SENATORS may, this week, take delivery of their official Toyota Land Cruiser jeeps, The Nation on Sunday can reveal.
The cost per unit of the 2011 model of the jeep obtained from the manufacturer's website is $100,724 - about N16,115, 840.
The total cost of the vehicles for the 109 senators is put at over N1.7 billion.
A competent source in the National Assembly told our correspondents yesterday that the senators opted for the Land Cruiser jeep because of its unique features.
In the sixth Senate, senators settled for Toyota Camry at a unit cost of N9 million.
Some of the features of the Land Cruiser obtained online include: Displacement cc - 4500; Transmission - Automatic; and Fuel Type - Diesel.
Sources said "no contractor" was used in purchasing the vehicles.
The National Assembly Service Commission reportedly handled the purchase transaction.
The Commission, sources said, might have opted to buy directly from the manufacturer to reduce cost.
Sources said the delivery of the vehicles will be in batches while vehicle documents would be handed over to individual senators in their offices after delivery.
It was also gathered that furnishing of offices of senators would commence this week as contracts for the supply of refrigerators, computers and other office equipment have been sealed.
Efforts to speak with the Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Public Affairs, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, on the supply of the jeeps and other office items were unsuccessful as he did not answer calls put across to him yesterday.
But a senator who spoke to one of our correspondents on condition of anonymity simply said "we have been on this issue for some time."
He added "I cannot confirm anything because I have not seen any vehicle but we have been on this issue for some time. But I think they are not buying vehicles for senators as such. What I know is that they want to procure vehicles to facilitate the work of committees."
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Bayelsa face-off gets messier: Jonathan has failed – Sylva
Yenagoa – The feud between President GoodluckJonathan and the immediate past governor of his home state ofBayelsa, Chief Timpre Sylva, deepened, yesterday, as Sylva literallycalled the president a liar.
Sylva’s comment came in a riposte to the president’s comment at the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) rally,on Friday, in Yenagoa, the state capital, where Jonathan said he decided not to back the former governor for second time because he(Sylva) failed to perform.
At the rally organised to promote the PDP candidate in Bayelsa, Mr Dickson Seriake, ahead of the forthcoming gubernatorial election, the president cited an incident in which the former governor was stoned as a sign of his rejection by the people and a five-star Tower Hotel project allegedly abandoned by the Sylva administration.
But Sylva, in a statement by his media aide, Doifie Ola, yesterday, described as barefaced lie, and amis representation of open facts the president’s claim that the five-star hotel had been the way he (Jonathan) left it.
He challenged Jonathan “to tell the world how much he (the president) paid the contractor and how much I paid the contractor.”
The statement read: “Timipre Sylva has read with utter dismay some statements credited to the President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, at the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) campaign rally on Friday, 03 February in Yenagoa.
“Two things stand out in the president’s speech. He talked about a stoning incident in Yenagoa that he watched with pleasure and the Tower Hotel project in Yenagoa that was conceptualised by the government of Chief Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, which Jonathan took over as governor of Bayelsa State and passed on to Sylva as governor.
“The stoning in Yenagoa happened during the president’s visit and it was widely believed to have been arranged by a few misguided elements, which, with the backing of Mr. President, had used the presidential security to subvert the security of the state on purpose to embarrass Governor Sylva. Sponsors of the incident had tried to deny their involvement and present the event as indicative of the governor’s non-performance.
The world now knows better, of course. Everyone is now perfectly well aware of the mastermind of that insult on the Ijaw nation.
“But let us state that it was not the governor who was disgraced by the stoning. Instead, it was the president himself. Now, if stoning is a yardstick for non-performance, are we also right to say that the burning down of Mr. President’s house in 2007, in the run-up to that year’s general elections, was also an act of rejection by the people of the state? A lot of people believed that the burning of his house and the action of militants in 2007 were an expression of rejection.
Is Mr. President now confirming that wide belief? “In addition, can we also say that the stoning of President Jonathan, in May, last year, in Uganda, was a global act of rejection? Besides, it was after the stoning incident in Yenagoa in late 2010 that Mr. President came back to Yenagoa, raised the hand of Sylva, and spoke glowingly about his achievements, saying he has performed excellently well and that the people of Bayelsa should vote him into office.
“It was after the stoning that he came back and voted in the January 2011 PDP governorship primaries and gave a glowing report of Sylva’s performance.
So what suddenly changed from January 2011 to later that year when President Jonathan manipulated all the institutions of state, including the armed and security forces, the judiciary and critical organs of democracy like the political parties, in full cry, leaving the security and economic challenges which he faced, to embark on OPERATION REMOVE SYLVA as the sole mandate which the people of Nigeria gave to him?
“Didn’t Jonathan know there was a stoning incident when he came to say Governor Sylva should be voted in January?”
Question for Jonathan
On the five star-hotel, Sylva said, “President Jonathan also in his speech described the Tower Hotel, Yenagoa, as “a monument of disgrace,” insinuating that the edifice is still at the stage he left it as governor. This is a barefaced lie and a misrepresentation of open facts.
Sylva wishes to clarify that the hotel was at the second floor when he took over from Dr. Jonathan as governor. It is now at its 18th floor, as the whole world can see. Sylva agrees that the job has been delayed, but explains that the reason it has been delayed is because the contractor, whom Dr. Jonathan himself chose and awarded the contract to, asked for a variation of N5 billion.
“Let Jonathan tell the world how much he paid this contractor and how much Sylva has paid the contractor. And we are aware that this same contractor is not building a house for Sylva in his village. “Far more than Jonathan’s tenure, Sylva has performed given the challenges he faced.”
He noted: “At a time when it wasbeing widely suspected that he might be involved in the questionable acts around the Bayelsa State governorship contest, his outing on Friday, 03 February, has conclusively proven that, all along, he has been behind all the shenanigans in Bayelsa State deliberately to destabilise the state for his own selfish interest.”
‘Democracy manipulation’
Nigerians, he said, expected Jonathan to tackle security, unemployment, power, critical infrastructure and not to manipulate democracy for his strange motives.
“What all these show clearly is that the exclusion of Sylva from the primaries of November last year was based on nothing other than President Jonathan’s inordinate whims. The event of last Friday confirms once again that Sylva has not committed any offence known to the PDP constitution or the Nigerian constitution to warrant his exclusion,”the statement said.
“The Bayelsa State governorship racewas a critical democratic test case for President Jonathan; and wedare say that he has failed to prove himself as a believer indemocracy and free choice. Chief Sylva is in court trying to putright the infractions because he believes our country may be doomedif this subversion of democracy in Bayelsa State is allowed tostand.”
Sylva’s comment came in a riposte to the president’s comment at the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) rally,on Friday, in Yenagoa, the state capital, where Jonathan said he decided not to back the former governor for second time because he(Sylva) failed to perform.
At the rally organised to promote the PDP candidate in Bayelsa, Mr Dickson Seriake, ahead of the forthcoming gubernatorial election, the president cited an incident in which the former governor was stoned as a sign of his rejection by the people and a five-star Tower Hotel project allegedly abandoned by the Sylva administration.
But Sylva, in a statement by his media aide, Doifie Ola, yesterday, described as barefaced lie, and amis representation of open facts the president’s claim that the five-star hotel had been the way he (Jonathan) left it.
He challenged Jonathan “to tell the world how much he (the president) paid the contractor and how much I paid the contractor.”
The statement read: “Timipre Sylva has read with utter dismay some statements credited to the President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, at the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) campaign rally on Friday, 03 February in Yenagoa.
“Two things stand out in the president’s speech. He talked about a stoning incident in Yenagoa that he watched with pleasure and the Tower Hotel project in Yenagoa that was conceptualised by the government of Chief Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, which Jonathan took over as governor of Bayelsa State and passed on to Sylva as governor.
“The stoning in Yenagoa happened during the president’s visit and it was widely believed to have been arranged by a few misguided elements, which, with the backing of Mr. President, had used the presidential security to subvert the security of the state on purpose to embarrass Governor Sylva. Sponsors of the incident had tried to deny their involvement and present the event as indicative of the governor’s non-performance.
The world now knows better, of course. Everyone is now perfectly well aware of the mastermind of that insult on the Ijaw nation.
“But let us state that it was not the governor who was disgraced by the stoning. Instead, it was the president himself. Now, if stoning is a yardstick for non-performance, are we also right to say that the burning down of Mr. President’s house in 2007, in the run-up to that year’s general elections, was also an act of rejection by the people of the state? A lot of people believed that the burning of his house and the action of militants in 2007 were an expression of rejection.
Is Mr. President now confirming that wide belief? “In addition, can we also say that the stoning of President Jonathan, in May, last year, in Uganda, was a global act of rejection? Besides, it was after the stoning incident in Yenagoa in late 2010 that Mr. President came back to Yenagoa, raised the hand of Sylva, and spoke glowingly about his achievements, saying he has performed excellently well and that the people of Bayelsa should vote him into office.
“It was after the stoning that he came back and voted in the January 2011 PDP governorship primaries and gave a glowing report of Sylva’s performance.
