Transformation Agenda Myth or Reality

7/30/2019 Transformation Agenda Myth or Reality

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/transformation-agenda-myth-or-reality 1/14

NATIONAL TRANSFORMATION AGENDA (TA): MYTH OR REALITY1

By

Femi Aborisade

Labour Consultant and Attorney-At-Law

[email protected]

INTRODUCTION

I want to thank the Dean of the School of Applied Science of the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro, Mr.O. A. Oduwobi and the Organising Committee of this National Conference for the opportunitygiven me to deliver a Keynote Address. In the course of inviting me to this Conference, Mr.Oduwobi has created in me an indelible positive impression, which I feel compelled to publiclyacknowledge. He gave an undertaking to visit me one-on-one. The appointed day was fixed for 29 March 2013 between 11am and 12noon. He fulfilled his promise. He arrived a minute to12noon! Such level of commitment, focused devotion and dedication to defined objectives isrequired from national leaders if the goal of societal transformation is ever to be achieved.Structure of the paper

This paper is structured as follows:1. Definition of key concept – ‘transformation’2. Dissecting the Transformation Agenda

a. The roots of the Transformation agenda b. The perception of what is wrong with previous development plans of successive

Nigerian governments:c. lack of continuity, consistency and commitment (3Cs) to agreed policies,

programmes and projectsd. lack of adequate fundinge. recurrent expenditure crowding out capital expendituref. the nature of jobs needed to be created

g. The focus and measurability of declared objectives3. What is to be done?

DEFINITION OF KEY CONCEPT: TRANSFORMATION

The concept of transformation means a break with the past with a sense of finality and totality. Itsuggests system change - the bringing about of fundamental changes in the working of a socialunit, which may be a company, a school, a country, local government council, and so on. Theword ‘transformation’ means a total overhauling of the system as opposed to making marginalimprovements to the working of the system. It implies not only a completely new way of doingthings but also a re-organisation of society on a new basis, paradigm, policy, programme, perspective and philosophical world outlook.In order to appreciate the essence of the concept of ‘transformation’, it should be contrasted to‘reform’. A programme of reform is concerned with bringing about gradual changes withinaspects of the existing system in order to promote improvements in limited areas. While‘transformation’ denotes radical changes, a complete overhauling of the system or system changefor short, ‘reform’ may either be progressive or retrogressive. A progressive reform tends to

1 Being Keynote address delivered at the 2 nd National Conference of School of Applied Science of the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro,

Ogun State on 7 May 2013.

1 | P a g e



promote limited positive changes while a retrogressive reform tends to resist changes or causenegative reversal of changes already in place.Within the context of Nigeria, a programme that places full responsibility for health care andeducation of all Nigerians (rich or poor) completely on the shoulders of government is anexample of a transformative agenda. A programme that aims at subsidizing cost of health care

and school fees by fifty percent would be an example of a progressive reform. A policy that promotes divesting government of ownership of Public Enterprises and vesting their ownershipin private individuals or private companies is an example of a retrogressive or reactionaryreform.DISSECTING THE TRANSFORMATION AGENDA (TA)

I consider it pertinent to first X-ray the Transformation agenda in order to take an informed position on whether or not it is a myth or reality.An X-tray of the Transformation agenda will be undertaken from the following points of view:

• The roots of the Transformation agenda

• The perception of what is wrong with previous development plans of successive Nigerian

governments:

o lack of continuity, consistency and commitment (3Cs) to agreed policies, programmes and projects

o lack of adequate funding

o recurrent expenditure crowding out capital expenditure

o the nature of jobs needed to be cretaed

• The measurability of declared objectives

Permit me to say that for this paper, I rely on the publication of the National PlanningCommission entitled ‘Transformation agenda 2011-2015: summary of Federal Government’s key priority, polices, programmes and projects2.

THE ROOTS OF THE TRANSFORMATION AGENDA (TA)The introductory part to the Transformation Agenda (TA) publicly declares that the agenda:

‘is based and draws its inspiration from the NV 20:2020…’ (page 6).

Tentatively, we may pose and answer the question: if a transformative agenda means breakingwith the past, is the Transformation Agenda, which is based on and draws its inspiration from a past programme, a myth or reality? It is submitted that on the ground of being based on a pastagenda, which has never being acknowledged to be a success, the Transformation Agenda is amyth.Since the Transformation Agenda is rooted in Vision 20: 2020, it is imperative to understand thekernel of this Vision.What is Vision 20:2020?

