him some money and, frequently, Peter
does not honour his debt repayment,
the neighbour, Paul, has the moral
and economic right to seat the
frequent borrower down to discuss the
terms of the next lending. Terms
such as, Peter, no, I am not
lending you money this time unless
you tell me what you intend to
do with the money, ( for I believe
you have not been using the
previous lending judiciously well, and
that is why you keep coming back
for more and also you have not
been honouring your debts) and if
I do not like your plan, I
will advise you on what I think
will benefit you and me. On take
it or leave it bases. I
understand that bilateral and/or
multilateral lending is not as clear
cut as is put here. There are
much more to country lending than
just Peter and Paul.
The fact was that Babangida
inherited a steadily declining economy
from his predecessor, Buhari, who ran
out of new ideas on how to
revamp the recalcitrant economy. The
regime's counter - trading economic policy
(exchange of oil for raw - materials, spare
- parts, machinery and consumer goods)
was worsening the economy, international
debts were not being honoured and
IMF conditionalities did not appeal to
Buhari and Idiagbon. Babangida implemented
the conditionalities and the rest as
they say is history. Nigerians are
quick to criticise SAPs for the
country's woes but the question is,
did SAPs fail Nigeria or did
Nigeria fail SAPs? I think Babangida
failed Nigerians, not the other way
round. Babangida wasted more than 100
billion naira in phantom projects.
Projects such as his wife's Better
Life Programmes for the poor, DFRRI,
People's Bank of Nigeria, two
democratic transition experiments, big time
corruption in which members of the Babangida
regime enriched themselves. So it goes
without saying that according to the
book implementation of SAPs would do
any country good.
When also the Peoples Bank was
established, I supported the august
idea, hoping that the measure would
do well to ease the plight of
the Nigerian poor.
My optimism was premised on the
knowledge that the idea had been
tried and tested somewhere in the
world and it worked and, guess
what, the idea is still thriving
now as you are reading this
article. The country in question is
Bangladesh and their own Peoples Bank
is called Grameen Bank. In fact
Nigeria got the idea of the
Peoples Bank, as an effective way
of alleviating poverty, from the
Bangladesh's Grameen Bank. So one is
forced to ask why is it that
when something is working perfectly
well in one country, when the idea
is imported to Nigeria it stops
working. As my mother used to
say, it is not what you do,
but how you do it. The Nigerian
problems lie in the lacklustre attitudes
to execution of government projects.
If Obasanjo can correct that ugly
aspect of the Nigerian factor
(lacklustre execution), the country's
problem is half solved. A tall
order, maybe, but the success of
this country movement forward or
backward hinges on three things :
ideas, implementations and executions.
Had Buhari been honest in his
management of the petroleum trust
fund, PTF, the amount of money
that was in his disposal, he
would have alleviated Nigerian poverty
ten fold. Obasanjo has earmarked N10
billion to fight poverty, but
according to a newsmagazine report ( Newswatch
), Buhari had an average of N52
billion every year to spend on
Nigeria. At the end of the PTF
reign Nigerian poverty and underdevelopment
level remained the same, if not worse,
as prior to the establishment of
the PTF. Nigerians were fooled by
the two former Head of States,
Buhari and Abacha. Dr Haroum Adamu's
interim report says that N135 billion
out of the N146 billion was
squandered, possibly through over invoicing,
over supplies, supplying expired materials,
wrong project priorities, settling perceived
trouble spots, like the army and
the police, and blatant thievery.
It was like Buhari was out to
punish Nigerians for God - knows - what. As
one commentator put it, "In a
country where poverty has remained
pervasive in spite of the oil
wealth, such a huge amount could
have provided succour to millions of
Nigerians by way of the provision
of basic infrastructure. For decades
after independence, Nigerians cannot even
have potable water despite the huge
sums of money sunk into boreholes.