So what suddenly changed from January 2011 to later that year when President Jonathan manipulated all the institutions of state, including the armed and security forces, the judiciary and critical organs of democracy like the political parties, in full cry, leaving the security and economic challenges which he faced, to embark on OPERATION REMOVE SYLVA as the sole mandate which the people of Nigeria gave to him?
“Didn’t Jonathan know there was a stoning incident when he came to say Governor Sylva should be voted in January?”
Question for Jonathan
On the five star-hotel, Sylva said, “President Jonathan also in his speech described the Tower Hotel, Yenagoa, as “a monument of disgrace,” insinuating that the edifice is still at the stage he left it as governor. This is a barefaced lie and a misrepresentation of open facts.
Sylva wishes to clarify that the hotel was at the second floor when he took over from Dr. Jonathan as governor. It is now at its 18th floor, as the whole world can see. Sylva agrees that the job has been delayed, but explains that the reason it has been delayed is because the contractor, whom Dr. Jonathan himself chose and awarded the contract to, asked for a variation of N5 billion.
“Let Jonathan tell the world how much he paid this contractor and how much Sylva has paid the contractor. And we are aware that this same contractor is not building a house for Sylva in his village. “Far more than Jonathan’s tenure, Sylva has performed given the challenges he faced.”
He noted: “At a time when it wasbeing widely suspected that he might be involved in the questionable acts around the Bayelsa State governorship contest, his outing on Friday, 03 February, has conclusively proven that, all along, he has been behind all the shenanigans in Bayelsa State deliberately to destabilise the state for his own selfish interest.”
‘Democracy manipulation’
Nigerians, he said, expected Jonathan to tackle security, unemployment, power, critical infrastructure and not to manipulate democracy for his strange motives.
“What all these show clearly is that the exclusion of Sylva from the primaries of November last year was based on nothing other than President Jonathan’s inordinate whims. The event of last Friday confirms once again that Sylva has not committed any offence known to the PDP constitution or the Nigerian constitution to warrant his exclusion,”the statement said.
“The Bayelsa State governorship racewas a critical democratic test case for President Jonathan; and wedare say that he has failed to prove himself as a believer indemocracy and free choice. Chief Sylva is in court trying to putright the infractions because he believes our country may be doomedif this subversion of democracy in Bayelsa State is allowed tostand.”
Saturday, January 28, 2012
I see revolution –Kokori
Remember Chief Frank Kokori, former General Secretary of National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG)? Any day, his name rings a bell in Nigeria. He is one of those whose names are synonymous with the labour movement in Nigeria.
During the reign of late dictator, Gen Sani Abacha when many Nigerians cringed at mere mention of his name, Kokori was a thorn in the flesh of the maximum ruler. For those who followed events then, his union, NUPENG literally brought the nation to its knees when he mobilized his workers for a nationwide strike.
The Delta-born labour leader has once dared the odds for the people. In this interview with him in Lagos, he appraises the state of the nation among other issues. Excerpts…
With recent events in the country, how do you feel as a Nigerian?
As a Nigerian, I have always been in these things, so I have seen a lot. What we are going through, it seems the government is alienating itself from the people and this is very unfortunate. President Goodluck Jonathan was popular and many had thought that he would make a good change. But the crux of the problems of this country is just being scratched at the surface. The root cause of the whole problems in this country is corruption and if you cannot wipe out corruption, then there is a problem.
There is no way you can say you are reforming anything in a country like Nigeria where corruption is so rampant. That is the problem. I am saying that until Jonathan decides to face the issue of corruption headlong, I do not see Nigeria moving forward. People who are not even corrupt will now see it start saying what about those who are corrupt. Those who are corrupt are milking the people dry. The so-called fat cows are milking the people dry and government is doing nothing about it.
So, when you start preaching that you want good governance, you want the people to be good and that you want to carry out reforms, where are the reforms when corruption is eating up everybody? At the end of the day, what reformation are you doing when corruption is so blatant? I think that until that is done, the people would not even be satisfied. If you are corrupt and government is serious about fighting corruption, the government would go in and within six months, people have been caught, prosecuted, sanctioned with heavy punishment.
That would be a deterrent to other people but if you do not do that, you are not serious about reforming the society. And Nigeria has got to that stage where we need real serious minded people to handle the issue of anti-corruption so that the people would see results. The people are tired of waiting and if people are even ready to make sacrifice, they cannot make sacrifice when people at the top are wallowing in obscene wealth. How can they tighten their belts? They tighten and tighten until there is nothing to tighten again. They see fat cows living flamboyantly and moving about everywhere.
How do you account for a man who yesterday did not have N50,000 in his account and he is made a local government chairman or voted into the House of Assembly or National Assembly and overnight, you see him building about two mansions, big estates and plazas. Where did he get the money within three years? It is so easy to catch people who are corrupt. That is what they do abroad. They see money in your account and they ask-how you came about the money. So, I feel they are not serious in the fight against corruption and until the anti-corruption agencies are serious with the backing of government, and put people in handcuffs, we would not move anywhere.
Do not tell me like the former chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Farida Waziri would say that you do not put people in handcuffs. You must put people in handcuffs. If a whole president of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) just because of a case of rape was put in handcuffs, why can’t corrupt people suffer the same fate in Nigeria? The Lehman brothers’ executives and the Enron people who ran down the American economy were given terms like 22 and 25 years in prison. And they were in handcuffs. So, who are the Nigerians? Even when you charge them, they go to court with a retinue of people with Aso ebi and all those rubbish. There is no deterrent yet and that is what is leading to all these.
With government not taking care of the people, no social security structures and so on for the poor and old people, the youths become restive. These are some of the most active years of a man’s life. If you do not go to higher institutions, from 18 years through 25 up to 30, you start thinking about life. You are vibrant and everything. In our own generation, we knew what we were already doing. It will surprise you that some of us then who were even 26 were already heading a section of the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria (ECN) with school certificate. So, how would I have become a militant? I was in Lagos and entered the ECN and the whole top people were all white men and they take you on merit.
So, I entered when I was about 23 years old and at 26, they had seen my brightness. By that time, you could not even have a meter in Lagos without passing through me. It was me who would now make the final recommendations to the commercial engineers (what they call consumers’ engineer). I was part of the tariff section in Ijora. So, where would I have time for militancy, armed robbery and all that? So, that was the country we had. It was after that period that I went to the University and I already had two children then. As I talk to you, my first two children who today are still based in the United States, are in their early 40s.
Today, you have people of all manner of professions that are unemployed. So, how would all be well with Nigeria?
But from the picture you have painted, what do you think is the future of this country?
Nigeria has a bright future. It depends on leadership. If I am the president of this country, I will wipe out corruption. One to two years, you will not hear of corruption in this country. You can fight corruption to a standstill. If your hands are not clean and you have skeletons in your cupboard, they show you the red card. I was locked up in one of the worst cells in this country in the fringes of the desert in Borno State. I was in solitary confinement for four years.
They could not even take me to court because all the investigations they did were all rubbish. They went to banks and everywhere and they did not see anything. I was charged for industrial relations offence. I was given mandate by my union, National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), they knew that and you cannot even charge me to court. But now they went to other extraneous issues and that was Abacha himself who was terribly corrupt. They just wanted to embarrass me at that time. They went everywhere and found out that it was only this house they saw that I have in the whole world.
This is somebody that dominated the oil industry for about 20 to 25 years. I sat with the whole Managing Directors and oil Ministers. People felt I am a strange fellow but unfortunately, this country does not give chance to people who are clean because corruption pervades everywhere. They are all looking at it shamelessly and they tell me they are rulers. Why should the youths not be annoyed and take arms and do anything they want to do because the society itself has not provided for them.
In our own time, government provided for us and in Lagos here, one could move about freely even to night club no matter the time. Small children went to school in Warri where I was brought up and nobody was afraid of kidnappers. But now, the society does not cater for its people and the Nigerian masses themselves are not committed because of the way they see their leaders. We are not patriotic. So, any small chance, they would like to make money in order to survive. But everybody is getting aware because I am surprised with the recent resistance over oil subsidy removal. It shows there is improvement and that the awareness is coming. Most of the protesters were not paid or hired and they went to all these grounds. So, the awareness is already coming.
Do you think that with the attitude of Nigerians during the recent strike that the poor masses are close to being emancipated from their “oppressors”?
Well, it is a starting point. The people have done their best but I was feeling that labour would have given them real direction and leadership. And I was happy when I saw my comrades doing that but suddenly, I saw the change in the negotiations. It is like the government did some “juju” on them because at the end, I could not understand the labour leaders any longer. You know Africans believe in juju.
So, may be, they did juju for them because I do not believe the rumours people are carrying about that they were compromised with “Ghana must go” bags. But the labour leaders I thought could lead the people and give them leadership and look at the humiliation they gave to labour. The body was humiliated by government because the negotiations were going on and they were saying they had not reached a compromise. They gave them the last minute suggestion that everybody should go and consult. That was what I was made to understand, the way I was following it because I still phone some people there.