The key goal of Vision 20:2020 was to catapult Nigeria into the league of the first global 20economies by the year 2020 – hence the name Vision 20:2020 The idea of Nigeria’s Vision 2020has been traced to a research conducted by some American economists who predicted that basedon the abundance of human and material resources, Nigeria could be in the league of 20 topeconomies by year 2025, provided the resources are properly managed and channeled

2 Available online at http://npc.gov.ng/vault/transformation.pdf

2 | P a g e

http://npc.gov.ng/vault/transformation.pdf

http://npc.gov.ng/vault/transformation.pdf



towards attainment of defined economic goals3. Central to the Vision is the target of reducingextreme poverty, along the line of NEPAD and Millennium Development Goals, MDGs. Under Vision 20:2020, the State is to be, on the one hand:

• the enabler (helping the private sector to grow);

• the facilitator (putting in place policy measures to attract private sector investment)

• the regulator (putting in place laws, rules and regulations and ensuring private sector compliance)

On the other hand, the private sector is to be:

• the executor (carrying out economic activities)

• the direct investor (committing capital to economic activities)

• manager of businesses

In short, under Vision 20:2020, the private sector is to be the engine of economic growth. Inother words, Vision 20:2020 (and by implication, the Transformation agenda) is a programme based on the government shifting responsibility for the attainment of social and economic goalsworked out by public organs/officers on an unelected private sector. Thus, the TransformationAgenda also stipulates that:

‘The role of government should be limited to creating the enabling environment aimed atfacilitating sustainable growth and development in the country’ (page 20).

As an evidence of its private-sector orientation , the Transformation Agenda (TA) has thefollowing policy thrusts:

On the Power sector:

‘Creating a deregulated and competitive electric power sector to attract foreign and localinvestments’ (p, 16).

On Oil and Gas sub sector, the TA states it is committed to:

‘Promotion of private sector investment in both upstream and downstream activities of the oil and gas industry (Section 5.1.3, p. 14).

‘Deregulation of the industry’, (Section 5.1.3, p, 14).

The implication of the above pro-private sector declaration in the Agenda is a continuedcommitment to the neoliberal privatization agenda whereas what is required is to reverse thetrend.I contend that government officials were not elected or appointed to pass responsibility for publicgood to the unelected private sector. The primary purpose of government (so declaredimperatively and mandatorily by the Constitution) ‘shall be’ the welfare and security of the people4. Government lacks the right, under the Constitution, to shift responsibility to the privatesector. Any Agenda that avoids constitutionally backed responsibility is not only

3 See Eneh, O. C. 2011. Nigeria’s Vision 20:2020 – Issues, challenges and implications for Development Managment. Asian

Journal of Rural Development, 1:21-40.

4 S. 14 (2) (b), Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.

3 | P a g e



unconstitutional, it is equally immoral. Any Government that authors such an unconstitutionalAgenda becomes illegitimate.For the avoidance of any doubt, Nigeria’s Constitution opposes privatization. In order toensure that the State has the capacity to fund socio-economic rights that require budgetary provision to execute, S. 16 of the Constitution provides essentially for state ownership and

control of the major sectors of the economy. That the state shall:• manage and operate the major sectors of the economy, without prejudice to equally

operating or participating in other sectors of the economy (S. 16(1)(c)

• protect the right of every citizen to engage in any economic activities outside the major

sectors of the economy, even though any person may still participate in the major sectors of theeconomy (S. 16(1)(d);

• not operate the economic system in such a manner as to permit the concentration of

wealth or the means of production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group (S.16(2)(c);

• ensure that the material resources of the nation are harnessed and distributed as best as

possible to serve the common good; (S. 16(2)(b);

• (b) control the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare,

freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status andopportunity (S. 16(1)(b).

In the spirit of ensuring availability of resources to meet socio-economic needs, Chapter II, inSection 15(5) mandates the state to fight corruption:

‘The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power’.

THE PERCEPTION OF WHAT IS WRONG WITH PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENTPLANS OF SUCCESSIVE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENTS

The conceptualization of what is wrong with past development efforts by successivegovernments in Nigeria in the Transformation Agenda appears faulty and simplistic. A problemidentified is a problem half solved, they often say. But when a problem is not appropriatelyidentified and defined, finding appropriate solution may become a tall order.The Introductory part of the Agenda posits that:

‘Nigeria’s development efforts have over the years been characterized by lack of continuity,consistency and commitment (3Cs) to agreed policies, programmes and projects…’

While lack of continuity, consistency and commitment may be a problem, it does not tell thewhole story. Such a conceptualization is a reflection of a weak appreciation of the issues at stake.I contend that unless both the cause and effect of mercantilist policy which governs the economicsub system of Nigeria’s social structure are adequately appreciated, the striving for a way out of economic doldrums will continue to be a mirage. Mercantilism has implications on decliningterms of trade, rising debt stock, increasing interest rates, and so on.

