Introduction
Fellow citizens of Nigeria, Happy Independence Day to you
all.
At crucial moments such as this, I have, by the grace of
God, stood on this platform to bring timely admonitions to our beloved nation.
I stand here once again at this defining period in the evolution of our
nationhood to bring the mind of God to a nation in the valley of decision. I
stand here today as a patriotic citizen of Nigeria, as an ardent believer in
her great future, and as an unrepentant optimist in the God-given potential of
the Nigerian people to surmount the present challenges and build a great
nation.
Let me begin this address with gratitude to God for the
recovery and return of our dear President Muhammadu Buhari. As I have done
privately, I once again congratulate Mr President on this pleasant climax to a
trying period in his personal life and that of the nation. Together with all
well-meaning Nigerians, I pray for a continuous supply of health, vitality and
wisdom as he resumes his duties. Let me also use this opportunity to commend
the vice president, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, who, as Acting President,
courageously held the fort and steered the ship of state with grace and skill
on behalf of his principal.
Furthermore, I congratulate the nation on the victory of
constitutionalism over conspiracies. The correspondence between the president
and the National Assembly in line with section 145 of the constitution each
time the president left to attend to his health indicates some progress in our
democratic experience, compared with almost eight years ago when a cabal
hijacked power in circumstances bordering on the health of a sitting president.
In this regard, credit must be given to President Muhammadu Buhari for his
compliance with due process, and to the leadership of the National Assembly,
including the Senate President, Senator Bukola Saraki, and the Speaker of
the House of Representatives, Honourable Yakubu Dogara, for making the
most of the constitution despite its flaws. This evident growth is a shimmer of
hope at a very sensitive period in which the destiny of the nation is at stake.
The State of the
Nation and the Quest for Leadership
Undoubtedly, Mr President has returned to a nation
hanging in a precarious balance. Indeed, our nation is enmeshed in a prolonged
war against the retrogressive effects of a structure that was created by the
fear of the past, has become institutionalized by the fear of the present, and
is being perpetuated by the fear of the unknown. These fears have morphed into
a horde of agitations which, in an address upon his return in August, Mr
President charged aggrieved persons to channel to the National Assembly and the
Council of State.
However, due to the reputation that members of the
hallowed chambers have created in the minds of Nigerians, many have expressed
doubts as to the ability and willingness of the National Assembly to midwife
the structural, institutional and constitutional solutions demanded by
Nigeria’s historical and present circumstances. As a result, Nigerians from all
walks of life are questioning Mr President’s recommendations as to proper
channels for agitations, even though the National Assembly and by extension the
State Houses of Assembly are the only available constitutional avenues for
making peaceful change possible and violent change inconceivable.
We can only keep hope alive by reminding ourselves that
the National Assembly has, in the past, risen to the occasion and intervened at
crucial moments such as this. From the decisive death blow dealt the third term
agenda of the then president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, by the 5th National
Assembly, to the doctrine of necessity invoked by the 6th National Assembly,
the 8th National Assembly has sufficient precedents on how to act in the best
interest of Nigeria. We believe that the distinguished and honourable lawmakers
will rise to the occasion and work closely with the president to pilot Nigeria
into stable and prosperous nationhood.
Having laid the foundation of the need for legislative
responsibility, I must state that, as far as championing the far-reaching
structural, institutional and constitutional changes necessary to salvage the
soul of our nation is concerned, the words on the desk of the 33rd president of
the United States, Harry Truman: “THE BUCK STOPS HERE!”, are relevant to
President Buhari whose legacy is at stake. Mr. President, the buck stops at
your desk and, as always, my earnest prayer is that you find the courage and
political will to do what is right at this momentous period in the history of
our nation.
Against this backdrop, we shall now examine the latest
buzzword in Nigeria’s political lexicon with a view to distinguishing the noise
from the voice, separating the wheat from the chaff, and presenting practical
steps towards building a strong and stable nation.
The Clamour for
Restructuring
Some years ago, the word “restructuring” was the
exclusive lingo of pro-democracy groups like the National Democratic Coalition
(NADECO), the Pro-National Conference Organisation (PRONACO), and The Patriots.