Safe for some few roads lopsidedly
selected by the PTF, the roads
network in the country especially in
the eastern parts, can only draw
tears even from the man with the
heart of stone. The educational sector
has even suffered more degradation
despite the intervention of the PTF
under Buhari".
The whereabouts of the Babangida's Gulf -
war windfall is still a mystery
to Nigerians. "Earnings from the
sale of crude oil during the
Gulf war was put at $12.4 billion
but government eventually declared deficits
of N21.7 billion and N35.31 billion in
1990 and 1991 respectively"
Pius Okigbo - led panel set up in
1994 to look in to the matter
"returned a verdict of a gross
abuse of public trust and of
payments that were surreptitiously and
clandestinely done". A French paper
put the overall worth of IBB at
N450 billion. IBB's ministers, generals,
contractors and indeed Abacha's ministers
and generals are all
untouchables. John Fashanu found $6
billion debt buy back scam that
was perpetrated by IBB, is
once again reminding Obasanjo that IBB
should not be left untouched.
When you see gloomy political and
economic statistics from the World
Bank or any other august body on
Nigeria, you know why and how
Nigerian came to that sorry level.
Statistics such as $250 GDP per
capital, life expectancy of about 50
with illiteracy rate of 45%, that
between 1985 - 1986, 34.1% of Nigerians
lived below poverty level. That figure
had jumped to 56% in 1996. The
same report also revealed that 26
million Nigerians were core poor in
1996 unlike 13 million in 1985,
an indication of rising poverty level.
The figure also show that 60% of
rural dwellers and close to 48%
of urban dwellers are in poverty.
The report ranked Nigeria as the
12th poorest country in the
world, ranks 146 out of 174
in the Human Development Index, has
112 per 1,000 (live births) infant
mortality, 50% of the population has
access to clean water. 40% of
Nigerians have access to electricity. (
Sunday Vanguard 30-1-00 ).
The Demise of the New Initiative
Obasanjo , perhaps to correct the
wrongs of the operation feed the
nation, or to prove to the
Nigerians that his government can
actually alleviate poverty in the
country, has vowed to improve the
welfare of the poor lot and in
so doing stop the rot of the
country's economy. But the signs are
that this quest to alleviate poverty
may go the same way as the
past attempts. It is becoming obvious
that this administration maybe paying
lip service on the question of
the plight of the Nigerian poor.
The new administration's policy and
law makers are already enmeshed in
corruption, allegations and accusations of
corruption. The rate of official
profligacy in this administration is
fast approaching the level of the
Shagari's administration. Obasanjo and his
elected members are running haywire
with the tax payers money. The
law makers "senators welfare"
allowances as contained in the
Senators Committee on Insurance and
Allied Matters Budget proposal for
insurance cover on 109 Senators are
seen by ordinary Nigerians as a
rip-off by the government. There are
also ridiculous allowances under the 2000
Recurrent Expenditure , which covers such
things as over-head costs for self,
aides, family, children and other
dependants. These, in addition to the
N5 million each law maker received for
furniture allowances. Governing Nigeria has
become business as usual. Direct and
indirect appropriation of public funds.
The poor yet again are being
left behind, as if they are not
part and parcel of Nigeria. The
big-men are sharing the spoils while
the poor looks on. Just like the
old saying - the rich are getting
richer while the poor are getting
poorer. The proposal would enrich the
law makers each to the tune of
several million naira, serving or
retired. ( See May 6 2000, Weekend
Concord for an exhaustive details
about these rip-offs )
The anti - corruption policy stance of
this administration can only be
achieved if greed mentality is
addressed through proper management of
the national wealth and through proper
implementation of the on-going poverty
alleviation programmes. The fact is
that it is poverty and greed
that breeds corruption, so it goes
without saying that where poverty is
alleviated, corrupt practices would be
minimal or alleviated as-well (for
corruption can never be eradicated,
and never has it been eradicated
in anywhere in the world). As
one commentator put it, "poverty
makes people compromise on moral
values or abandon moral values
completely. Poverty has created frustration,
loss of hope, prospects and value
for life. Loss of the meaning of
life, purpose of living, something to
live for and disillusionment about
morality because criminals are living
best. In order words, poverty is
a cause of corruption while corruption
is a consequence of poverty and
loss of moral values".