What is Mercantilism5

5 www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Mercantilism.html and www.sparknotes.com/testprep/books/sat2/.../chapter5section4.rhtml

4 | P a g e

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Mercantilism.html



http://www.sparknotes.com/testprep/books/sat2/.../chapter5section4.rhtml






Mercantilism is a system of political economy, which aims at restraining imports and

promoting exports so as to achieve a favourable balance of trade (in international trade)

and generate employment in the domestic economy. This system dominated WesternEuropean economic thought, policies and practices between the 16 th and 18th centuries. While the policy worked in the interest of the colonising countries, it undermined the productive capacities

of the colonised countries. Colonies were discouraged from production of manufactured goods.They were to engage in primary production of cash crops and mineral extraction for export

and depend on importation of manufactured goods. That was the division of labour at thelevel of international trade. From the standpoint of developing countries, mercantilism is aneconomic structure that perpetrates unequal terms of trade, as costly manufactured goods are to be exchanged for cheap primary raw materials. Mercantilism is thus a protectionist economicsystem, which protects the economies of the industrial countries against those of the developingeconomies by a combination of economic, financial, legislative and political pressures.

Though there is the tendency to transfer capital to the economy that offers the most conduciveatmosphere for profitable investment today, the mercantilist economic system still largelycharacterises economic and trade relationships between the industrial countries and theeconomies of the former colonial countries. Though the phenomenon of Nigeria producing crudeoil and depending on importation of petroleum products is largely a product of the corruptionand failure of the internal ruling class, the reality of that economic relationship is a typicalexample of the way mercantilism works.

UNEQUAL AND DECLINING TERMS OF TRADE

The economic relationship between developing and industrial countries is characterised byunequal terms of trade, which continue to worsen.The UNCTAD6 has noted that:

There has been a long-term downward trend in real nonfuel commodity prices since 1960

... The commodity prices recession of the 1980s was more severe, and considerably more prolonged, than that of the Great Depression of the 1930s .

Findings by Christian Aid7 have also confirmed the assertion by UNCTAD:

the prices Third World countries receive for many of their traditional exports, from coffee and cocoa to rice, sugar, and cotton, continue to decline. The relative value of their exports has

declined even more—for example, in 1975 a new tractor cost the equivalent of 8 metric tons of

African coffee, but by 1990 the same tractor cost 40 metric tons.

Even World Bank 8 has confirmed the trend of falling commodity prices:

Between 1980 and 1986 the real prices of primary commodities fell sharply.

6 UNCTAD (2002) Least Developed Countries Report 2002: Escaping the Poverty Trap, New York and Geneva: United Nations,

p. 138.http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ldc2002_en.pdf (18 November 2009) (cited in Povey, 2012, p. 4).

7 Christian Aid (2003) The Trading Game: How Trade Work , Oxford: Oxfam, p. 22. (cited in Povey, 2012).

8 World Bank (1988) World Development Report 1988: Public Finance in Development , Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 24.

5 | P a g e

http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ldc2002_en.pdf





The effect of the declining terms of trade could be better appreciated when we consider thefindings by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation, FAO9. This body estimatedthat if commodity prices had maintained the same real value as in 1980, the Global South would be earning an additional $112bn in annual export revenues, which was double the then level of their aid receipts.

Causes of worsening terms of tradeBut the worsening terms of trade did not just arise naturally; the causes are due, more toconsciously determined policies and conditions, than chance occurrence. The causes could beexplained as follows:

• The economy of a typical African economy is more susceptible to the vagaries of world

price changes and other external shocks than more diversified economies10.

• the World Bank’s encouragement of all primary commodity producers to pay off their

debts by increasing their exports”11

From the publication of the World Bank,12 the following factors can also be identified:

• Slower growth in industrial countries and corresponding depressed demand.

• shifts in technology in the industrial countries aimed at reducing reliance on, and

demand for industrial raw materials.• Growing subsidies and trade protectionist policies in the industrial countries, as provided,

for example, by the EC's Common Agricultural Policy.

• Past investment in infrastructure and new techniques, and subsequent output expansion in

developing countries in response to the high prices of the early 1970s.