The leading individual voices in this call emerged mainly from the southern
part of the country, including the likes of Chief Rotimi Williams, Chief Gani
Fawehinmi and Chief Anthony Enahoro, all of blessed memory. Others
included the likes of Prof. Ben Nwabueze, Prof. Wole Soyinka and
Chief Emeka Anyaoku. However, in more recent times, leaders from the
northern part of the country have increasingly lent their voices to this call.
From former vice president, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who has aired this
opinion since around 2012[1], to a former governor of Kaduna State, AlhajiBalarabe
Musa, and, most surprisingly, former Head of State, General Ibrahim
Babangida, the call for restructuring appears to be reaching a tipping point.
Nevertheless, in spite of the fact that the restructuring
of the polity is implied in the manifesto of the All Progressives Congress
(APC), the government has, for a long time, been silent on the matter and has,
very often, drawn the attention of Nigerians back to the tripodal policy agenda
of President Buhari, namely, anti-corruption, security, and job creation
through diversification. However, after much evasion, the APC, two months ago,
eventually constituted a ten-member committee headed by Mallam Nasir El-Rufai,
the current Governor of Kaduna State, to address the increased agitation for
restructuring.
As we await the submission of that committee, I
acknowledge that some opponents to the call for restructuring, including
serving officials, have ascribed ulterior selfish motives to those calling for
it.
Whether or not this is the case, not only must we not
allow the counterfeit overshadow the genuine, we must also not allow the voice
of cynicism drown the voice of reason. Thus, the words of David, the shepherd boy,
when he was confronted by his brothers as he was about to take on Goliath,
should be the response of every genuine advocate of restructuring to the
criticisms. David said, and I quote: “Is there not a cause?” (I Samuel 17:29;
NKJV)
Moreover, the hue and cry over President Buhari’s address
to the nation on August 21, 2017, suggests Mr President is perceived by some
stakeholders as opposed to restructuring[2]. But, from my interactions with the
president in the past seven years as an advocate of a properly structured
polity, I am convinced that this is not the case. Not only does the president
want agitations managed through appropriate constitutional channels, he also
wants a clarification of demands in concise terms, as well as propositions on
practical pathways towards achieving those demands. That is the essence of this
address and I believe that Mr President’s expectations are valid.
However, before I proceed to elucidate on the
practicalities of restructuring, permit me at this juncture to cast our minds
back to our consistent calls for the restructuring of the polity, long before
the current bandwagon effect.
Our Calls for
Restructuring
In 2010, the Save Nigeria Group (SNG) presented a
“Contract to Save and Transform Nigeria” to President Goodluck Jonathan which,
among other demands, made a case for devolution of powers, called for a review
of the revenue formula, and advocated the convocation of a national conference
towards the creation of a draft constitution that would be adopted through a
referendum. Following the inaction of the government, we subsequently convened
a Dialogue of the Nobles attended by Donald Duke, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, Dr
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, Dr Oby Ezekwesili, and Fola Adeola,
among others. As part of a series of dialogues, in a bid to seek the best of
the North and the best of the South as an alternative to the then incumbent
administration, we also engaged the major candidates ahead of the 2011
elections in search of commitment to the restructuring of the nation, among
other desirables.
General Muhammadu Buhari stood out among the available
contenders and, on October 10, 2010, we expressed our conviction that he was
best suited to lead. On January 15, 2011, I was invited by General Buhari to be
his running mate and I initially declined because I had engaged the polity not
with the intention to contest elections but to midwife genuine national
rebirth. My eventual acceptance was contingent on the mutual understanding that
the restructuring of Nigeria would be top on the agenda. This was reflected
prominently in the manifesto of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in
which we promised the initiation of “action to amend our Constitution with a
view to devolving powers, duties and responsibilities to states and local
governments in order to entrench Federalism and the Federal spirit[3]”. This
provision subsequently made its way into the APC manifesto.
In 2014, we took our demands for restructuring to the National
Conference, where a case was made for a unicameral parliamentary system of
government to reduce the cost of governance, and for a federal structure
comprised of a strong central government with six geopolitical zones as
federating units. In addition, we sponsored a Nigerian Charter for National
Reconciliation and Integration as the basis of our union as a nation, as
against Decree 24 of 1999 by which the current constitution was promulgated.