On the issue of Obasanjo's
anti-corruption crusade or selective
crusade, as it is beginning to
look like. It is true and quite
pleasing to know that the
administration is making good their promise
to fight corruption in Nigeria. Nigerian Monies
are frequently being identified and
recovered from all over the world.
It is also true, or so it
seems, that Obasanjo is carefully
picking his battles. Those battles
that he thinks he might lose, he
develops selective amnesia and refuses
to know. All the corruption probes
today seem to be centred on
Abacha and his government alone, no
probes on Babangida and Abubakar's
governments. These people are untouchables,
in the sense that Obasanjo has
chosen not to probe them. Would
Obasanjo be preaching anti - corruption
today if Abacha was alive? So
long as this administration continues
to pick their battles on whom to
probe or not to probe in their
anti-corruption stance, so long will
the sincerity of the probe remains
questionable.
Essentials of Poverty Alleviation
Inflow of foreign investments cannot
materialise in an environment of
political and economic instability.
Officially Nigeria is politically an
unstable country. As a newspaper put
it - "From the far north where
forces campaigning for sharia seem to
have all the governors in agreement,
the south-east where MASSOB holds
sway, to the south-west where the
Oodua Peoples Congress had been
championing a violent form of ethnic
nationalism, right down to the creeks
of the Niger Delta where the
youths are in a virtual state of
rebellion. The trend has been to
pull away, not pull together". As
the saying goes "money is a
coward, it does not go where it
is not safe. Nigeria is directly
calling foreign investors to come and
invest in the country, while
indirectly letting the would - be foreign
investors know that they and their
money are not safe in Nigeria.
On the economic front the government
is not making clear it's economic
policy. Past regimes had their
economic policies spelt out for
Nigerians and the world to know.
Buhari had his trade - by - barter
policy ( counter - trading ), Babangida had
his structural adjustment programmes, and
Abacha had one economic policy for
every other year until his death.
There were structural adjustment programmes
for one year, controlled economy for
another, guided economic policy for
one, and sundry others. The point
here is not whether these policies
worked or not. Nigerians know that
they all failed badly, either because
the policies were not implemented in
good faith by the Nigerian leaders
or that the economic policies were
not suitable for Nigeria The point
is that Nigerians knew which economic
policies their governments were
implementing. And that made it
possible for government watchers to
criticise, suggest an alternative (s) or
praise a particular policy (s).
Obasanjo at this moment in time
do not have a clear cut economic
policy for the Nigerian economy. As
at now all that the government
have as economic policy are poverty
alleviation and loot recovery. The
policy of providing jobs for the
unemployed without stimulating production is
tantamount to papering the wall
cracks. Money will be provided to
the states and the local governments
so as to be able to employ
the unemployed. What happens when the
stipends from the federal government
dries up or late in coming, like
it is usually the case, retrenchment
surfaces again and back to square
one. But, as an observer put it,
"if production is stimulated in a
market as huge as ours, jobs
will automatically be created. In fact
many of those who are now
unemployed are likely to become the
job creators and employers".
No doubt, Nigeria is the most
attractive country to do business with
in Africa. The largest market in
Africa, with population of around 120
million people, twenty percent of them
with qualitative education. But at
present the truth is that Nigeria,
since the Buhari government to this
day, have become the most dangerous
country to do business in. In
addition to the already enumerated
catalogues of woes that besiege the
country, political instability is the
most serious of them. Forget about
the chicken or the egg debate of
which one comes first, political
stability or economic growth. In the
developing world where foreign investment
is the pillar ( the be all and
end all ) of economic growth and
sustainable development, political stability
comes first. Investors do not feel
save in a volatile environment, hence
the Nigerian problems in attracting
them. But in the rich western
world where foreign investment is
important, but not as crucial as
is the case in the poor,
economic growth and political stability
have equal position. One compliments
the other.