• Domestic policies adopted by developing countries in response to directions dictated by

the core industrial countries.EFFECTS OF UNEQUAL TERMS OF TRADE

Rising Debt Stock

Nigeria’s external debt profile has again been on a gradual rise. Before the exit from the ParisClub debt as at end of December 2004, the external debt stock was about $35.94bn. After theuneconomic and slavish payment of over $12bn in 2005/2006, the external debt stock dropped to$3.54bn. As at April 2012, it had risen to $5.9bn while the total debt stock, external and internalamounted to $44bn13. Though the current debt stock is about 20 per cent of GDP and is generallynot considered a problem, because the general recommendation is that debt stock should be lessthan 60 per cent of GDP. However, it is important to note that the debt stock is rising graduallyagain and may sooner than later reach disturbing proportions. It should also be appreciated thatmuch of the existing and new loans being incurred are from multilateral sources – the WorldBank, African Development Bank, International Fund for Agricultural Development, and so on.Though these are termed ‘soft loans’ with certain concessional terms, including no interest

9 FAO (2005) The State of Agricultural Commodity Markets 2004, Rome: UN Food and Agricultural Organisation.

10 T. Mkandawire & C. C. Soludo (eds.). (1999). Our Continent, Our Future: African perspectives on structural adjustment ,

Dakar: CODESRIA.

11 M. B. Brown (1995). Africa’s Choices: after thirty years of the World Bank , London: Penguin Books, p. 79.

12 World Bank (1988) World Development Report 1988: Public Finance in Development , Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.

24.

13 www.thisdaylive.com/articles/nigeria-s-domestic-external-debts-no ... (retrieved on 14/10/12).

6 | P a g e

http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/nigeria-s-domestic-external-debts-no






charges, repayment grace period of 10 years and long repayment of between 20 and 40 years,they carry a service charge of 0.75% per annum. The critical implication of this nature of loan isthat the future of the coming generation is being mortgaged and enslaved. The debts are beingincurred, stolen and enjoyed by the current ruling class but the burden of repayment is to be borne by future generations.

Increasing interest ratesThe reasons for the rising debt stock include:

• Unequal terms of trade.

• Rising interest rates.

• Imposition of penalties for failure to repay loans on time . On a continental basis,

UNCTAD14 calculated that between 1970 and 2002 sub-Saharan Africa received $294 billion in loans, paid back $268 billion in debt service, but was still left with debts of some $210 billion.

In the case of Nigeria, the original value of Nigeria’s external debt in 1985 was $18bn. This

increased to $35.9bn as at December 2004. But the cumulative debt service payment during

the same period was $36.6bn15.

THE PROBLEM OF INADEQUATE FUNDINGThe Transformation Agenda identifies seven sectors of the economy as the main growth drivers 16 and that the sectors are characterized, among others, by ‘inadequate funding’ (p. 14).The Agenda thus declares that:

A total investment size of N40.75 trillion in nominal terms is projected for the programme period. The public sector will account for N24.45 trillion or 60 per cent, while the remaining N16.30 trillion or 40 per cent is expected to be invested by the private sector. Overall, publicsector investment plan is made up of N12.86 trillion for Federal Government and N11.59trillion for States and Local Governments respectively (p. 8).

Three important issues are of concern with the above perception of inadequate funding andfunding plan for the agenda:

First, the problem with public projects or development plans in Nigeria is not so much aboutinadequate funding but corruption. It is either budgeted funds are never released for the purposefor which they were meant or that if released, they are diverted into private accounts. Where budgeted funds are not released, new budgets are made without any reference to the previousunspent funds. We may use the controversies surrounding the 2012 budget implementation as anexample. This controversy has been succinctly captured in a write up by Nasir El Rufai 17, asfollows:

Implementation in 2012 was shrouded in controversy; by the third quarter of the year, thefinance ministry pegged implementation at 56% but when new facts emerged, the ministryreverted the figures to about 12.6%. The House of Representatives came up with a different

14 UNCTAD (2004), ibid.

15 O. A. Ogunlana (A deputy director of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN) www.g24.org/TGM/ongu0905.pdf (retrieved on

14/10/12).

16 They are agriculture, water resources, solid minerals, manufacturing, oil and gas, trade and commerce as well as culture and

tourism (p. 14).

17 http://premiumtimesng.com/opinion/126653-nigerias-budget-and-the-dance-of-the-masquerade-by-nasir-ahmad-el-rufai.html

(Published March 24, 2013 and retrieved on 6 May 2013).

