Nigeria Content Online

Odds are that you
probably missed it. With all the noise being made about the president’s
faulty plane, the rise of the falconets and the welcomed restoration of
DSTV’s football rights, it’s easy to understand why the story would be
ignored. And yet it was there. Sandwiched between the larger tales of
significant occurrences was this tiny news insert. Half way across the
world, the presidential aspiration of a person was about to be
announced and his name was Wyclef Jean. Yes, “The” Wyclef Jean The idea
of a musician running for president does tend to give reason for a
silent chuckle. Of all the possible professions on which an aspiration
for a nation’s presidency can be mounted, music seems to be the least
likely of candidates. It takes a lot to run a nation. People would no
more expect a musician as a likely presidential candidate than they
would the pastor of a church. And yet, as insane as the proposition
might seem there is certain merit behind the possibility.

Wyclef’s loyalty
to his country is not disputed. He has already served as an ambassador
for his nation and donates thousands of dollars by way of scholarships
and foundation grants to people who require these. Even though, Wyclef
Jean is undoubtedly a multimillionaire superstar, he has rarely failed
to identify with his nation. He has instead constantly sought to find
the different ways through which he can contribute to its development —
something that very few of our media stars can boast of.

I am not much of a
fan of Nollywood. The only time I pause to watch a movie from its
stables is when I decide that I am sorely in need of a good dose of
depression. As this urge rarely surfaces, my periods in front of a
Nollywood movie are blessedly rare and short. However, despite my
unpatriotic dislike for the products of our national cinema, even I
cannot fail to acknowledge the influence that Nigerian media stars have
had on our country.

I find it hard to
single out a singular musician or movie star who would make a possible
candidate for a political position. D’banj never did let us in on what
the “koko” meant, but I somehow doubt that his revelation would involve
a concrete plan for improving the nation. MI would find it difficult
meeting the heights of the political system and Tuface would probably
get shot again by unknown gunmen after his first five hours in office.
The efforts of individuals, such as the musical legend who also goes by
the name of Pastor Chris, have only managed to further enhance the
growing inefficiencies of media icons in today’s politics. When Fela
died many years ago, it is likely he took with him the status of the
last Nigerian media icon who sought to improve the country’s image
through his celebrity status.

Amongst the young
members of the Nigerian media circle, it’s almost impossible to find an
individual who has offered as much contribution to the country as
Wyclef has for his nation. If I was to pick a cabinet, I would probably
pick Lagbaja as possible president because I want to believe that
beneath that impenetrable mask is a billionaire with a Harvard business
degree. It is undoubtedly a far stretch but that is where we currently
are. For good measure, Julius Agwu would probably be a fitting choice
for the minister of power and steel. If Nigeria is going to continue to
make a mockery of those establishments as she has for the last three
decades, then she might as well secure the assistance of a comedian.
They’re better at making jokes and have the uncanny ability to draw out
attention to the lighter side of darker topics.

In the weeks to
come, a lot more attention will be paid to Wyclef Jean’s bid for the
position of president. Many are already leaning towards this
possibility. He is well loved by the people of his country and he
certainly has the ear of world organisations. With the right cabinet
supporting him, he just might be able to lead the damaged nation into
newer lights. He might, however, need to make a few changes or two in
order to improve his chances.

Nigeria celebrates five decades of existence as
an independent state on October 1, 2010. Its first chance to show whether the
next fifty years will be an improvement of its first fifty years will come in
early 2011 when Federal and state presidential, gubernatorial, and
parliamentary elections will be held. All of us know what is wrong in Nigeria:
the tremendous venality of public officials and politicians, for one; the
maddening maze of inefficient state monopolies over large swathes of the
Nigerian economy for another. How for do?

To help me figure that out, I have been thinking
about the traits of Nigeria which were evident at its birth to determine what
can be expected realistically from Nigeria over the next five decades. Let me
start with that most notorious of allegedly Nigerian traits-a thirst for
corruption. The American journalist-John Gunther-visited Nigeria and the Gold
Coast in the mid-1950s.