At a stage even up till late in the night, they said they have not called them. Up till midnight, I was still calling some people who were in the negotiating team. Suddenly in the morning, I saw that broadcast and I was thinking labour would react sharply to it because they said they had not been called. The mandate they gave to them was on N65 per litre and even if you are going to change the mandate, it would be in a meeting with the government. That is the way everybody knows the art of negotiation and collective bargaining which I did for more than 13 years in this country. Now, they were not called and the next minute, government fixed the price unilaterally which labour insisted that that was what government did.
If it is the type of labour I know, when the government does that type of thing with arrogance, then labour would go back, reinforce and mobilise. You cannot do that to labour. That is heavy humiliation on labour. So, that is why I said, is there any juju that they used for them in Aso Rock. But if even they used Juju on Omar and Esele who were leading them, can the Juju affect all of them? This is because in labour, it is collectivity. Even as president or Secretary-General, you cannot take decisions on behalf of any union. You cannot take unilateral decision. You must go back to the people to get their mandate. And these were the two biggest leaders of labour in Nigeria. The president of Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) which controls three quarters of the workforce and then Esele of the Trade Union Congress (TUC), they were small boys who were saying, we would take over from you.
You know much about Nigeria’s oil sector; what is the way out of the crisis facing the sector especially with regards to corruption?
That is another long story and it would take a day to talk about the rot in the oil sector and the close shop by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). You do not know what is happening there. And they were able to run a close shop because they have the support of the Federal Government which uses the NNPC as a honey pot. They go there, dip hands into funds and use the money for undercover jobs. They have not been able to open their books to the public and even the National Assembly who are supposed to enforce it have not been able to do that for about 12 years. But there is a lot of rot in the oil sector.
But the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has been invited to look at the books. What is your take on that?
That is a good development but that is if they will go the whole hog. Normally, if the books are opened, good auditors can fish out all the whole rubbish going on there. But there has been a collaboration with some governmental officials. You always see the Senate or House of Representatives Committees summoning them every year but at the end, you do not see anything. If the government is not behind them, they would force them to open their books.
How do you feel with the deployment of soldiers to Lagos after the strike over removal of oil subsidy?
Normally, when you deploy soldiers to places like Borno State, Yobe, Kano where the rule of law and everything has broken down, where the security of lives and property has become so bad, it is in order. But when you deploy soldiers to a place like Lagos where people just sit at the Gani Fawehinmi square and they vent their anger by demonstrating and dancing and you now bring soldiers to come and stop them, it is not right and unacceptable to human beings especially those of us who fought for democracy.
We put our lives on the line to fight for democracy. Then, the whole country was in emergency but there is no emergency now in the country. How can you put soldiers on the streets when you do not see any insurrection? I am not happy with the presidency over that. That is a minus on their side and I felt that the international community would just laugh at us especially with what happened in other countries recently like the Arab spring. In other countries, they allow people like that to demonstrate especially when you know that they do not carry arms. But that is actually a fallback of the military era. That was why we decided to challenge them at that time.
As one of those who fought the military, how do you feel today looking at the type of democracy that we practise?
I am disillusioned from even the second year of democracy. When Obasanjo went in, I was so happy but after about two or three years, I felt things were getting worse. And since then, it has not improved. We fought for democracy to remove the military people and we brought bigger thieves to run the country. But like I told you, corruption is the main issue in this country.
If corruption is wiped out, you do not talk about subsidy. The mystery surrounding the subsidy is because of the corruption. I have told people and I said if I am the president, even if you have to subsidise, you block all the leakages in the whole areas of the physical regime, you would now see that you would save so much. I do not see Nigeria subsidizing oil consumption to the tune of N1.3 trillion in nine months. If there is anywhere you say because of the international oil market prices and everything, do not forget that we are major producers of oil. Actually, we are not even supposed to get to this level where we have to import refined products into this country. I knew that the Warri refinery, the second Port Harcourt refinery and the Kaduna refinery were built within 1978 to about 1983.
Warri refinery was built in 1978 and we opened Kaduna in 1980. So, we now had three refineries. The old one that the British petroleum built in Port Harcourt was there before. So, it was the new Port Harcourt refinery that came about five or six years later. So, the question then is-what happened between 1984 and now? It is about 30 years, and no more refinery. So, what was the magic they used in building those refineries? This is when we even have superior products. You cannot compare our kerosene or fuel with the rubbish they import from abroad. People go to the most inferior markets to buy those products to bring them to Nigeria, pad them up in form of over invoicing and nobody asks questions.
As long as we do not fight this octopus they call corruption, Nigeria would have a long way to go and we would be a laughing stock in the comity of nations. Nigeria is not properly ruled since we fought for democracy. The leaders have become fat cows and they have allowed the people to wallow in poverty and penury. In a society like this, when you push the people to the wall, there would be a revolution. These are historical things I am telling you. It happened everywhere. The Russian revolution led by Lenin started that way. You go to places like Britain, America, the way they won their independence was through marginalization.
The people were overmarginalised. With the whole respect they have for the British royalty, in Britain, a whole king was beheaded. Remember the French revolution. The Bolsheviks took over Russia. If the leaders are not careful how they manage the affairs of this country, I see revolution on the way. They are still fortunate that Nigerians have not started such a revolution although the Boko Harams have started their own. However, that is not to say that I am in support of them because their own is a senseless fight. I do not know what they are fighting for because all what they are doing is to kill innocent poor people. They have no ideology or demand that is reasonable. I do not see how we can go back to the dark ages again without western education.
Do you agree with those who insist that it is a ploy by the northern elite to recapture power in 2015?
If it is a strategy, that is rubbish. They are only killing their people in the North because I do not see how a Boko Haram person would come into Delta or any of our villages and I would not detect him. Even in Lagos here that is so cosmopolitan, if you see a stranger in your neighborhood, you will detect him. That is why they have not been able to come to the South. They are just killing their people in the North and they do not even obey their emirs even though some of those traditional institutions, Nigerians are fed up with them.
An American intelligence agency predicted that Nigeria might break up in 2015. Do you see an international connection to all of this?
There is no international connection to it. The Nigerian presidency is one of the most powerful in the world. They know what they do and they can do the right thing. The legisature is supposed to be the watchdog of the people. They are supposed to call the governors to order. The state and National Assembly do not do what they are supposed to do. That is why Nigerians are so pissed off with them. They collect so much money that Nigerians get baffled about. They receive obscene salaries. For the state assemblies, they have sold out. The governors are now emperors in their states.
Many expected that your man, Ogboru, was going to be victorious in the last election but it never materialized. What happened?
I was involved in that election but it was massively rigged from the riverine area. That area is very difficult to monitor. We have 25 local governments and the three local governments of the riverine areas, they just rigged the election there and those are areas that are sparsely populated. It defeats all logic when you see people in riverine areas that are sparsely populated coming out with votes that are fictitious
During the reign of late dictator, Gen Sani Abacha when many Nigerians cringed at mere mention of his name, Kokori was a thorn in the flesh of the maximum ruler. For those who followed events then, his union, NUPENG literally brought the nation to its knees when he mobilized his workers for a nationwide strike.
The Delta-born labour leader has once dared the odds for the people. In this interview with him in Lagos, he appraises the state of the nation among other issues. Excerpts…
With recent events in the country, how do you feel as a Nigerian?
As a Nigerian, I have always been in these things, so I have seen a lot. What we are going through, it seems the government is alienating itself from the people and this is very unfortunate. President Goodluck Jonathan was popular and many had thought that he would make a good change. But the crux of the problems of this country is just being scratched at the surface. The root cause of the whole problems in this country is corruption and if you cannot wipe out corruption, then there is a problem.
There is no way you can say you are reforming anything in a country like Nigeria where corruption is so rampant. That is the problem. I am saying that until Jonathan decides to face the issue of corruption headlong, I do not see Nigeria moving forward. People who are not even corrupt will now see it start saying what about those who are corrupt. Those who are corrupt are milking the people dry. The so-called fat cows are milking the people dry and government is doing nothing about it.
So, when you start preaching that you want good governance, you want the people to be good and that you want to carry out reforms, where are the reforms when corruption is eating up everybody? At the end of the day, what reformation are you doing when corruption is so blatant? I think that until that is done, the people would not even be satisfied. If you are corrupt and government is serious about fighting corruption, the government would go in and within six months, people have been caught, prosecuted, sanctioned with heavy punishment.
That would be a deterrent to other people but if you do not do that, you are not serious about reforming the society. And Nigeria has got to that stage where we need real serious minded people to handle the issue of anti-corruption so that the people would see results. The people are tired of waiting and if people are even ready to make sacrifice, they cannot make sacrifice when people at the top are wallowing in obscene wealth. How can they tighten their belts? They tighten and tighten until there is nothing to tighten again. They see fat cows living flamboyantly and moving about everywhere.
How do you account for a man who yesterday did not have N50,000 in his account and he is made a local government chairman or voted into the House of Assembly or National Assembly and overnight, you see him building about two mansions, big estates and plazas. Where did he get the money within three years? It is so easy to catch people who are corrupt. That is what they do abroad. They see money in your account and they ask-how you came about the money. So, I feel they are not serious in the fight against corruption and until the anti-corruption agencies are serious with the backing of government, and put people in handcuffs, we would not move anywhere.