7 | P a g e

http://www.g24.org/TGM/ongu0905.pdf


http://premiumtimesng.com/opinion/126653-nigerias-budget-and-the-dance-of-the-masquerade-by-nasir-ahmad-el-rufai.html






figure entirely and issued a threat to have the President impeached if by September the sameyear the budget was not implemented 100%. The budget was not implemented 100% andneither was the president impeached. Interestingly, the implementation for the four quartersof 2012 fell below the projected estimates.

It is disturbing that the issue of corruption is not a concern in the Transformation Agenda. Is such

an Agenda a myth or reality?Second, the Transformation Agenda is an Agenda of the Federal Government. There is noevidence that it was collectively drawn up democratically or with the participation of the privatesector, the State and Local Government Councils. Yet, the Agenda has estimated how much of itscost will be contributed by the State and Local Governments (N11.59 trillion) and the privatesector (N16.30 trillion or 40 per cent). The question again is: Is an Agenda drawn up exclusively by the Federal Government but which allocates roles to others without consultation a myth or reality?THE ISSUE OF RECURRENT EXPENDITURE CROWDING OUT CAPITAL

EXPENDITURE

The Agenda expresses concern over recurrent expenditure crowding out capital expenditure, as

follows:2.3 Public Expenditure Management

The sub-optimality of the expenditure profile of the Federal Government of Nigeria(FGN) has been a major area of concern. Since 1999, recurrent spending has consistentlycrowded out capital expenditure, exacerbating the already abysmal state of infrastructure.Recurrent expenditure has fluctuated between 47.5% in 1999 to 80.29% in 2003, whilecapital expenditure accounted for only 19.71% of total government expenditure. It hassince increased continually to a high of 38.37% of total expenditure in 2009. It has grownmuch worse in 2011 with government borrowing to finance recurrent expenditures. (p. 9)

The above conceptualization of the problem is nothing but an excuse to sack workers. From this point of view, the Agenda should be seen as anti-worker or anti-poor. It was on the basis of thisanti-poor people reasoning that the CBN Governor, towards the end of last year called for massive retrenchment of as much as 50% in the Federal public service.

Reducing the workforce is not a solution to the crisis of the economy for the following reasons.

First, those who work deserve their pay, as a legitimate right. Payment of salaries is not agratuitous gift; it is consideration for services rendered.

Second, there is a relationship between the state of the economy and the number of personsemployed. When workers are sacked, the capacity to buy goods and services dwindles. Thus, insome other industrial economies, in the face of the financial crises, various governments tend tofind a way to put money in the hands of the people and cushion the effects of the crisis.

Third, as the NLC reasoned, if workers are sacked, the money saved in the process is likely to bestolen.

Fourth, the stolen wealth should be recovered and invested to establish public enterprises inorder to enhance the capacity of the state to employ more hands.

8 | P a g e



Fifth, if the wage bill must be reduced for any reason, it is the salaries and allowances of electedofficers that should be cut. For example, as pointed out by the radical, pro-people Pastor TundeBakare, the average cost of maintaining a national legislator in Nigeria(based on the 2012national Budget) is N320million or $2.1million per year or about N27million per month, in acountry in which the official (as opposed to the actual) minimum wage is just N18,000 per

month or N216,000 per year, a ratio of 1: 1,500. The calculation of the average cost of maintaining a national legislator is presented below: Number of Senators = 109· Number of Members of the House of Representatives = 360· Total Number of Legislators = 469· 2012 Budget Proposal for the National Assembly = N150 billion· Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member = N320 million· Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member in USD = $2.1 million/year Indeed, on the basis of international comparison, the Nigerian Senator earns about seven (7)

times what the US President earns. Whereas the US President earns $400,000 per year, or N60million, inclusive of all allowances, the Nigerian Senator earns N163million or $1.10million

per year, at the exchange rate of $1:N150. The average salary of the Nigerian Senator per year isabout N11million while the allowances amount to N152million18. Indeed, the cost of a Senator’scar (Toyota Land Cruiser Jeep)19 is $100,724 or about N16million (The Nation, online version,12 February 2012), in a country where minimum wage is N18,000 per month or N216,000 per year!