Fiji's tourism, and perhaps other
aspects of economic activities, are
today suffering from lack of patronage
due to the political instability in
that country today. The country's much
needed foreign exchange is fast drying
out. The country may face
international isolation, much more serious
to the one Abacha government faced.
Why do you think the South-Africa's
Nelson Mandela chose peace and
reconciliation, in that country's post - apartheid
government, to political vendetta. The
reason (s) being to avoid instability,
protect the economy, attract new
foreign investors and encourage the
ones that flee the country, due
to apartheid, to come
back.
Recent reports have it that there
are signs that foreign companies have
completed plans to haemorrhage out of
the northern region for fear of
sharia. The report said that thousands
of employees may lose their jobs
in the process. So much for the
government that has employment creation
as one of the ways of
alleviating poverty in Nigeria. In
Kano 20 companies, amongst them,
Impresit Bakolori Plc, the KLM Royal
Dutch Airline, Pulama Associates, and
Star Model Paper Mills, are on
their way out of the region. So
much for the government that
globe-trot round the world convincing
potential investors to come to
"business friendly Nigeria" and
invest.
The instability in the Niger-Delta
region is probably the most crucial
concern for the country's survival.
This region is where the Nigeria's
GNP is based, where the country's
foreign exchange is earned, where the
country's budget is based, where this
government poverty alleviation fund is
obtained and yet the region has
one of the worst forms of
marginalisation, only second to that
of the Ibos. If Niger-Delta region
were to be in the Hausa land,
Hausas would have gone their separate
ways for long, the same goes for
the Yoruba land. I am not from
the Niger-Delta region but I know
that they have been hard done
by. The Ibos (Oguta in particular)
have a saying that "as the
rain beats the goat, the same rain
is also beating the person who
is dragging the goat". The
Niger-Delta region is the bread winner
of Nigeria, it is imperative that
the region is well fed if
everybody in the country is to
expect continuous food from the
region. Nigeria will never be at
peace as long as the Niger-Delta
question is not settled to the
satisfaction of the Deltians.
The Nigeria's age old problem of
inadequate business infrastructure is
begging for proper attention. Erratic
power supply, water, telephone, fuel
(more so as Nigeria is an oil
producing country), inefficient civil
service, inadequate crime control, poor
judicial system, inadequate primary health
care, and less than average
educational system. Nigerian infrastructure
problem is legion, but has to be
tackled squarely if any economic
development is to occur. All these
public services, since independence, have
been consistently inconsistent in their
service to the public. Another
dimension to this constant inconsistencies
in the public service is the
fact that a good number of these
public services problems are contrived.
They are being manipulated by powerful
group of people who gain enormously
by the ineffectiveness of these
authorities. NEPA and oil refineries
are two of the fingered authorities
that are being manipulated. It is
the job of the government to
fish out these elements of anti -
progress and deal with them accordingly.
To illustrate the importance of one
of the important public services,
electricity. Lets assume a would - be
business - man, lets call him
"Onesi", borrowed money from the
alleviation fund and set up a
barbing saloon. Due to the electrical
nature of the equipment in use
these days, it goes without saying
that constant supply of electricity
would be one of his major
requirements and with today's Nigeria
epileptic electricity supply, his barbers
(assuming he employed one or two
barbers to help him) and himself
could be idling about most of
the days, not making money because
there has been no electricity supply
for days. At the same time Onesi
is still expected to pay the
barbers, feed his family, pay the
land-lord and honour his loan
repayment. Power failure is just one
of the numerous epileptic public
services Onesi could be facing.
Obviously with these experience Onesi
would not be able to make ends
meet, not to talk of repaying
the loan. It would not be long
before customers, landlord and hard
life force him out of business.
The state that gave him loan to
better his life, to be out of
poverty, the same state has indirectly
aided him back to where he was,
poverty line, by relegating on the
social contracts signed by the
government and the governed.