Do not tell me like the former chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Farida Waziri would say that you do not put people in handcuffs. You must put people in handcuffs. If a whole president of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) just because of a case of rape was put in handcuffs, why can’t corrupt people suffer the same fate in Nigeria? The Lehman brothers’ executives and the Enron people who ran down the American economy were given terms like 22 and 25 years in prison. And they were in handcuffs. So, who are the Nigerians? Even when you charge them, they go to court with a retinue of people with Aso ebi and all those rubbish. There is no deterrent yet and that is what is leading to all these.
With government not taking care of the people, no social security structures and so on for the poor and old people, the youths become restive. These are some of the most active years of a man’s life. If you do not go to higher institutions, from 18 years through 25 up to 30, you start thinking about life. You are vibrant and everything. In our own generation, we knew what we were already doing. It will surprise you that some of us then who were even 26 were already heading a section of the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria (ECN) with school certificate. So, how would I have become a militant? I was in Lagos and entered the ECN and the whole top people were all white men and they take you on merit.
So, I entered when I was about 23 years old and at 26, they had seen my brightness. By that time, you could not even have a meter in Lagos without passing through me. It was me who would now make the final recommendations to the commercial engineers (what they call consumers’ engineer). I was part of the tariff section in Ijora. So, where would I have time for militancy, armed robbery and all that? So, that was the country we had. It was after that period that I went to the University and I already had two children then. As I talk to you, my first two children who today are still based in the United States, are in their early 40s.
Today, you have people of all manner of professions that are unemployed. So, how would all be well with Nigeria?
But from the picture you have painted, what do you think is the future of this country?
Nigeria has a bright future. It depends on leadership. If I am the president of this country, I will wipe out corruption. One to two years, you will not hear of corruption in this country. You can fight corruption to a standstill. If your hands are not clean and you have skeletons in your cupboard, they show you the red card. I was locked up in one of the worst cells in this country in the fringes of the desert in Borno State. I was in solitary confinement for four years.
They could not even take me to court because all the investigations they did were all rubbish. They went to banks and everywhere and they did not see anything. I was charged for industrial relations offence. I was given mandate by my union, National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), they knew that and you cannot even charge me to court. But now they went to other extraneous issues and that was Abacha himself who was terribly corrupt. They just wanted to embarrass me at that time. They went everywhere and found out that it was only this house they saw that I have in the whole world.
This is somebody that dominated the oil industry for about 20 to 25 years. I sat with the whole Managing Directors and oil Ministers. People felt I am a strange fellow but unfortunately, this country does not give chance to people who are clean because corruption pervades everywhere. They are all looking at it shamelessly and they tell me they are rulers. Why should the youths not be annoyed and take arms and do anything they want to do because the society itself has not provided for them.
In our own time, government provided for us and in Lagos here, one could move about freely even to night club no matter the time. Small children went to school in Warri where I was brought up and nobody was afraid of kidnappers. But now, the society does not cater for its people and the Nigerian masses themselves are not committed because of the way they see their leaders. We are not patriotic. So, any small chance, they would like to make money in order to survive. But everybody is getting aware because I am surprised with the recent resistance over oil subsidy removal. It shows there is improvement and that the awareness is coming. Most of the protesters were not paid or hired and they went to all these grounds. So, the awareness is already coming.
Do you think that with the attitude of Nigerians during the recent strike that the poor masses are close to being emancipated from their “oppressors”?
Well, it is a starting point. The people have done their best but I was feeling that labour would have given them real direction and leadership. And I was happy when I saw my comrades doing that but suddenly, I saw the change in the negotiations. It is like the government did some “juju” on them because at the end, I could not understand the labour leaders any longer. You know Africans believe in juju.
So, may be, they did juju for them because I do not believe the rumours people are carrying about that they were compromised with “Ghana must go” bags. But the labour leaders I thought could lead the people and give them leadership and look at the humiliation they gave to labour. The body was humiliated by government because the negotiations were going on and they were saying they had not reached a compromise. They gave them the last minute suggestion that everybody should go and consult. That was what I was made to understand, the way I was following it because I still phone some people there.
At a stage even up till late in the night, they said they have not called them. Up till midnight, I was still calling some people who were in the negotiating team. Suddenly in the morning, I saw that broadcast and I was thinking labour would react sharply to it because they said they had not been called. The mandate they gave to them was on N65 per litre and even if you are going to change the mandate, it would be in a meeting with the government. That is the way everybody knows the art of negotiation and collective bargaining which I did for more than 13 years in this country. Now, they were not called and the next minute, government fixed the price unilaterally which labour insisted that that was what government did.
If it is the type of labour I know, when the government does that type of thing with arrogance, then labour would go back, reinforce and mobilise. You cannot do that to labour. That is heavy humiliation on labour. So, that is why I said, is there any juju that they used for them in Aso Rock. But if even they used Juju on Omar and Esele who were leading them, can the Juju affect all of them? This is because in labour, it is collectivity. Even as president or Secretary-General, you cannot take decisions on behalf of any union. You cannot take unilateral decision. You must go back to the people to get their mandate. And these were the two biggest leaders of labour in Nigeria. The president of Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) which controls three quarters of the workforce and then Esele of the Trade Union Congress (TUC), they were small boys who were saying, we would take over from you.
You know much about Nigeria’s oil sector; what is the way out of the crisis facing the sector especially with regards to corruption?
That is another long story and it would take a day to talk about the rot in the oil sector and the close shop by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). You do not know what is happening there. And they were able to run a close shop because they have the support of the Federal Government which uses the NNPC as a honey pot. They go there, dip hands into funds and use the money for undercover jobs. They have not been able to open their books to the public and even the National Assembly who are supposed to enforce it have not been able to do that for about 12 years. But there is a lot of rot in the oil sector.
But the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has been invited to look at the books. What is your take on that?
That is a good development but that is if they will go the whole hog. Normally, if the books are opened, good auditors can fish out all the whole rubbish going on there. But there has been a collaboration with some governmental officials. You always see the Senate or House of Representatives Committees summoning them every year but at the end, you do not see anything. If the government is not behind them, they would force them to open their books.
How do you feel with the deployment of soldiers to Lagos after the strike over removal of oil subsidy?
Normally, when you deploy soldiers to places like Borno State, Yobe, Kano where the rule of law and everything has broken down, where the security of lives and property has become so bad, it is in order. But when you deploy soldiers to a place like Lagos where people just sit at the Gani Fawehinmi square and they vent their anger by demonstrating and dancing and you now bring soldiers to come and stop them, it is not right and unacceptable to human beings especially those of us who fought for democracy.
We put our lives on the line to fight for democracy. Then, the whole country was in emergency but there is no emergency now in the country. How can you put soldiers on the streets when you do not see any insurrection? I am not happy with the presidency over that. That is a minus on their side and I felt that the international community would just laugh at us especially with what happened in other countries recently like the Arab spring. In other countries, they allow people like that to demonstrate especially when you know that they do not carry arms. But that is actually a fallback of the military era. That was why we decided to challenge them at that time.
As one of those who fought the military, how do you feel today looking at the type of democracy that we practise?
I am disillusioned from even the second year of democracy. When Obasanjo went in, I was so happy but after about two or three years, I felt things were getting worse. And since then, it has not improved. We fought for democracy to remove the military people and we brought bigger thieves to run the country. But like I told you, corruption is the main issue in this country.
If corruption is wiped out, you do not talk about subsidy. The mystery surrounding the subsidy is because of the corruption. I have told people and I said if I am the president, even if you have to subsidise, you block all the leakages in the whole areas of the physical regime, you would now see that you would save so much. I do not see Nigeria subsidizing oil consumption to the tune of N1.3 trillion in nine months. If there is anywhere you say because of the international oil market prices and everything, do not forget that we are major producers of oil. Actually, we are not even supposed to get to this level where we have to import refined products into this country. I knew that the Warri refinery, the second Port Harcourt refinery and the Kaduna refinery were built within 1978 to about 1983.
Warri refinery was built in 1978 and we opened Kaduna in 1980. So, we now had three refineries. The old one that the British petroleum built in Port Harcourt was there before. So, it was the new Port Harcourt refinery that came about five or six years later. So, the question then is-what happened between 1984 and now? It is about 30 years, and no more refinery. So, what was the magic they used in building those refineries? This is when we even have superior products. You cannot compare our kerosene or fuel with the rubbish they import from abroad. People go to the most inferior markets to buy those products to bring them to Nigeria, pad them up in form of over invoicing and nobody asks questions.
As long as we do not fight this octopus they call corruption, Nigeria would have a long way to go and we would be a laughing stock in the comity of nations. Nigeria is not properly ruled since we fought for democracy. The leaders have become fat cows and they have allowed the people to wallow in poverty and penury. In a society like this, when you push the people to the wall, there would be a revolution. These are historical things I am telling you. It happened everywhere. The Russian revolution led by Lenin started that way. You go to places like Britain, America, the way they won their independence was through marginalization.