Sixth, it has also been argued that the proportion of the population in public service is toolimited, and that in reality, governments ought to employ more. Prof Funmi Adewumi20 hasasserted that by government’s own admission, as at early 2006, the total employment figure inthe entire public service of Nigeria from the Federal to local government levels was 2,267,492.With a population of about 140million as at then, this translates to only 1.61% of the populace.He wonders why anybody would argue that it is too much for a government to directly employless than 2% of its total population.Also, according to Adewumi21, by government’s own account,

those in the cadres of permanent secretary and the directorate during the same periodeach earned on the average, US$1,000 and US$ 700 per month respectively andconstituted less than 2% of all employees. The bulk of the employees outside thedirectorate cadre as at 2005 numbered 178,445 … Those at the level of confidentialsecretary are credited with a pay packet of US$400 per month (Adegoroye, 2006) whilethose at the lowest level earn less than US$100 each per month. We can then put theaverage earning of the civil servant at about US$ 250 …

18 Pre 2012 Budget figures

19 For 2012 Financial Year

20 F. Adewumi (2012) ‘Welcome Address at the Formal Opening of the Conference on 100 Years of Trade Unionism in Nigeria:

Retrospect and Prospects, Organised by the Working Class and Trade Union Studies Association of Nigeria(WCTUSAN) at theConference Centre, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, 5-7, December 2012.

21 F. Adewumi (2012), id.

9 | P a g e



THE NATURE OF JOBS NEEDED TO BE CREATED

The Transformation Agenda (TA) correctly identifies the enormity of the problem of unemployment. It states that:

The Nigerian economy is experiencing growth without employment as the rate of growthof the labour force exceeds the employment opportunities that are being created. Theunemployed population is at present, dominated by the youth who are mostly schoolleavers with senior secondary school qualifications and graduates of tertiary institutions.The composite employment data showed that the rate of unemployment surged from11.9% in 2006 to 14.6% in 2007 and 21.1% by January 2010 (S. 2.2, p. 8)

Also, in another context, the Agenda describes the problem of unemployment as follows:

During the period 2004 – 2010, the country experienced sustained high growth rates, butwithout commensurate rises in employment. The structure of employment remained

basically the same during the period with agricultural self-employment continued todominate the country’s labour market. The most noteworthy employment developmentwas the expansion of jobs in the communication sector as a direct consequence of thederegulation of the sector (S. 4.3, p. 12).

Unfortunately, the measures designed to tackle the plague of unemployment fall short of themonstrous dimension, which unemployment and the accompanying pervasive insecurity and daredevil criminality have attained. The government appears contented with creating jobs, whichinvolve re-charge card selling, job creation by gambling in the name of “You Win’, graduatestreet cleaners, graduate road traffic officers, vocational training of a few hands, and so on. Whatthe disturbing degree of unemployment requires today is direct investment by the State and preparedness to fight corruption, head-on The measures articulated or disarticulated in theTransformation Agenda does not show government is committed to positive reform not to talk of commitment to a transformation agenda, which is radical in nature.

Let us have a glimpse of the inadequate measures contained in the Transformation Agenda:

Accordingly, the following policy measures will be pursued during the programme period to reinvigorate various sectors of the economy and enhance their employmentgenerating potentials:

• Implementing a youth employment safety net support program that includes

conditional cash transfer and vocational training

•

Development of Industrial Clusters• Reviewing of university curricula to align with industry job requirements and

promotion of apprenticeship/work experience programmes and joint ventures

• Enforcement of mandatory sub-contracting and partnering with locals by foreign

construction companies.

• Implementation of mandatory skills transfer to Nigerians by foreign construction

companies (pp. 8 -9)

10 | P a g e



Under the subsection entitled ‘Priority Policies and Projects for Labour and Productivity’ theTransformation Agenda also stated that:

The key policies to be implemented during the period are as follows:

• Implementation of the National Action Plan on Employment Creation (NAPEC) targetedat creating 5 million new jobs annually within the next 3 years.

• Establishment of more Skills Acquisition Centres;

• Implementation of Local Content Policy in all the Sectors especially in the Oil and Gas

Industry in order to boost Job creation in the country

(p. 12)

THE FOCUS AND MEASURABILITY OF DECLARED OBJECTIVES

There are two concerns here:

• The focus of the declared objectives does not address welfare issues , which are of

interest to the generality of poor people who are in the majority.

• Much of the declared objectives are not stated in measurable terms.

Examples of such objectives include:Judiciary:

‘The policy thrusts of the Justice and Judiciary sector are(i) achieving greater independence for the judiciary in terms of funding’ (p. 10).

Foreign Policy

‘In order for Nigeria’s foreign policy goals to be achieved it is imperative that Nigerianmissions are properly focused and well-funded …’ (p. 11).

Legislature

‘The thrust of policy during the period will be to facilitate the creation of a dynamic,constitutionally effective and public responsive legislature that is proactive in itslegislature duties and independent but aware of its constitutional partnership with theexecutive and judicial arms of government...’ (p. 11).