The fact is that the Nigerian State
today is collapsing. Some say the
state has already collapsed, that the
state, like the other embattled
African states, remains relevant only
in the juridical sense. The state
has relinquished it's functions and
obligations to the highest bidder (s).
There are now 120 million miniature
states in Nigeria. Each providing ( or
hoping to provide ) their own
electricity supply, water supply, education
for their children, security of life
and property, roads and air-port ( Ibos,
through voluntary and involuntary
contributions have built roads and
air-port, to alleviate their transport
problems ). Nigerians now rely on
vigilante groups, like the Onitsha
Traders Association, the Bakassi Boys,
the O'odua People's Congress and
sundry associations, to protect their
lives and property. The state has
no legal answer to the all-powerful
armed robbers, ritual killers, hired
assassins, swindlers and sundry life
and property threatening crimes. Even
the government's Police Affairs Minister,
David Jemibewon, and the Anambra State
Governor, Chinwoke Mbadinuju, are strongly
in support of vigilante alternative to
the proper rule of law. Their
support for illegal methods of
combating crimes in Nigeria demonstrates
the height of loss of confidence
in the ability of the government,
they are serving, to provide
sufficient security for lives and property.
Proper rule of law is primary
for economic growth and development.
This, not only ensures life and
personal security, it also provides a
stable framework of rights and
obligations which can help to reduce
political risk to investors and to
cut down transportation costs. Lack of
proper rule of law not only
drives away foreign businesses, but
also hinders domestic businesses. Business
do not thrive in an environment
of unchecked abuses of political
power, unchecked violence by security
personnel, and unchecked corruption ( official
and non-official ). In the case of
unchecked corruption, the poor are
regularly forced to pay a premium
for public goods and basic services,
such as access to education, water,
public transport, health-care, medicines,
and official information. The 1997
World Development Report concluded that
markets cannot exist without effective
property rights, and that effective
property rights depend upon fulfilling
three conditions - "protection from theft,
violence, and other acts of
prediction; protection from arbitrary
government actions - ranging from unpredictable,
ad hoc regulations and taxes to
outright corruption - that disrupt business
activity; and a reasonably fair and
predictable
judiciary".
So the watch words are that
before doling out funds to the would -
be business people, the good
governance equations have to be
balanced first. The Nigeria's infrastructure
need urgent attention, if the country
is to attract foreign investors, and
if the present poverty focused
administration is to succeed. The
above imaginary Mr Onesi's analysis is
literally true of most businesses in
Nigeria. The small, medium and large
scale businesses feel the impacts of
inadequate public services. At the end
it is the consumers and the poor
that are punished as these businesses
usually pass the excess costs of
their doing business to them, hence
the high costs of goods and the
high level of unsold goods. I
guess, what is needed in government
is the principle of good governance.
Government doing what is democratically
expected of her from those that
elected them. When that social
contracts are satisfactorily carried out
by the government, poverty alleviation
programmes would probably be the
government's least of all problems in
Nigeria. Nigerians are poor because
the past governments, had been selfish
in their dealings with the governed.
They were not the supposed servants
to the masses. They were busy
appropriating and privatising the tax
payers money. That is why Nigeria,
with all those petrol - dollar since
1970, is today still in the
business of alleviating poverty and
not quite succeeding in
it.
Then the question of whom should
benefit from the N10 billion poverty
alleviation fund. The programme would
not yield the desired result if
the people that are most in need
of the fund are left out. This
is where the idea of targeting
comes in. The level of poverty
that this country is in now
demands that this poverty alleviation
programme be intended to be an
emergency programme, to address some
of the most urgent social concerns
of the Nigeria's vulnerable groups.