Following heated debates, in the spirit of trustful give
and take, the conference adopted a modified presidential system that would
harness the separation of powers inherent in the presidential system, while
guaranteeing the needed cooperation between both arms of government as intended
in the parliamentary system of government. We recommended the selection of the
Vice President from the legislature and advocated the institutionalization of
the principle of zoning in the Electoral Act. Furthermore, the Nigerian Charter
for National Reconciliation and Integration was unanimously adopted. This
address will use the propositions at the National Conference as a springboard
but will necessarily include bolder and more far-reaching recommendations given
the current state of the nation.
On January 4, 2015, in a message titled “The Gathering
Storm and Avoidable Shipwreck – How to Avoid Catastrophic Euroclydon,” I
sounded a note of warning at the height of the electioneering campaign. I
charged the nation not to place the cart of elections before the horse of
restructuring, proposing “true federalism under Zonal Commissions as well as
fiscal federalism…”
Rather than pay heed to the warnings, many of our
politicians kept on with their “business as usual” attitude that brought the
nation very close to the brink of disaster. Fortunately, by divine intervention
through the efforts of distinguished Nigerians, the international community,
and through a demonstration of statesmanship unprecedented in Nigeria’s
history, we scaled through the 2015 elections by a hair’s breadth. Mindful of
our narrow escape and the festering socio-political and economic challenges,
soon after the inauguration of this administration in 2015, we submitted to Mr
President an extensive document that called for a Presidential Commission for
National Reconciliation, Reintegration and Restructuring comprised of eminent
Nigerians, and guided by the Nigerian Charter for National Reconciliation and
Integration which was adopted by the 2014 National Conference.
Our submission anticipated the need to reconcile
contentious interest groups, foster the integration of the diverse sectional
groups into true nationhood, and facilitate the evolution of an acceptable
functional governmental structure for Nigeria. We proposed that the new
structure would be contained in a new constitutional framework which would come
into effect by way of an executive bill to be submitted to the National
Assembly by Mr President and decided upon by the Nigerian people through a
referendum.
All our efforts have been inspired by our belief that, as
a nation, we are better off together and should find acceptable ways to stay
together. We are driven by an urgent responsibility to find, within the
constitution, pathways to a perfect union. Having laid this background we shall
proceed to further simplify the seemingly complicated but, indeed, simple
concept of restructuring.
Understanding Restructuring: The Basis
Restructuring simply means to change the way an entity is
organized or arranged. In the corporate context, restructuring is a management
term “for the act of reorganizing the legal, ownership, operational, or other
structures of a company for the purpose of making it more profitable, or better
organized for its present needs”[5]. In the context of a nation, restructuring
requires redefining the relationship between the people and the government,
including taking another look at the structures and systems of governance as
encapsulated in the constitution. The diverse positions on the restructuring
debate are being championed by at least ten categories of advocates, give or
take a few overlaps, namely:
The Conservatives
The Economic Structure Reformists
The Non-Structural Constitutional Reformist
The Political System Reformists
The Devolutionists
The State Creation Advocates
The Resource Control Activists
The Regional Federalists
The Regional Confederalists
The Secessionists
We shall now examine these positions and then proceed to
present our prescription on the way forward for Nigeria.
Category #1: The
Conservatives
The Conservatives are generally satisfied with the
systems and structures of governance, current challenges notwithstanding. They
generally hold the view that attitudinal adjustments, not necessarily systemic
or structural changes, are required. This position is held by the likes of the
former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo[6], and Kano State Governor, Dr
Abdullahi Ganduje[7], who believe Nigerians need a “restructuring of the mind.”
Category #2: The
Economic Structure Reformists
The economic structure reformists frown at the focus on
politics and emphasize the need to restructure the systems and structures of
economic governance, in order to diversify from an oil-based economy, reduce
the size and bureaucracy of government, and loosen government’s grip on the
economy through the privatization of key sectors while the government simply
plays a facilitatory role. Proponents include policy and economic experts like
my friend and sister, Dr. Oby Ezekwesili, who has said: “We need economic
governance as the basis for any political grouping the country may need [8]”,
or, in the words of James Carville, chief strategist for the Bill Clinton
campaign in 1992: “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Category #3: The
Non-Structural Constitutional Reformists
These are those demanding amendments in certain aspects
of the constitution that have no direct bearing on the structure of governance.
They include young people advocating a reduction of the age qualifications into
certain political offices through movements such as Not Too Young To Run; they
include advocates for such affirmative action that reserves a percentage of
political offices for women; they include those advocating the removal of the
Land Use Act from the constitution, as well as those advocating the separation
of the office of the Attorney General of the Federation from that of the
Minister of Justice, and so on.