Manufacturing

‘Promotion of private sector investments through the creation of an enabling environmentthat allows for substantial improvement in efficiency, productivity and profitability’(Section 5.1.2, p. 14),

Agriculture and Food Security•

• Secure food and feed needs of the nation

• Enhance generation of National and Social wealth through greater export and import

substitution(section 5.1.1, p. 14).

Information and Communication Technology

11 | P a g e



‘The development of a national knowledge Based Economy (KBE) 10-year Strategic Plan,Sustained human capacity development in ICT’ (p, 16).

Given the broad and un-measurable terms in which those objectives are stated, can we really saythey serve any useful purpose? Are they not just meaningless rhetoric?

WHAT IS TO BE DONE?

What must be done must be predicated upon a proper appreciation of the dimensions of therealities that we are confronted with. Nigeria is a paradox – a rich country with majority of the citizenry living in poverty. Accordingto the IMF, over $700bn had been realized as oil revenue since 1960. Eighty per cent (80%) of this sum accrues to only 1% of the population 22. In spite of its oil wealth, Nigeria is nowreckoned to be one of the 25 poorest countries in the world. According to the CoordinatingMinister for the Economy and Finance Minister, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iwealla, more than 1.8million job seekers join the army of the unemployed every year. About one billion people areestimated to be living under poverty line world-wide. One third, that is, about 300 million, live in

Africa. Nigeria alone is host to about half of the poor people in Africa, going by the figures of the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) on proportion living in relative poverty as at 2011. From18 million Nigerians who were living in a state of long-term deprivation of well-being, a

situation considered inadequate for decent living in 1980, the figure rose to 120m by 2011.The NBS23 found that poverty levels have been rising by the year, for all types of measurementof poverty, whether based on relative poverty, absolute poverty, subjective poverty or Dollar-per-day24, even though the percentage for each type of measurement varies slightly. Indeed,according to the African Peer Review Committee (2008), Nigeria hosts 6% of the core

chronically poor in the world.

•

There is no indication of improvement in all available indices. In fact, the more development

plans and programmes that are adopted, the greater the people are thrown into deeper poverty.The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) was adopted in 2000. The time frame for theachievement of the set targets is 2015. Year 2008 therefore marked the midpoint between 2000and 2015. The Mid-point Assessment Report (2008) showed that the targets set have not beenachieved. Under the MDGs, the proportion of the population living in relative poverty wasexpected to have fallen to 28.78 percent in 2007, if the MDG target is to be met in 2015. But thattarget was missed. Infant mortality, rather than declining, actually rose from 81 per 1000 live

22 (Cited in Watts, 2009)

23 NBS (2012). The Nigeria Poverty Profile 2010 Report. Press Briefing by the Statistician-General of the Federation, Chief Executive Officer of the National Bureau of Statistics, Dr. Yemi Kale, at the Conference Room, 5 th Floor, NBS headquarters,Central Business District, Abuja, on Monday, 13 February 2012 (Available online at http://resourcedat.com/resources/The-

Nigeria-Poverty-Profile1.pdf as at 16 May 2012.

24 NBS defines ‘Absolute Poverty’ as the ‘minimal requirements necessary to afford minimal standards of food, clothing,

healthcare and shelter’. ‘Subjective Poverty’ refers to the proportion of the population who consider themselves to be poor basedon ‘self-assessment and sentiments’. ‘Dollar-per-day’ refers to the World Bank’s Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) index, whichdefines poverty as the proportion of those living on less than US$1 per day poverty line. According to the NBS, the current dollar rate is US$1.5.

12 | P a g e

http://resourcedat.com/resources/The-Nigeria-Poverty-Profile1.pdf







births in the year 2000 to 110 per 1000 live births in 2005/6, which is farther away from theglobal target of 30 per 1000 live births in 201525.

•

The Mid-point Assessment Report (2008) on the MDGs also revealed that primary sixcompletion rate actually declined from 8 pupils out of 10 in 20004 to 7 in 2007. The finding by

the Report has been corroborated by the Central Bank Governor, Malam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi,at a recent symposium. The CBN Chief Executive disclosed that out of a hundred girls in Northern Nigeria, less than eight complete secondary school. Indeed, 70.8 per cent of girls in the North West between 20 and 29 years of age cannot read and write, compared with 9% (nine percent) in the South West. In Jigawa State, according to the CBN Governor, the girls'completion rate is as low as 7.5 per cent. The CBN Chief Executive wondered how the countrycould develop when 93 per cent of the girls in the most populous region in the country do notcomplete secondary school education26.