Such as the poor widows, orphans,
the disabled, the urban poor, the
urban displaced (like the 300,000
Lagos- Maroko inhabitants that were
forcibly removed by the military, and
the victims of the previous and
the present political/religious disturbances ),
the rural poor, the environmental
refuges of the Niger-Delta people and
the erosion prone Ibo people, the old
- age - people and the retrenched civil -
servants and others who were affected,
since Buhari to Abacha's regimes, due
to the economic down-turn occasioned
by mismanagement and the subsequent
economic reforms. These group of
people need urgent attention. They
should not be left to their fate
for their fate is in
Nigeria.
Nigeria has no business paying
salaries for Niger - Republic workers. It
is absurd for a country like
Nigeria who since 1980 have not
past a year without owing workers
salaries. This should not be the
case in a country that thinks
she can afford to play the big
brother by volunteering to pay
salaries for other country's workers.
Mr K. Naiyeju, the Accountant-General
of the Federation, has just confirmed
the fact that the Nigerian government,
without the National Assembly approval,
has honoured the promise to pay
Niger-Republic workers salaries. This is
regressive governance. Robbing Peter to
pay Paul, starving Nigerians for the
sake of positive international image. The
same desire for positive image abroad
drove the past and present governments
( to neglect the facts that the
majority of Nigerians are close to
starvation, and that millions of
workers are yet to be given
months of overdue salaries ) to
be spending one million dollars, $1m,
per day in Sierra-Leone. Tell,
Nigerian weekly magazine on the issue
of 23 - 6 - 97, put the figure Nigeria
spent on Liberia as close to six
billion dollars in its six year
ecomog in that country in the
name of peace keeping while our
refineries were locked up, desperately
crying for turn -around -maintenance ( TAM ).
Nigeria built 250kms long express dual
carriage-way for Liberians while it
was (and probably still is ) totally
impossible to travel from Lagos to
Benin hitch-free. Supply Niger-Republic and
Benin-Republic with electricity while we
cannot have an hour of uninterrupted
electricity supply. There have been
stories of months and even years
of non-payment of pensions to
pensioners. Maybe the government should
direct their attention to these poor
pensioners instead of looking for a
neighbouring country to help financially.
Providing funds for the Nigerian
pensioners would be, in the eyes
of the public, a proper poverty
alleviation measure.
There was a disturbing report
in the Tempo newspaper of 22 - 3 -
2000, on the agony of the
Nigerian Railway Corporation retired
workers. In the report the newspaper
stated that the non - payment of the
ten months arrears owned to former
employees of the corporation (NRC) "is
taking a toll on the retirees,
that aside the psychological trauma of
having to wait endlessly, some of
the retirees have actually died
without getting paid. In just one
week, five of the retirees were
reported dead. Even among those that
have not succumbed to the cold
hands of death, many have resigned
themselves to the cruelty of fate.
A parlous existence without their
pension allowances". This is happening
in a country that has volunteered (
and has actually made good the promise
) to settle a neighbouring country's
unpaid salaries. As a Nigerian I
know that this NRC report is
just a tip of the iceberg. There
are many pensioners in the country
that are in the same sorry state
as the NRC pensioners. It was
this country's unnecessary expenditures in
the past that put Nigeria in
this sorry state. Babangida and
Abacha's phoney transition programmes cost
tax payers more than N70 billion,
while Nigerians starve. All the past
phoney poverty alleviation programmes since
the Operation Feed the Nation up
to the Abacha's FSP have been
billions upon billions of naira down
the drain. A government that indulges
in profligacy can not effectively
alleviate poverty.
Conclusion
From all that have been said,
it goes without saying that it
will take much more than earmarking
N10 billion for poverty alleviation in
Nigeria. There are many forces that if not checked
and put in proper place, could seriously de-rail these poverty alleviation
programmes. There are environmental forces,
economic forces, political/religious forces
and attitude/cultural forces. The state
of the Niger-Delta environmental degradation
has been well documented and talked
about in the country. These people's
livelihood depends on crop and fish
farming. Their land and water have
been laid waste due to the
activities of the oil firms that
are in the business of exploring
(oil) and exploiting the area. No
amount of poverty alleviation measure
will make a dent in their lives
if they are prevented from doing
what they know best, farming.