The people were overmarginalised. With the whole respect they have for the British royalty, in Britain, a whole king was beheaded. Remember the French revolution. The Bolsheviks took over Russia. If the leaders are not careful how they manage the affairs of this country, I see revolution on the way. They are still fortunate that Nigerians have not started such a revolution although the Boko Harams have started their own. However, that is not to say that I am in support of them because their own is a senseless fight. I do not know what they are fighting for because all what they are doing is to kill innocent poor people. They have no ideology or demand that is reasonable. I do not see how we can go back to the dark ages again without western education.
Do you agree with those who insist that it is a ploy by the northern elite to recapture power in 2015?
If it is a strategy, that is rubbish. They are only killing their people in the North because I do not see how a Boko Haram person would come into Delta or any of our villages and I would not detect him. Even in Lagos here that is so cosmopolitan, if you see a stranger in your neighborhood, you will detect him. That is why they have not been able to come to the South. They are just killing their people in the North and they do not even obey their emirs even though some of those traditional institutions, Nigerians are fed up with them.
An American intelligence agency predicted that Nigeria might break up in 2015. Do you see an international connection to all of this?
There is no international connection to it. The Nigerian presidency is one of the most powerful in the world. They know what they do and they can do the right thing. The legisature is supposed to be the watchdog of the people. They are supposed to call the governors to order. The state and National Assembly do not do what they are supposed to do. That is why Nigerians are so pissed off with them. They collect so much money that Nigerians get baffled about. They receive obscene salaries. For the state assemblies, they have sold out. The governors are now emperors in their states.
Many expected that your man, Ogboru, was going to be victorious in the last election but it never materialized. What happened?
I was involved in that election but it was massively rigged from the riverine area. That area is very difficult to monitor. We have 25 local governments and the three local governments of the riverine areas, they just rigged the election there and those are areas that are sparsely populated. It defeats all logic when you see people in riverine areas that are sparsely populated coming out with votes that are fictitious
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Betrayal of the Nigeria workers by the Nigeria Labour Congress
The suspension of the strike by the NLC, apparently agreeing to the N97 per litre when the working masses are still struggling for reversal to N65 per litre of fuel is a betrayal. It has shown that the labour leaders, with a historical mandate to lead the suffering working masses of the country out of misery, oppression and dictatorship, is shying away from this responsibility. By suspending the strike, labour has dealt the hopes and aspirations of Nigerians for affordable fuel, and the movement for accountable and corruption-free governance, a huge blow. Labour has betrayed the people. However, Now that the labour has betrayed us, a time will come when they will need our support and we will betray them in retun. I wish government will take of this betrayal and hammer labour hard since labour has lost public and moral supports of the people, weak and vulnerable. I challenge the leadership of organized labour to tell Nigerians who they consulted with before calling off the strike.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Nigeria unions suspend strikes in fuel dispute
Reuters) - Nigerian unions suspended strikes and protests over rising petrol prices for the weekend on Friday while talks take place between union leaders and government, but warned of more industrial action if there was no resolution.
Domestic airports would reopen to allow union leaders to fly to the capital of Africa's biggest crude oil producer to hold delicate talks with government officials on reversing a cut in petrol subsidies, but if no agreement could be reached strikes would resume next week.
"The labor movement and its civil society allies after nationwide consultations has decided that Saturday and Sunday will be observed as strike, protest and rally-free days," a joint statement from Nigeria's main labor unions said.
"We ask Nigerians to utilize these days to rest, restock and get re-energized for the continuation of the strikes, rallies and protest from Monday."
Tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets and staged strikes for five straight days in cities across Nigeria in protest against the removal of fuel subsidies on January 1, which more than doubled the pump price to 150 naira ($0.93) per liter from 65 naira.
Pressure is mounting on President Goodluck Jonathan to reach a deal in Abuja over the weekend. Nigeria's main oil union had threatened to shut down output, which provides 80 percent of national revenues, from Sunday if the government did not relent.
Central Bank Governor Lamido Sanusi told Reuters the strikes were costing Africa's second biggest economy around $600 million a day, based on a daily average of GDP for the year.
The fuel subsidy confrontation is another serious setback for Jonathan as Nigeria, whose population is roughly evenly split between Christians and Muslims, has also been rocked by a series of attacks by Islamist militants.
FEARS OF UNREST
Although demonstrations over the subsidy have been mostly peaceful there were clashes between police and crowds and at least three protesters have been shot dead by police. One police officer was arrested for shooting dead a man in Lagos.
Workers had earlier joined protests in cities on Friday, after trade unions broke off talks with Jonathan and said they would not restart until Saturday. Crowds dispersed after the union leader's announcement.
The statement on Friday said that unions would hold internal meetings to decide what to take to the talks with the president.
"The threat by Nigeria's oil unions to shut down oil terminals ... has fast-tracked subsidy reform negotiations, making an interim deal between government and labor over the weekend more likely than not," Eurasia Group's Philippe de Pontet in a research note.
"President Goodluck Jonathan will try to spin this as a partial victory but he and his economic reform agenda will emerge greatly weakened by this episode and the mass protest."
Industry officials doubted unions would be able to stop crude oil exports completely because much of production is automated and Nigeria has crude stored in reserves, but even a minor outage could have a significant impact on the economy.
In the heaving commercial hub Lagos, where thousands staged protests on Friday morning, many had said they were determined to carry on until the government met their original demands.
"Nigerians are not happy with what is happening. We will walk all the way from Lagos to Abuja to fight the government," said Linus Antony, a 42-year-old businessman.
"Listen to the people when you negotiate. We will accept 65 naira (pump price) no more, no less," another said, standing in front of crowds dancing as colorful musicians played on a makeshift stage.
In many parts of the mostly Muslim north of the country protests had stopped and crowds gathered to pray in mosques. Some were resigned to a compromise being made.
"If the government will be sincere with what it pays to subsidize fuel, the labor and government should agree on a common front," said Abdullahi Mustapha, a civil servant in Kano, Nigeria's oldest city and the second largest after Lagos.
"My wish is that any decision should not hurt Nigerians, the economy or this great nation."
Ministers and some analysts say the subsidy fuelled corruption, favored richer people who could afford cars and drained resources from Nigeria.
"FRUITFUL TALKS"
Main unions said they had "fruitful" talks with Jonathan on Thursday night, leading to media speculation that the two sides might be approaching a compromise.
"There are no talks today because we have to go back to our members and discuss the options with all the stakeholders. We are a democratic organization," NLC's vice president Isa Aremu told Reuters.
Presidency sources say the sticking point in talks was the price of petrol, which unions want returned back to 65 naira. One solution may be for the government to pay a percentage of the subsidy, which reduces along a sliding scale over time.
This could give the government time to convince the public it will spend money saved from the subsidy on promised social programmes and local refinery maintenance.
Sanusi said the key for the government was to get unions to agree to subsidies being removed, even if this was to happen in the future.
Worries over Nigerian oil supplies have pushed up global oil prices in the last two days.
Nigeria produces more than 2 million barrels of crude oil per day and is a key supplier to the United States, Europe and Asia. Crude oil exports provide Nigeria with more than 90 percent of foreign exchange revenues.
Economists say keeping the subsidy in place would force Nigeria into huge external borrowing, but Nigerians, many of whom live on less than $2 a day, see it as their most tangible welfare benefit.
Despite holding the world's seventh-largest gas reserves and producing over 2 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude, decades of graft and mismanagement mean Nigeria has to import almost all of its fuel needs. ($1 = 162.0500 naira)
Domestic airports would reopen to allow union leaders to fly to the capital of Africa's biggest crude oil producer to hold delicate talks with government officials on reversing a cut in petrol subsidies, but if no agreement could be reached strikes would resume next week.
"The labor movement and its civil society allies after nationwide consultations has decided that Saturday and Sunday will be observed as strike, protest and rally-free days," a joint statement from Nigeria's main labor unions said.
"We ask Nigerians to utilize these days to rest, restock and get re-energized for the continuation of the strikes, rallies and protest from Monday."
Tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets and staged strikes for five straight days in cities across Nigeria in protest against the removal of fuel subsidies on January 1, which more than doubled the pump price to 150 naira ($0.93) per liter from 65 naira.
Pressure is mounting on President Goodluck Jonathan to reach a deal in Abuja over the weekend. Nigeria's main oil union had threatened to shut down output, which provides 80 percent of national revenues, from Sunday if the government did not relent.
Central Bank Governor Lamido Sanusi told Reuters the strikes were costing Africa's second biggest economy around $600 million a day, based on a daily average of GDP for the year.
The fuel subsidy confrontation is another serious setback for Jonathan as Nigeria, whose population is roughly evenly split between Christians and Muslims, has also been rocked by a series of attacks by Islamist militants.
FEARS OF UNREST
Although demonstrations over the subsidy have been mostly peaceful there were clashes between police and crowds and at least three protesters have been shot dead by police. One police officer was arrested for shooting dead a man in Lagos.
Workers had earlier joined protests in cities on Friday, after trade unions broke off talks with Jonathan and said they would not restart until Saturday. Crowds dispersed after the union leader's announcement.
The statement on Friday said that unions would hold internal meetings to decide what to take to the talks with the president.
"The threat by Nigeria's oil unions to shut down oil terminals ... has fast-tracked subsidy reform negotiations, making an interim deal between government and labor over the weekend more likely than not," Eurasia Group's Philippe de Pontet in a research note.