Category #4: The
Political System Reformists
Political System Reformists make a case for such
constitutional changes that include a unicameral, rather than a bicameral,
legislature to reduce the size of government. Others prescribe part-time
legislature while some make a strong case for the parliamentary system of
government or, as the 2014 National Conference resolved, a modified
parliamentary system.
Category #5: The
Devolutionists
These are multi-state federalists making a case for
ceding more powers to the federating units even if such units are the current
36 states. Many of the current advocates of restructuring, including former
vice president, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, belong to this school of thought. The
devolutionists envisage a constitution with a leaner exclusive legislative
list, a more robust concurrent list, and a workable residual list. Also on the
agenda of the devolutionists is the review of the revenue sharing formula in
favour of the states and local governments.
Category #6: The
State Creation Advocates
At the last National Conference, 18 demands for state
creation were approved, taking the possible number of states in the nation to
54. Some advocates are regionalists deploying multi-state strategies in the
quest for an equitable allocation of resources to the respective regions from
the centre, including the leaders of the South-East calling for one more state
so each region would have six states apiece except the North-West, which has
seven. The Middle Belt states seeking regional autonomy from the North-Central
also fall into this category. They recognize that, given the current revenue
allocation system, the more states a region has, the more allocation goes to
that region or geopolitical zone. Other advocates of state creation are
motivated by the need to give geographical expression to ethnic identities.
Category #7: The
Resource Control Activists
This is a more radical group that swings between
devolution and secession. They include the Niger Delta activists and militants
demanding outright resource control, which is the exclusive right to regulate
the exploitation of resources in a geographical area. Their clamour simply
reminds us that we need a more pragmatic resource distribution and management
system.
Category #8: The
Regional Federalists
The Regional Federalists argue not only that the current
system falls short of true federalism, as the devolutionists point out, but
also that the vast majority of the current 36 states are not viable. Recent
reports indicate that Lagos State, where the commercial activities of Nigeria
are concentrated, generates more internal revenue than 32 states combined[9].
This school of thought, therefore, makes a case for the integration of states
along geopolitical zonal lines to create economies of scale. A number of
options have been thrown up as to the possible number of zones but the six
geopolitical zonal formula featuring the North-West, North-Central, North-East,
South-West, South-South and South-East, has been the most advocated.
Proponents envisage a strong central government catering
for matters like defence, foreign affairs and monetary management, with six
strong zonal federating units having concurrent legislative powers in such
matters as policing, mineral resource management, electricity generation, and
transportation. Groups such as Afenifere are inclined in this direction, taking
a cue from the 1963 Constitution.
Category #9: The
Regional Confederalists
These also advocate a regional or geopolitical zonal
arrangement. However, advocates of confederacy prefer a weak central government
and strong regional governments with each region having its own army and as
such able to defend itself in cooperation with other regions.
Category #10: The
Secessionists
These are those calling for Biafra Republic, Oduduwa
Republic, Arewa Republic, Ijaw Republic, Ogoni Republic and so on. This is
because sectional identities have survived independence and are still reflected
in our social interactions and intensified by perceptions of marginalization.
Decades after the civil war, we are yet to forge true nationhood and Nigerians
still tend to think of themselves as Yorubas, Igbos, Hausas, Fulanis, Kanuris,
Tivs, Idomas, Nupes, Ijaws, Edos, Urhobos, and so on, within the Nigerian
state.
Some of the ongoing calls for restructuring are motivated
by the aim of finding geographical expressions for these sociocultural
identities. Although we can compel statehood by the show of force, we cannot
force true nationhood into existence. A relationship cannot be legislated; it
can only be cultivated. Nationhood can be built only through good and equitable
governance.
Therefore, those asking for the opportunity to negotiate
their existence within the Nigerian state based on their ethnic or cultural
identities have a right so to do, as captured in international legal
instruments such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights, to which Nigeria is a signatory.
However, these negotiations must be handled with decorum
and all the sensitivity required so that the Rehoboams in the polity do not
play into the hands of the Jeroboams and push the nation from bad to worse as
it happened to Israel of old (I Kings 12:1-24 & 14:1-11, 14).