But Nigeria has the resources to abolish poverty. The problem is that economic decisions that aretaken enrich a few while impoverishing the majority. For example, Aliko Dangote is richer than

the richest person in Britain.

The way out lies in appreciating the challenge thrown by the late Prof Claude Ake. Ake 27 arguesthat “somebody has to determine that development is desirable, that a particular kind of development should be pursued and in a particular kind of manner.” This demonstrates thatdesirability of development, the kind of development and the manner of attainment are neither accidental nor objectively determined. Ake argues that the state is a specific mode of capitalistdomination and represents contradictory interests and forces. It is impacted by the nature andeffectiveness of capitalist hegemony and by the capacity of the dominated and oppressed classesto deploy effective counter-forces in reaction to their domination. These go a long way towardsinfluencing the possibility of development. The degree of effectiveness of resistance by the

dominated tends to determine the extent to which the state uses scarce resources for developmental programs or for building the arsenal of terror required by a militarized state.

The sum total of Claude Ake’s challenge is that citizens should not look up to their governmentsfor solution. They should look up to the amount of pressure they can bring to bear on their governments to effect positive changes. No government in the world does anything willingly inthe interest of the marginalized without pressure from below or without the threat of pressurefrom below.To this extent, I call on you as academics, to join forces with the labour movement in calling for implementation of the socio-economic rights contained in Chapter II (sections 13 -24) of theConstitution. The right to education, health care, housing, full employment, jobs or

unemployment allowance, decent work and decent wage, the care of the aged, the care of 25 REPORT ON THE NATIONAL CONSULTATIONS ON THE POST 2015 DEVELOPMENT AGENDA HELD AT THE LADI

KWALI HALL, SHERATON HOTEL, ABUJA FROM 18-19 February 2013.

26 See THE NATION, Friday, April 12, 2013, cited in F. Falana’s ‘Development: how it begins with you’. Paper Delivered By

Femi Falana, SAN at the 2013 Annual Lecture held at Jogor Centre, Ibadan, Oyo State on Monday, April 15, 2013

27 (C. Ake, (1989). ‘Africa and the Political Economy Approach’ in Ihonvbere, J (ed.). The Political Economy of Crisis and

Underdevelopment in Africa, Selected Works of Claude Ake. Lagos: JAD Publishers, p. 43)

13 | P a g e



retirees, the care of the disabled, minimum living income for all, regardless of employmentstatus, the right to water, electricity, and so on. Chapter II of the Constitution is enforceableunder the following provisions:

1. S. 6(6)(c), CFRN, 1999

2. S. 1(1), CFRN, 1999.3. Section 13, CFRN, 1999.4. section 224, CFRN, 1999, and

5. Item 60(a) of the Exclusive Legislative List.

It should be realized that what makes a difference in the general quality of life of poor people indifferent countries is not the government but the level of alertness of the have-nots to organizeand fight in defense of their interests. That is the lesson I call on you to draw from the Appendix below.While thanking you for your attention, I wish you a successful conference.

Femi Aborisade6 May 2013

Comparison of Nigeria, South Africa and USA on empirical development indices

Factors Nigeria South Africa U.S.A

Human Development Index 51 68 96

Life Expectancy 48 52 79

GDP per Capita 474 3,616 37,225

Irrigated land (‘000 ha) 293 1,498 22,906

Fertilizer consumption 88,334 637,110 29,175,701

Net agric trade -2,148 -224 18,029

Electric consumption (kWh per

capita)

121 @ 2009 4,532 @ 2009 12,914 @ 2009

Proportion Undernourished 9 < 5 < 5

Share of food in agric imports 87.9 67.4 60.9

Mortality Rate 189 59 8

Lending interest rate (%) @ 2011 16.0 9.0 3.3

Poverty level at $1.25 a day 33.7% @ 2010 2.3% @ 2009 N.A.

Sources: FAOSTAT, Various issues28

The Table above indicates that Nigeria recorded the lowest on Human Development Index, LifeExpectancy’, GDP per capita, Irrigated Land, Fertilizer Consumption, Net Agric Trade,Electricity Consumption; and the highest in Proportion Undernourished, Share of food in agric

import, Mortality Rate, Lending Interest Rate and Poverty Level.

28 Cited in Prof T. Alimi’s ‘Chairman’s Opening Speech’ delivered at a workshop on participatory governance held on 24 April

2013 at Iwo, Osun State.

14 | P a g e

Documents

Transformation Agenda Myth or Reality