"President Goodluck Jonathan will try to spin this as a partial victory but he and his economic reform agenda will emerge greatly weakened by this episode and the mass protest."
Industry officials doubted unions would be able to stop crude oil exports completely because much of production is automated and Nigeria has crude stored in reserves, but even a minor outage could have a significant impact on the economy.
In the heaving commercial hub Lagos, where thousands staged protests on Friday morning, many had said they were determined to carry on until the government met their original demands.
"Nigerians are not happy with what is happening. We will walk all the way from Lagos to Abuja to fight the government," said Linus Antony, a 42-year-old businessman.
"Listen to the people when you negotiate. We will accept 65 naira (pump price) no more, no less," another said, standing in front of crowds dancing as colorful musicians played on a makeshift stage.
In many parts of the mostly Muslim north of the country protests had stopped and crowds gathered to pray in mosques. Some were resigned to a compromise being made.
"If the government will be sincere with what it pays to subsidize fuel, the labor and government should agree on a common front," said Abdullahi Mustapha, a civil servant in Kano, Nigeria's oldest city and the second largest after Lagos.
"My wish is that any decision should not hurt Nigerians, the economy or this great nation."
Ministers and some analysts say the subsidy fuelled corruption, favored richer people who could afford cars and drained resources from Nigeria.
"FRUITFUL TALKS"
Main unions said they had "fruitful" talks with Jonathan on Thursday night, leading to media speculation that the two sides might be approaching a compromise.
"There are no talks today because we have to go back to our members and discuss the options with all the stakeholders. We are a democratic organization," NLC's vice president Isa Aremu told Reuters.
Presidency sources say the sticking point in talks was the price of petrol, which unions want returned back to 65 naira. One solution may be for the government to pay a percentage of the subsidy, which reduces along a sliding scale over time.
This could give the government time to convince the public it will spend money saved from the subsidy on promised social programmes and local refinery maintenance.
Sanusi said the key for the government was to get unions to agree to subsidies being removed, even if this was to happen in the future.
Worries over Nigerian oil supplies have pushed up global oil prices in the last two days.
Nigeria produces more than 2 million barrels of crude oil per day and is a key supplier to the United States, Europe and Asia. Crude oil exports provide Nigeria with more than 90 percent of foreign exchange revenues.
Economists say keeping the subsidy in place would force Nigeria into huge external borrowing, but Nigerians, many of whom live on less than $2 a day, see it as their most tangible welfare benefit.
Despite holding the world's seventh-largest gas reserves and producing over 2 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude, decades of graft and mismanagement mean Nigeria has to import almost all of its fuel needs. ($1 = 162.0500 naira)
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Salary Of A Nigerian Politician
Analysis
This analyses translate to the fact that in addition to the regular and legitimate salaries and allowances of N17 million ($113,333) and N14.99 million ($99,933) which senators and reps were collecting yearly and the irregular allowance of estacodes, duty tours etc, they were also collecting N192m ($1.28m) and N140m ($0.93m) respectively in illicit quarterly allocation which is not provided for by RMAFC.
Effectively, a Nigerian senator was taking home at least $1.40m ($1.28m quarterly allocations + $0.113m regular salaries and allowances) as against the $0.174m an American senator takes home hence a Nigeria senator earns at least 8 times as much as an American senator and more than 3 times the American president.
Whereas a Senator in the U.S earns N21, 146,000, the same as a member of the House of Representatives; a UK Member of Parliament earn £64,766 (N14, 896,180)
In other words, a Federal Legislator in Nigeria is paid more than double what a Member of British Parliament earns per annum.
Senate President David Mark alone takes N250 million quarterly or N83.33 million per month. Senate Deputy President gets N150 million per quarter or N50 million a month.
Mark and his deputy earns in 4 months, six times what the UK Prime Minister earns in a year. David Cameron goes home with £190,000 per anum (N43, 700,000)
In a Next newspaper news article entitled ‘An Assembly for looting’ written by Musikilu Mojeed with Elor Nkereuwem, the authors rightly claimed that each of the 360 members of the House of Representatives were getting N35 million in cash money in quarterly allocation while each of the 109 Senators pockets N48 million each. These allocations have however been slashed by 20% to N27 million ($180,000) and N38 million ($253,333) respectively due to the 20% reduction requested by the late president.
The cut has been a source of a major controversy in the House of Representatives in the past few days where members are agitating to jerk up the sum to N42m quarterly at a time when the government is lamenting being broke and when the already signed 2010 budget is being cut by as much as 40%. What a bunch of greedy inhuman lots! The discordance has caused members of the House to force the former speaker, Dimeji Bankole to reduce his quarterly allowance from N140m ($933,333) to N100m ($666,667) or from an annual allowance of N560m ($3.73m) to N400m ($2.67m).
This analyses translate to the fact that in addition to the regular and legitimate salaries and allowances of N17 million ($113,333) and N14.99 million ($99,933) which senators and reps were collecting yearly and the irregular allowance of estacodes, duty tours etc, they were also collecting N192m ($1.28m) and N140m ($0.93m) respectively in illicit quarterly allocation which is not provided for by RMAFC.
Effectively, a Nigerian senator was taking home at least $1.40m ($1.28m quarterly allocations + $0.113m regular salaries and allowances) as against the $0.174m an American senator takes home hence a Nigeria senator earns at least 8 times as much as an American senator and more than 3 times the American president.
Whereas a Senator in the U.S earns N21, 146,000, the same as a member of the House of Representatives; a UK Member of Parliament earn £64,766 (N14, 896,180)
In other words, a Federal Legislator in Nigeria is paid more than double what a Member of British Parliament earns per annum.
Senate President David Mark alone takes N250 million quarterly or N83.33 million per month. Senate Deputy President gets N150 million per quarter or N50 million a month.
Mark and his deputy earns in 4 months, six times what the UK Prime Minister earns in a year. David Cameron goes home with £190,000 per anum (N43, 700,000)
In a Next newspaper news article entitled ‘An Assembly for looting’ written by Musikilu Mojeed with Elor Nkereuwem, the authors rightly claimed that each of the 360 members of the House of Representatives were getting N35 million in cash money in quarterly allocation while each of the 109 Senators pockets N48 million each. These allocations have however been slashed by 20% to N27 million ($180,000) and N38 million ($253,333) respectively due to the 20% reduction requested by the late president.
The cut has been a source of a major controversy in the House of Representatives in the past few days where members are agitating to jerk up the sum to N42m quarterly at a time when the government is lamenting being broke and when the already signed 2010 budget is being cut by as much as 40%. What a bunch of greedy inhuman lots! The discordance has caused members of the House to force the former speaker, Dimeji Bankole to reduce his quarterly allowance from N140m ($933,333) to N100m ($666,667) or from an annual allowance of N560m ($3.73m) to N400m ($2.67m).
The case against removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria by Femi Aderupatan, USA
I am writting this article to argues that subsidy can and does occur in deregulated markets, the difference being its point of application and nature of distribution in an economy. My article draws from the current use of subsidy and protectionism by leading free market economies in analysing the logic of fuel subsidy as it relates specifically to the Nigerian economy. Following the on going protest in Nigeria , this article is presented in a sense, as a concept note to stimulate reflection at policy level and its analysis qualitative but pragmatic.
There is a strong resolve by Nigerians to resist government attempts to implement the European development fund (EDF) / IMF agenda to deregulate the downstream oil sector, which to the average Nigerian, simply means the removal of fuel subsidy. This is a hard sell, given the arguments presented by top bureaucrats in the Nigerian oil business on the deregulation debates. Before i comment on these ‘facts of the matter’ that gave further boost to the ‘pro subsidy’ campaign, i would like to briefly analyse the implication and logic in ODA/IMF position in pushing the deregulation ‘conditionality’. Put bluntly, the removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria is a direct affront to the millennium development goal number 1 of halving the number of people living in poverty by 2015 and at odds with global concern for the low levels of economic growth and recently reported declining human development index in Nigeria. It also smacks of double standards in the current patterns of State intervention in free markets and increased levels of protectionism in leading capitalist enclaves. It is also obvious that the pressure to remove subsidy is designed by experts with insufficient understanding of the Nigerian economy or who choose to ignore the inability of client governments to effectively implement anti poverty programmes planned as a wider element of a fiscal policy agenda.
While it is not my intention to discuss the structural flaws in government implementation of anti poverty programmes, it is important that certain assumptions are put in proper perspective. To understand the prevailing dynamics, we need not duel on contested official statistics, but point to some persistent gaps in the Nigerian economy that explain the reality on ground. First, the Nigerian economy is almost singularly hinged on crude oil export and therefore, highly sensitive to internal and external market shocks in the oil sector. What this means is that a fractional rise in cost of fuel has unmitigated ripple effects on the industrial sector and key components of basic need indicators such as food, housing and health. Secondly, the ripple effects are without boundary, as social liberties for example, become less accessible to the average Nigerian and well removed from the less privileged who consist the vast majority of the over 145 million population. The private sector suffers the biggest reverses as small scale entrepreneurs’ lose their businesses due to higher business overheads. When one business is lost, many dependent families are exposed not only to poverty but other forms of social exclusion which include constrained access to justice system (determined by financial leverage) and constrained rights to electoral/political participation. So, we are not dealing with a polity environment where there are clear delineations in rights, privileges and opportunities and where institutions have the capacity to preserve and distribute these variables equitably.