As for those calling for secession, they should bear in
mind the fact that, before the creation of the Nigerian state, there was no
Yoruba nation, there was no Igbo nation, there was no Hausa nation, neither was
there an Ijaw nation. We must not be misled by nostalgia for a spurious
harmonious past or the myth of homogenous ethnic groups that is far removed
from reality. The area around the Niger was marked with unrest, continuous
intergroup conflict, subjugation, enslavement and oppression of the weaker by
the stronger until Nigeria provided the possibility for peaceful coexistence.
For this, we must appreciate the Nigerian state, we must celebrate our
Nigerian-ness and we must gravitate towards strengthening our nationhood rather
than cursing our blessing.
Be that as it may, there is no doubt that the current
structure cannot hold the greatness that awaits the nation but could hinder it.
The demand, however, should not be for secession. The question should be: How
best do we organize ourselves for equitable, peaceful and productive
coexistence? This takes me to our position on the pathway to a stable and
prosperous Nigeria.
Pathway to a New Nigeria
Each of the schools of thought on restructuring reminds
one of the stories of blind men who visited a zoo to “see” an elephant. One
grabbed its trunk and concluded the elephant was like a snake. Another touched
its ear and concluded the elephant was a fan. A third touched one of its legs
and concluded the enormous animal must have been a pillar. Rather than resolve
that they were all wrong, we believe there is a measure of wisdom in the
various perspectives and that, like a jigsaw puzzle, the bits must be put
together to achieve the desired objective.
For those who care to know where I stand in all this, I
am an advocate of progressive and pragmatic restructuring; progressive because
ours is a long-term approach, and pragmatic because the interests of every
segment of the country are taken into consideration. It is to this end that we
reiterate, and even expand the scope of, our call for the creation of a
Presidential Commission for National Reconciliation, Reintegration and
Restructuring by the president through an executive order, in full consultation
with the Council of State and the National Assembly.
The Presidential Commission should be given the mandate
and the powers to facilitate, within ten years, the evolution of a functional
and acceptable geopolitical structure subject to constitutional provisions
while the 1999 Constitution is progressively amended. This Commission shall
undertake a geoeconomic and geosocial path to geopolitical restructuring by
creating geoeconomic frameworks, mending geosocial faultlines, and attaining a
geopolitical climax.
1) Creating
Geoeconomic Frameworks
The Nigerian economy is clearly regional in structure
with comparative advantages defined by climate, geology, biogeography,
population and culture. It is why, in the era of the regions, even though
agriculture and mineral production were the mainstays of the economy, there
were areas of specialization.
The six geopolitical zones not only roughly reflect six
sociocultural zones but also mirror six geoeconomic zones that can be
deliberately cultivated over a period of about ten years within which political
structures can be designed. The ten-year window is meant to cater for the concerns
of parts of the country where the notion of restructuring is opposed due to
perceived economic disadvantages. Within the ten-year period, the six zones
would have been aided to develop areas of comparative advantage. Therefore, in
the interest of sustainable economic development over the next ten years, we
propose the following seven-point agenda:
The federal government will progressively devolve powers
to the existing 36 states, which will themselves progressively evolve into a
zonal arrangement. To facilitate this, we propose the creation of 6 zonal
commissions to be headed by zonal commissioners appointed from each zone, to
work with the 36 state governors to facilitate integration. The zonal
commissioners will be charged with a mandate to map out the economic potential
of each zone, design or update, as the case may be, a zonal economic master
plan, and coordinate federal and state efforts towards transitioning into zonal
economies within ten years, thereby harnessing the comparative resources of
each zone to achieve globally competitive economies of scale and scope;
Instituting a social bond to fund the transition to zonal
economies, thereby attracting local and international investments to the
possibilities of vibrant zonal economic clusters;
Within the financing framework, instituting a 5-part
Transitional Zonal Economic Fund focused on key sectors with unique expressions
in each of the six geopolitical zones, including extractive minerals,
agriculture, industrialization, creative and cultural development, and human
capacity development;
A progressive increase in percentage of funds from
mineral extraction accruing to the state from which it originates such that, by
the tenth year, either by derivation or by partial resource control, subject to
constitutional provisions, 50% of revenue will be returned to or retained in
the zone of origin as it was at independence and in the First Republic;
Consequently, a progressive shrinking of the
distributable pool account over ten years based on recommendations by the
Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission in line with the
restructuring thrust;
Aside from the Transitional Zonal Economic Fund, the
creation of a special Internally Generated Revenue Grant aimed at rewarding the
efforts of the states in each zone at generating internal revenue as against
compensating non-viable states for economic laziness. This grant will be in the
form of counterpart funding;
The national infrastructural development thrust will thus
be managed by the federal government in conjunction with the Zonal Commissions
and the state governments towards ensuring seamless linkage.
