Stock taking time

Stock taking time

Its so easy to predict Nigerian politicians. And they are not all that smart too. But smartness is not a quality easily associated with productive politicians. This should not be taken as a contemptuous comment. There are of course a few bright minds in the horde of politicians in Nigeria. After years of being in public spotlight, many Nigerian politicians, from the executive to the legislature, still have no idea about the intelligence level of the electorate. They believe their electors lack basic intelligence and so they feed them through public utterances with political crap. It is a tactic known to every adult Nigerian by now. When politicians want to be re-elected they go on the hustings and make statements that are meaningless and unachievable. When it's time for politicians to render account of their stewardship or service, they plead for time. Take, for example, Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who pleaded last weekend for patience and understanding while listing the government's achievements in the last two years. On the achievements of the federal government, Abubakar said the government has "invested greatly and embarked on a massive programme of road construction and maintenance, rehabilitation of the power sector and the modernisation of the telecommunications network." These, he said, were aimed at "promoting investments, increasing access and ultimately, bringing down prices of goods and services."

But two weeks ago, at the 33rd yearly celebration of World Telecommunications Day in Abuja, Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who was represented by Communications Minister Alhaji Mohammed Arzika, told his audience that, "by year 2005 all rural areas in the country will have access to voice, data, and video telecommunications at affordable pries." He added: "We will ensure that Nigerians can reach out to one another." Abubakar must be speaking to a wrong audience. His statement was haughty, husky, too ambitious, misleading, unachievable (in the face of his government's unfulfilled promises) and a public relations stunt designed to convey the impression that the federal government was concerned about the poor telecommunications infrastructure in the country. But Abubakar's speech may have been written by a foreigner because the speech did not capture or address the core social and economic needs of the majority of Nigerians. If the Vice-President thought that new communication technologies in the form of integrated voice, video, graphics and textual material were the priority needs of Nigerians, he was wrong. Although the occasion was essentially an international telecommunications event, the Vice-President was not mandated to engage in fox hunting on that day. Indeed, it would have been better if he had used the occasion to apologise to Nigerians about his government's failure to provide the basic telecommunications needs of the people. Government officials keen on making ambitious statements or promises that an uninspiring government can never achieve must not use the international telecommunications day as a gateway to public deception.

If the federal government has any major weaknesses, they must include the inability to communicate in the language the common people understand, as well as an inability to focus attention on projects that impact people's lives and standard of living, such as lowering inflation, promoting agricultural production (not importing beans form Chad), regular supply of electricity, provision of clean water, good network of roads and security for the lives and property of the citizens. Anything outside of these basic needs will be viewed negatively by the average Nigerian. Even if the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or any other international financial institutions rates the government's performance high on an abstract scale of achievement, it will never make sense to ordinary people. The best instrument of measuring the achievements of any government is usually the extent to which the basic needs of the people have been provided. Every democratic government monitors the mood of the common people and develops a programme of action in designed to keep the people happy. Part of the task of keeping the people involves listening to the people. It is crucial to electoral survival. It is also crucial to socio-economic development. Government, we have been told, is for the living, not for the dead.

When Vice President Atiku Abubakar outlined the achievements of the federal government, he left his audience with the impression that the so-called achievements must have been accomplished elsewhere but in Nigeria, perhaps in the outer space. As The Guardian editorialised recently, Nigeria is yet to reap the dividends of democracy. Two years is time enough for the government to lift its head from the sand and proclaim concrete achievements, not counting beans. The least the government can do to assure everyone that democracy is better than military dictatorship is to embark on projects that would transform the lives of the common people. There are two more yeas ahead and all levels of government, from the federal government to the local councils, must be seen to be performing. If the incumbent government must seek re-election in 2003, it must start performing now. A government that provides the basic needs of people need not worry too much about its re-election prospects or about election campaigns. In politics, achievements usually "speak" better than rhetoric. If democracy cannot provide food for people, if democracy must bring more hunger and poverty to everyone, people will be justified to reconsider the present political experiment. But the failure of democracy in Nigeria will have repercussions beyond Nigeria's borders. It will spell disaster to the African continent. In particular it will give a wrong signal to other emerging democracies in Africa about the impracticality of democracy in the continent. Above all, the failure of democracy in Nigeria will provide ambitious army officers with an excellent excuse to return to power. And that would imply a step into the cesspool of backwardness.

Part of the problem of Obasanjo's government is obdurate arrogance, right from the chief executive to the ministers. And when the government is criticised, it behaves like a flea-ravaged dog. It barks and bites, clawing at anything within sight, rather than take criticisms in good faith. Criticism, particularly press criticism, ennobles democracy. Criticisms are not meant derail to democratic governments but to furnish governments with the needs and feelings of the people. The moment the government snuffs out critics and rules like 14th century Roman dictators, that moment democracy would have been asphyxiated in Nigeria. People who are sensitive to press criticisms have no business being in government.

In the last couple of weeks, there have been a number of uninformed comments from high-ranking politicians. It is not uncommon to have politicians speaking from the edge of their hats at this time. It is stock time in Nigeria, a time when every politicians and political party tries to count its blessing and its achievements. It is also time when politicians make promises, beat their chest and show that it cares. In 2003 they will need more than rhetoric to sway the voters. They will need concrete proof of their achievements in office to deserve re-election. Nigerian voters are more sophisticated than the politicians would credit them.