What the advocates of deregulation may have missed is that the poverty reduction programme designed by most governments in sub Sahara Africa never goes beyond the official launch of the policy document. This is a fact that can be easily verified. Again, financial technocrats in Brussels and Washington are more obsessed with the pace of privatisation than the transparency of its process. It may be noteworthy to state that in much of Africa, there is no clear boundary between the private and public sector, the former is frequently an extension of the later and quite often than not, it is government officials and their associates that end up buying these public holdings. There is therefore, a conflict between the end and the means to privatisation in which the tax payer is the clear loser.
The external logic
Some of the questions our global financial experts need to ask are; what intervention would the government put in place to reduce the incidence of poverty resulting from imminent hyper inflation and how has similar schemes or projects worked in the past? Is it possible to identify projects, measure and evaluate individuals businesses that are the product of such intervention? What has been the specific impact of such projects on overall poverty level reductions? And if answers to these questions remain a puzzle, what are the alternative choices available to push the deregulation agenda forward? Would it not be sensible then to delay the removal of subsidy until the government delivers on the electricity supply required to service industries? Would it not be expedient to push for greater accountability and good governance to ensure a more transparent privatisation process that will respond to the market magic of enterprise and ‘trickle down’ effect?
But back to the issue of subsidy, it is important to acknowledge that deregulation has proven to be the way forward in expanding opportunities for economic growth and competitive markets. Yet, deregulation and subsidy have proved not to be entirely mutually exclusive. The developed economies have continued to apply subsidies in areas of social services as transport, energy and agriculture, sectors for which EU countries even borrow to subsidise. Private public partnerships are negotiated in transport services that offer unprofitable schedules just to provide convenience in social service to citizens. For African countries, the challenge is nothing near the convenience of transport service schedules, but the sheer availability of a service. Beyond this, countries like Ireland have provided more recent evidence that marked improvement in economic growth and human development is achievable through a balanced mix of market liberalism and state owned enterprise in an environment of public sector fiscal prudence and accountability. Such evidence includes the commercialised electricity company ESB and the telecom service Eirecom, which transformed in a span of six years (1984-1990) to a modern profitable and competitive outfit, extending its transformed digital services to less profitable rural communities even in a deregulation market environment (James B. Burnham 2003) . There is a clear indication here of subsidy applied through a national development programme aimed at improving communication and opportunities in rural communities. Subsidy is therefore not a strange bird in market economies and should not be served cold to less developed countries.
So, another set of hypothetical questions are; how would the IMF and donors like EDF respond if the money saved from subsidy were paid out as some social welfare scheme as would obtain in EU countries? (This precludes any argument for the NEEDS and SEEDS poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria as their impact is a matter of conjecture). Are these donor institutions prepared to negotiate a workable subsidy or grant scheme for Nigerian medium and small scale entrepreneurs/farmers from subsidy removal savings? Would it not be more expedient to pressure government to service the refineries to full production capacity given the implications on overhead and competitiveness for local industries? Nigerians and indeed Africans need to know why subsidy is good for the global north and bad for the south, when it is not a matter of affordability, but the need to hold off poverty levels and protect livelihoods.
Flaws in domestic logic
There is no truthful credibility in the arguments put forward by the Nigerian oil bureaucrats against subsidy in comparisons with oil sector policies in Venezuela. . First i debunked the argument that Nigeria had the lowest price of refined product among oil producing countries and said it cost NGN 400 approximately $2.35 to fill a 2 litre engine car in Venezuela against $29 (NGN5000) in Nigeria . I wondered why Nigeria was making so much fuss about fuel subsidy when his country was also subsidising other neighbouring countries. Nigeria main problem is our preference to export than refine more of our crude. Refining more of the countries crude would give the country higher stakes in a deregulated market, stimulate medium scale service industries and also provide greater job opportunities for the teaming skilled unemployed.
So another set of questions, why have successive governments left the refineries in a state of disrepair while spending huge on subsidy? Is there any chance that the savings from subsidy withdrawal will go directly into rehabilitating the refineries? Does deregulation imply NNPC will no longer operate a monopoly in importation of refined petroleum product or is this lobby a self- serving lifeline to continue its monopoly? Why should ordinary citizens bear the brunt of government inability to curb profiteering by a faceless bunkering cabal the NNPC referred to? These are serious questions Jonathan need to addressed before removing oil subsidy. In any case, there is good reason why Nigerians doubt subsidy removal will solve the fuel scarcity problem as the cabal will only regroup to change tactics, a fact Nigerians are only too aware of.
In the meantime, one option that can be revisited is the once attempted two tier pricing regime, a subsidised commercial rate and a full price market rate for private vehicles. This scheme introduced years back under past military administrations once seemed the answer to the concern for market price inflations, but could not stand the assault of gross racketeering, discipline and internal sabotaged at implementation. This option still holds good prospects for targeted subsidy if well structured and protected by legislation that impose consequences for transgression. Again, donor institutions need to re-define privatisation as it relates to economies in sub Sahara Africa to focus more on trimming the size and ego of the public sector. It should include encouraging public- private partnerships that out-source services in sectors like postal services for improved efficiency and enable the development of an active civil society sector that help build institutional values necessary for social capital .
Donors and international financial institutions need to think these issues through within the wider context of Nigeria’s and indeed Africa’s development challenges, the current global concern and effort to tackling global inequality, poverty and underdevelopment in less developed countries.
WHERE NIGERIA OIL SUBSIDY IS GOING
N3.655 trillion SHARED between 2006 and September 2011.
100 companies shared over N1.426 trillion between January and August 2011 alone.
Oando Oil => Wale Tinubu
Mike Adenuga => CONOIL
Femi Otedola => AP
MRS Oil => Aliko Dangote's brother, Sayyu Dantata.
Integrated Oil and Gas => former Minister of the Interior, Capt. Emmanuel Iheanacho.
The full list, and their individual haul, as read out by Senator Abe, is as follows:
1. Oando Nigerian Plc. – N228.506 billion
2. MRS –N224.818 billion
3. Pinnacle Construction-N300 billion
4. Enak Oil & Gas –N19.684 billion
5. CONOIl – N37.960 billion
6. Bovas & Co. Nig. Ltd. – N5.685 billion
7. Obat N85 billion and AP; N104.5billion.
8. Folawiyo Oil - N113.3 billion
9.IPMAN Investment Limited- N10.9billion
10. Acorn petroleum - N24.1billion
11. Atio Oil-N64.4billion
12. AMP- N11.4billion
13. Honeywell-N12.2billion
14. Emac Oil- N19.2billion
15. D.Jones Oil-N14.8billion;
16. Capital Oil - N22.4 billion
17. AZ Oil- N18.613billion
18. Eterna oil- N5.57 billion
19. Dozil oil- N3.375 billion
20. Fort oil-N8.582 billion.
21. Integrated Oil and Gas- N30.777 billion
My question to President Jonathan is that how will a wasteful government suddenly realize the genius of prudence and making the right investment decisions simply because there is more money available from oil subsidy removal? Ostentatiously lavish living, wasting and plundering public money, misuse of powers, disrespect towards rule of law, insatiable greed coupled with rampant corruption, apathy towards the poor and needy, inefficiency and incompetence – just to mention a few-are the well-known traits of our rulers (both military and civilian alike) and government officials – there could be some notable exceptions. The word 'austerity' is not in the dictionary of our political leaders, high-level civil bureaucrats, public office holders and even private individuals, who are enjoying little affluence. The habit of living beyond means – some called it our national addiction – has made us a nation with a beggar's bowl. When foreign lenders see the lifestyle of our ruling political elite, they immediately show indignation – it is hard for them to believe that the rulers of a nation, living on borrowed funds, have such flamboyant ways of spending.
By Femi Aderupatan, is a Venture Capitalist, Investment Banker and CEO of Strategic Business Solutions lives in Chicago , USA. Email: Femisun1@aol.com
There is a strong resolve by Nigerians to resist government attempts to implement the European development fund (EDF) / IMF agenda to deregulate the downstream oil sector, which to the average Nigerian, simply means the removal of fuel subsidy. This is a hard sell, given the arguments presented by top bureaucrats in the Nigerian oil business on the deregulation debates. Before i comment on these ‘facts of the matter’ that gave further boost to the ‘pro subsidy’ campaign, i would like to briefly analyse the implication and logic in ODA/IMF position in pushing the deregulation ‘conditionality’. Put bluntly, the removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria is a direct affront to the millennium development goal number 1 of halving the number of people living in poverty by 2015 and at odds with global concern for the low levels of economic growth and recently reported declining human development index in Nigeria. It also smacks of double standards in the current patterns of State intervention in free markets and increased levels of protectionism in leading capitalist enclaves. It is also obvious that the pressure to remove subsidy is designed by experts with insufficient understanding of the Nigerian economy or who choose to ignore the inability of client governments to effectively implement anti poverty programmes planned as a wider element of a fiscal policy agenda.