His impressions were recorded in a book entitled
“Inside Africa” that was published in 1955. Despite the limitations of relying
on a visitor’s perceptions of a country, Mr. Gunther’s observations are useful
as a record of the common views of that pre-independence era.

Listen to Mr. Gunther’s commentary on corruption
in Nigeria and the Gold Coast.

“It was in Lagos that we first began to hear
about the worst thing in Nigeria, corruption. A tip or gift is known as dash,
and “dashing” exists almost everywhere. This phenomenon is probably unavoidable
in any community like Nigeria, convulsed as it is by the most violent
fermentations, and where people thrown up from the bottom suddenly find themselves
able to exert power through money.

Nevertheless, it is regrettable…A boy in a
hospital will have to “dash” the nurse a penny to get a bedpan. Horrible, of
course.

” … Corruption is another characteristic [in
the Gold Coast], although I had the feeling that Accra was not so sensationally
corrupt as communities in Nigeria…. We asked several prominent Gold Coasters
what they thought the country needed most. Answers: (1) More honesty in the
public service. Abolition of corruption”.

In a manner reminiscent of babies born with the
HIV/AIDS virus today, Nigeria and Ghana were born with the “corruption” virus.
Like HIV/AIDS, it has spread and mutated over the years into a horrible
debilitating disease sapping our polity and economy. It is time for us to admit
that our leaders and politicians are a reflection of us. As we change, so do
they. Not the other way!

If we want a sober and honest Nigerian
administration, the quiet majority of ordinary people must show first, by their
deeds, that they will accept nothing less from Nigerian politicians. In a way,
Nigerian attitudes towards corruption and incompetent government remind me of
St. Augustine’s cry to God: “Give me chastity; but not yet.”

In the same vein, Nigerians want a prudent
government, but only tomorrow.

Permit a small example. Nigeria’s political class
proposes to spend 17 billion naira to celebrate five decades of independence.
Outrage has been expressed in several quarters. But, is there a movement to boycott
all celebrations or commence hunger strikes to stop such palpable profligacy?
Nothing of the sort! Rather, mere bombastic words of sound and fury signifying
something, but we know not what! Can it be a surprise that President Jonathan has
not objected to this wanton waste of public funds? Why should he when

Nigerians are unwilling to endure pain for a
modest celebration, befitting Nigeria’s mediocre experience of independence to
date?

There is an old saying that Nigeria is a place
where the best is impossible but where the worst never happens. There can be no
doubt that its first 50 years of existence have confirmed the truth of that
saying. The road ahead is to turn Nigeria into a country where the best is
possible.

The journey on that road should start at the
level of daily life-the states.

Reformers must build their vision of Nigeria at
its best, state by state. It is an arduous mission that will take the better
part of two decades. Lagos State seems a good place for reformers to create a
microcosm of the new Nigeria. It has an independent tax base, a vigorous
economy, a large population and a respected reformer as governor. Other states
which should be targeted now to show the benefits of reform are Plateau State, Kano
State, and Rivers State.

The road to a resplendent Nigerian centenary
celebration starts in the Nigerian states.

The British Cotton Growing Association (BCGA) was
formed following the severe cotton shortage of the Lancashire looming
industries at the turn of the twentieth century (1901-1903).

Its purpose was to find new sources of cheap
cotton to replace the expensive and increasingly sparse productions from the
southern states of North America.

The newly colonised provinces of Northern Nigeria
promised to fulfill this role.

Hausa farmers had been growing cotton for
centuries. It would not be a problem to persuade them to expand production for
export. All that was needed to transform Kano into the Mecca of Lancashire. The
way through was to improve transport in between Kano and Lagos by expanding the
Nigerian railway project with a section linking Baro to Kano.