The same predicament befalls the Ibos.
The menace of erosion in the Ibo
land is unprecedented. Families are
being displaced everyday and made
homeless by erosion in the area.
These people do not leave a
normal life. Some of them have
been made refuges in their own
land. They virtually depend on
remittances from relatives in the
cities and these are few and far
between. This source of help is
also drying up and drying fast.
The country's economic mismanagement and
the subsequent hardships had put a
stop to this African old - age culture
of being your brother's keeper.
Everyone is on his own now and
God for the poor. So, to these
erosion menaced Ibos and possibly the
other environmental degraded parts of
the country, poverty alleviation measure
is the eradication of the erosion
menace and the restoration of their
dignity and their sources of livelihood.
Inflation and the high costs of
items, especially food items, is a
clog in the wheel of any poverty
alleviation measures. The new government
minimum wage of N250 per day and
N183 per day, federal and state
government workers respectively, is a
disgrace to the government that is
bent on reducing poverty and
eradicating corruption. No Nigerian can
survive on that wage without receiving
brown envelopes ( bribes ). The wage, just
like the one before it, is an
indirect encouragement of corruption.
Nigerians, that is the poor majority,
should brace themselves for more
hardships, and the government should
brace itself for more corrupt
practices, thievery, robberies, and/or even
murder. The government should also
braze herself for restive Nigerians
due to poverty, malnutrition, and
starvation. The wage is simply not
a living wage in today's Nigeria.
Baring in mind the industrial and
market behaviours of the Nigerian
producers and marketers. These groups
of economic actors respond negatively
(increase their product prizes) to any
wage increase, in order to "share
in the increase", thereby negating
the government intention of alleviation
the workers
plights.
Mention was made earlier in this
article about the imperatives of
having a stable political environment.
I made special regards to the
Niger-Delta question. As at this
moment in time, Nigeria is anything
but politically stable. Internally this
unstableness is undermining the principle
and policy of this administration's
poverty alleviation programmes. There are,
at the moment, perceived recalcitrant
ethnic warlords flexing their muscles,
and in the process, destabilising the
polity and undermining the economic
advancement of the country. The
problem is that, it is always
the poor that ends up being the
victims of any political/religious
disturbances. Since the advent of
political independence, Nigerians have been
severally traumatised by political/religious
upheavals, especially the Ibos. The
most recent is the Kaduna - Sharia - riot
in which the shops and homes of
the inhabitants ( majority of them are
poor, trying to make ends meet ) were
burnt and looted, not to talk of
those that lost their lives. Those who
were blessed to be alive out of
the mayhem, who had laboured to
be out of poverty, are back to
square one, back in to poverty
again. Poverty alleviation programmes thrives
best in an atmosphere of economic
and political tranquillity. It is
pointless alleviating poverty in one
place and at the same time
creating one in another.
Nigerians attitude to life and
business can sometimes undermine progress.
There were cases during the early
implementation of the People's Bank of
Nigeria when people actually regarded
the bank loans as free money or
"national cake". This group of
ignorant people never intended to
repay the loans and it does not
need much reasoning to know that
they did not make good economic
use of the loans. There is
urgent need to educate the public
that the PAP loan is no
different from ordinary bank loan,
except that the PAP loan is
contracted with little or no
collateral and with little or no
interest repayments.
Nigeria is a difficult country to
do business in. Red tape abounds.
Contracts are often awarded to the
person or company that gives the
biggest bribe, not on merit. Bribes
are openly and frequently demanded.
Business people are unreliable and
rarely stick to appointments or
promises. Chronic inefficiency is the
norm.
The above article is based on Anthony
Maduagwu's forthcoming book : Growing
Up in Oguta : (The Economics of
Rural Poverty in Nigeria) Please send
comments to amaduagwu@hotmail.com
Published 09/09/00 |