While it is not my intention to discuss the structural flaws in government implementation of anti poverty programmes, it is important that certain assumptions are put in proper perspective. To understand the prevailing dynamics, we need not duel on contested official statistics, but point to some persistent gaps in the Nigerian economy that explain the reality on ground. First, the Nigerian economy is almost singularly hinged on crude oil export and therefore, highly sensitive to internal and external market shocks in the oil sector. What this means is that a fractional rise in cost of fuel has unmitigated ripple effects on the industrial sector and key components of basic need indicators such as food, housing and health. Secondly, the ripple effects are without boundary, as social liberties for example, become less accessible to the average Nigerian and well removed from the less privileged who consist the vast majority of the over 145 million population. The private sector suffers the biggest reverses as small scale entrepreneurs’ lose their businesses due to higher business overheads. When one business is lost, many dependent families are exposed not only to poverty but other forms of social exclusion which include constrained access to justice system (determined by financial leverage) and constrained rights to electoral/political participation. So, we are not dealing with a polity environment where there are clear delineations in rights, privileges and opportunities and where institutions have the capacity to preserve and distribute these variables equitably.
What the advocates of deregulation may have missed is that the poverty reduction programme designed by most governments in sub Sahara Africa never goes beyond the official launch of the policy document. This is a fact that can be easily verified. Again, financial technocrats in Brussels and Washington are more obsessed with the pace of privatisation than the transparency of its process. It may be noteworthy to state that in much of Africa, there is no clear boundary between the private and public sector, the former is frequently an extension of the later and quite often than not, it is government officials and their associates that end up buying these public holdings. There is therefore, a conflict between the end and the means to privatisation in which the tax payer is the clear loser.
The external logic
Some of the questions our global financial experts need to ask are; what intervention would the government put in place to reduce the incidence of poverty resulting from imminent hyper inflation and how has similar schemes or projects worked in the past? Is it possible to identify projects, measure and evaluate individuals businesses that are the product of such intervention? What has been the specific impact of such projects on overall poverty level reductions? And if answers to these questions remain a puzzle, what are the alternative choices available to push the deregulation agenda forward? Would it not be sensible then to delay the removal of subsidy until the government delivers on the electricity supply required to service industries? Would it not be expedient to push for greater accountability and good governance to ensure a more transparent privatisation process that will respond to the market magic of enterprise and ‘trickle down’ effect?
But back to the issue of subsidy, it is important to acknowledge that deregulation has proven to be the way forward in expanding opportunities for economic growth and competitive markets. Yet, deregulation and subsidy have proved not to be entirely mutually exclusive. The developed economies have continued to apply subsidies in areas of social services as transport, energy and agriculture, sectors for which EU countries even borrow to subsidise. Private public partnerships are negotiated in transport services that offer unprofitable schedules just to provide convenience in social service to citizens. For African countries, the challenge is nothing near the convenience of transport service schedules, but the sheer availability of a service. Beyond this, countries like Ireland have provided more recent evidence that marked improvement in economic growth and human development is achievable through a balanced mix of market liberalism and state owned enterprise in an environment of public sector fiscal prudence and accountability. Such evidence includes the commercialised electricity company ESB and the telecom service Eirecom, which transformed in a span of six years (1984-1990) to a modern profitable and competitive outfit, extending its transformed digital services to less profitable rural communities even in a deregulation market environment (James B. Burnham 2003) . There is a clear indication here of subsidy applied through a national development programme aimed at improving communication and opportunities in rural communities. Subsidy is therefore not a strange bird in market economies and should not be served cold to less developed countries.
So, another set of hypothetical questions are; how would the IMF and donors like EDF respond if the money saved from subsidy were paid out as some social welfare scheme as would obtain in EU countries? (This precludes any argument for the NEEDS and SEEDS poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria as their impact is a matter of conjecture). Are these donor institutions prepared to negotiate a workable subsidy or grant scheme for Nigerian medium and small scale entrepreneurs/farmers from subsidy removal savings? Would it not be more expedient to pressure government to service the refineries to full production capacity given the implications on overhead and competitiveness for local industries? Nigerians and indeed Africans need to know why subsidy is good for the global north and bad for the south, when it is not a matter of affordability, but the need to hold off poverty levels and protect livelihoods.
Flaws in domestic logic
There is no truthful credibility in the arguments put forward by the Nigerian oil bureaucrats against subsidy in comparisons with oil sector policies in Venezuela. . First i debunked the argument that Nigeria had the lowest price of refined product among oil producing countries and said it cost NGN 400 approximately $2.35 to fill a 2 litre engine car in Venezuela against $29 (NGN5000) in Nigeria . I wondered why Nigeria was making so much fuss about fuel subsidy when his country was also subsidising other neighbouring countries. Nigeria main problem is our preference to export than refine more of our crude. Refining more of the countries crude would give the country higher stakes in a deregulated market, stimulate medium scale service industries and also provide greater job opportunities for the teaming skilled unemployed.
So another set of questions, why have successive governments left the refineries in a state of disrepair while spending huge on subsidy? Is there any chance that the savings from subsidy withdrawal will go directly into rehabilitating the refineries? Does deregulation imply NNPC will no longer operate a monopoly in importation of refined petroleum product or is this lobby a self- serving lifeline to continue its monopoly? Why should ordinary citizens bear the brunt of government inability to curb profiteering by a faceless bunkering cabal the NNPC referred to? These are serious questions Jonathan need to addressed before removing oil subsidy. In any case, there is good reason why Nigerians doubt subsidy removal will solve the fuel scarcity problem as the cabal will only regroup to change tactics, a fact Nigerians are only too aware of.
In the meantime, one option that can be revisited is the once attempted two tier pricing regime, a subsidised commercial rate and a full price market rate for private vehicles. This scheme introduced years back under past military administrations once seemed the answer to the concern for market price inflations, but could not stand the assault of gross racketeering, discipline and internal sabotaged at implementation. This option still holds good prospects for targeted subsidy if well structured and protected by legislation that impose consequences for transgression. Again, donor institutions need to re-define privatisation as it relates to economies in sub Sahara Africa to focus more on trimming the size and ego of the public sector. It should include encouraging public- private partnerships that out-source services in sectors like postal services for improved efficiency and enable the development of an active civil society sector that help build institutional values necessary for social capital .
Donors and international financial institutions need to think these issues through within the wider context of Nigeria’s and indeed Africa’s development challenges, the current global concern and effort to tackling global inequality, poverty and underdevelopment in less developed countries.
WHERE NIGERIA OIL SUBSIDY IS GOING
N3.655 trillion SHARED between 2006 and September 2011.
100 companies shared over N1.426 trillion between January and August 2011 alone.
Oando Oil => Wale Tinubu
Mike Adenuga => CONOIL
Femi Otedola => AP
MRS Oil => Aliko Dangote's brother, Sayyu Dantata.
Integrated Oil and Gas => former Minister of the Interior, Capt. Emmanuel Iheanacho.
The full list, and their individual haul, as read out by Senator Abe, is as follows:
1. Oando Nigerian Plc. – N228.506 billion
2. MRS –N224.818 billion
3. Pinnacle Construction-N300 billion
4. Enak Oil & Gas –N19.684 billion
5. CONOIl – N37.960 billion
6. Bovas & Co. Nig. Ltd. – N5.685 billion
7. Obat N85 billion and AP; N104.5billion.
8. Folawiyo Oil - N113.3 billion
9.IPMAN Investment Limited- N10.9billion
10. Acorn petroleum - N24.1billion
11. Atio Oil-N64.4billion
12. AMP- N11.4billion
13. Honeywell-N12.2billion
14. Emac Oil- N19.2billion
15. D.Jones Oil-N14.8billion;
16. Capital Oil - N22.4 billion
17. AZ Oil- N18.613billion
18. Eterna oil- N5.57 billion
19. Dozil oil- N3.375 billion
20. Fort oil-N8.582 billion.
21. Integrated Oil and Gas- N30.777 billion
My question to President Jonathan is that how will a wasteful government suddenly realize the genius of prudence and making the right investment decisions simply because there is more money available from oil subsidy removal? Ostentatiously lavish living, wasting and plundering public money, misuse of powers, disrespect towards rule of law, insatiable greed coupled with rampant corruption, apathy towards the poor and needy, inefficiency and incompetence – just to mention a few-are the well-known traits of our rulers (both military and civilian alike) and government officials – there could be some notable exceptions. The word 'austerity' is not in the dictionary of our political leaders, high-level civil bureaucrats, public office holders and even private individuals, who are enjoying little affluence. The habit of living beyond means – some called it our national addiction – has made us a nation with a beggar's bowl. When foreign lenders see the lifestyle of our ruling political elite, they immediately show indignation – it is hard for them to believe that the rulers of a nation, living on borrowed funds, have such flamboyant ways of spending.
By Femi Aderupatan, is a Venture Capitalist, Investment Banker and CEO of Strategic Business Solutions lives in Chicago , USA. Email: Femisun1@aol.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