Members of the association argued that linking
Kano with the port of Lagos by rail would provide an endless supply of
affordable and good quality cotton for the looming industries of North Western
England. By persuading Hausa farmers to grow cotton for export, the BCGA would
be accomplishing it’s mission and saving one of the founding sectors of British
industrialisation.

Of course, obstacles to this project included the
four century-old textile manufactures, dying industries, and wide reaching
trading networks of Kano itself. Short looms were traditionally used to
manufacture the cotton and indigo produced in the region into high quality
turkedy and indigo dyed cloths. These were then traded across West Africa, the
Sahara, and North Africa, through a complex web of caravan routes and trading
networks.

The prices paid for cotton in Kano were often
twice as high as those paid in Lancashire. These figures demonstrate clearly
that local supply never satisfied the very high demand of the local
manufactures. However, British cotton enthusiasts, blinded by their agenda,
failed to evaluate the strength of the native industry.

By applying simple price comparison models they
imagined that they could overflow the northern market with cheaply produced
cloth from England to effectively ‘choke’ the Kanuwanci market. The Baro-Kano
railway extension was the effective means to transform the Manchester of West
Africa, as Kano was known, into a primary cotton exporter and an important
consumer of European textiles.

By March 1911 the tracks reached Kano, and on 1
April 1912, the railway opened for general traffic. In between, the BCGA
distributed free seeds of their preferred long-staple variety (Georgia variety)
and sent “junior native clerks” to train and buy cotton directly from
small-scale farmers. Their policy was to constantly offer a little more than
Hausa traders did to ensure they would get the product. However, the BCGA’s
dream turned into a nightmare when they realised that they had lost the
propaganda battle, a nightmare filled with mountains of groundnuts.

Whilst BCGA clerks were distributing free cotton
seeds, the Kola-nut trading families, Kambarin

Beriberi, Agalawa and Tokarawa, toured the region
promoting groundnuts by recruiting the services of village heads, offering
small gifts of salt and cloth and singing songs to the praise of groundnuts.
Farmers produced so many tons of these in the first season following the
arrival of the railway that the Kano rail station was ‘literally buried in
groundnuts’.

In December 1912, there were 3000 tons of
groundnuts stacked at the station awaiting shipment. By January 1913, only 674
tons had been shipped south, and more nuts were pouring into Kano. These were
not cleared until late April. The groundnut ‘boom’, as it is known, increased
in intensity in the planting season of 1913. Even the cattle Fulani are
remembered to have planted groundnuts to supplement their income!

On the other hand, not one batch of cotton is
recorded to have been shipped; no cotton at all!

Any increase in the region’s cotton production
following the BCGA’s efforts was therefore diverted to the manufactures of
Kano. Indeed, what turned out as a disaster for the BCGA and the colonial
government was an immense success for the economy of the northern regions.

Income generated by the groundnut boom further
boosted the manufacturing sector and set in motion externalities which
benefited all levels of the economy. The railway provided long distance traders
with access to European markets through the port of Lagos. Gandu farmers
supplemented their household income. Manufactures of all sorts expanded as
demand increased.

Ironically, Kano was able to import more cotton,
and reap the benefits of its centuries old ‘comparative advantage’ as West
Africa’s centre of trade and production.

In a nutshell, business oriented networks used
the dreams of the BCGA to their advantage. Colonial naïveté, coupled with an
important infrastructural investment, met the experience of kola traders, the
immense adaptability of Hausa farmers and the ‘vent for surplus’ of the
northern economies. Instead of cotton, the Lagos-Kano railway provided Europe
with endless supplies of groundnuts.

From the farmer’s perspective, there are four
main advantages to growing peanuts. First, ‘the groundnut has the most welcome
property of adding nitrogen to the soil, meaning that little or no manuring is necessary.’
Second, the nut draws on nutrients that are located higher in the soil than
cassava or millet, making intercropping recommendable.

This meant that any one, no matter how small his
farm, could produce groundnuts to supplement his income. Third, the nuts could
be picked early and stashed to await the availability of labour if priority was
given to food crops. At last, they could act as a substitute food crop in times
of hardship. In the end of course, peanuts paid a lot more than cotton in
return for the farmers’ investments of labour and capital.

Currently
conducting research in Kano, Olivier is finishing an MA in History at the
University of Liverpool.

On Thursday 29th July, the Senate President
dissolved the Committee on Communications chaired by Sylvester Anyanwu for
telling a lie and bringing the Senate to ridicule. The committee had claimed
that they had studiously screened the chair, executive chair and commissioners
of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and it turned out that they did
no such thing. Rather than carry out their legislative functions, they were
fabricating stories about their work.

One key question is the explanation for why they
claimed they had screened them if they had not. We know that they had also
approved over N6 billion for the registration of SIM cards for GSM phones. We
know however that the registration is being done by the phone companies not by
NCC. It is clear that the anti-corruption agencies have some work to do
investigating possible connections between the committee and the budget lines
approved for theft.

There are indeed clear indications that
increasingly, National Assembly Committees are approving budget lines that were
not conceived by the originating ministries. They make the allocations with the
intention of recovering the monies later by using their “oversight might” to
blackmail ministries and agencies to pass on the budget lines to them. If the
rumours circulating about such activities are true, then the level of
irresponsibility of our legislature has reached the point of no return.

We recall how on Tuesday 22nd June, the House of
Representatives engaged in a disgraceful show of disrespect to Nigerian
citizens by organizing a fist fight choreographed with kung fu moves, blood,
screams, whistles and tear gas. They were showing their determination to prove
to all who cared to listen that they were the most irresponsible legislature in
the world.

As I have argued previously, one of the most
serious threats to sustaining democracy in Nigeria emanates directly from the
irresponsibility of the National Assembly. And yet, legislatures are the only
institutions that directly represent constituencies, and thereby the people.
They have the power to create other powers which means they have the monopoly
of the powers to make laws through which they create new commissions and
agencies, enact public policy and determine public expenditure through the
process of appropriation laws.

It is this legitimacy derived from the electoral
process that gives them the power to translate the views and concerns of citizens
they are representing into public policy. Not surprisingly, when many a
legislator owes his or her seat to godfathers rather than the votes of
constituents, the focus of work is diverted.

On 30th June this year, the Kenyan Parliament
approved a 25% increase of their allowances. They earn $13,455, (about 2
million Naira), a month today and the increase led to major condemnation around
the world over the excesses of the income of Kenyan legislatures. The important
thing in Kenya however was that the increase was debated openly and citizens
know what their parliamentarians earn.

In Nigeria, the National Assembly members have
refused to let us know officially what they earn. We have however learnt from
leaks that they illegally pay each member about N15 million every month and are
about to double the amount. They will not pass the freedom of information bill
because they want to hide from Nigerians the scandalous financial packages they
give themselves.

In addition, Section 24 of the Legislative Houses
Powers and Privileges Act of 2004 prohibits Nigerian citizens from publishing
any statement that falsely or scandalously impinges on the character of the
leaders or members of the National Assembly. This means that when they tell
lies about their work, steal our money, fight each other in public and engage
in disgraceful acts, we the ordinary citizens who they are supposed to be
representing must shut up because they are convinced that they are our
overlords.

Consolidating Nigerian democracy today requires
an open confrontation between the people and the legislature. We must insist on
an open debate on the take home pay of every legislative member. It is curious
that no member of the legislatures has to my knowledge confessed the totally
scandalous monthly take home package they pocket.

We all know that the contract between the
legislatures and the people is a dubious one because most of them were not
genuinely elected by the people. Be that as it may, we know today that they are
an avaricious, self-serving bunch of goal getters whose sights are on their
pockets and not the interest of the people. To save our democracy, we must
confront, challenge, delegitimise and recount on a daily basis how their lives
and actions betray the interest of the people and prove that they represent the
god of money rather than the good people of Nigeria.