2) Mending
Geosocial Faultlines
While the economic component of the restructuring agenda
is being implemented, the geosocial component, which calls for a resolution of
the inter-zonal and intra-zonal aspects of the Nigeria Question, should be
immediately activated. This will entail harnessing the collective strengths of
statesmen and nation builders across the nation to reconcile historical and current
grievances and to reintegrate the diverse components of our nation into united
nationhood. The details of this component are beyond the scope of this address
but are contained in the framework for a Presidential Commission for National
Reconciliation, Reintegration and Restructuring.
3) Attaining
a Geopolitical Climax
The climax of the work of the Presidential Commission
will be to codify the geoeconomic and geosocial outcomes and facilitate their
evolution into vibrant geopolitical zones as federating units, each with rich
sociocultural expressions and viable, world-class economic clusters, all knit
together by a strong federal government. The geopolitical zones will have the
power to organize the constituent states and local governments as districts and
counties based on the models created by the geoeconomic and geosocial aspects
of the process. By the tenth year, the codified outcomes will be presented to
the president who, in conjunction with the National Assembly, will have, within
the ten-year period, championed the necessary constitutional amendments for
progressive development of good governance, including allowing for a referendum
in which the Nigerian people will eventually adopt the framework as a new
constitution for a New Nigeria.
Sustainability
The proposed ten-year transitional window is expected to
kick in from 2018 to 2028. I understand that this translates to the
administration of at least two, or at most four, presidents spanning three
election cycles. Therefore, if the policy is flagged off by the current
administration, there is the clear danger of policy discontinuity unless the
process is institutionalized. However, the 1976 Abuja Master Plan offers an
example of collaboration and continuity spanning fifteen years and five
administrations.
In the early 1970s, the Nigerian government began to mull
the idea of relocating the federal capital from Lagos. It felt that the capital
had become congested in terms of population and available land. It sought a new
capital that would be sited in the centre of the country, thus providing a
surer guarantee of security and ensuring a more balanced representation of the
country’s ethnic and religious diversity.
To this end, in 1976, the government of General Murtala
Muhammed identified a site for the proposed new capital and established the
Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) to mastermind the process. Policy
execution of this restructuring spanned the administrations of General Olusegun
Obasanjo, President Shehu Shagari, General Muhammadu Buhari and, eventually,
General Ibrahim Babangida under whose watch the relocation phase commenced in
1991.
The fact that such policy consistency occurred during
Nigeria’s unstable political history, characterized by successive military
takeovers and a truncated democracy, shows that the right dose of political
will can sustain a policy when the need is universally appreciated. Therefore,
The following points should be noted in the quest for
sustainability.
We expect that the project will be flagged off under the
administration of President Muhammadu Buhari in the period leading to the next
governmental fiscal year;
Alongside the kickoff of the project, the President may
send to the National Assembly a Bill for the Establishment of the Commission
for National Reconciliation, Reintegration and Restructuring, however so named,
to provide institutionalization, continuity and legislative guarantee for the
objectives of the restructuring agenda;
To further safeguard its operations and objectives, we
charge Nigerians to hold as a standard for electoral decision-making the
commitment of aspirants and candidates towards the ten-year framework for a
restructured Nigeria;
Finally, we expect subsequent holders of public office at
all levels of government to demonstrate the desired political will, drawing
lessons not only from the Abuja story but also from more recent policy transitional
success stories, including the Integrated Payroll and Personnel Information
System (IPPIS), the Government Integrated Financial Management Information
System (GIFMIS), and the Treasury Single Account (TSA) which were enacted by
the preceding administration but are being implemented by the current
government.
Conclusion
Recently, the Minister of Finance, Mrs Kemi Adeosun, was
reported[10] as stating that the Nigerian economy has struggled so far because
it is not structured to meet demographic needs. She, therefore, cited, as
regards respites, the government’s policies aimed at diversification from an
oil-based economy. However, I am confident that the success of its
diversification programme is dependent on the ability of the government to
embrace the zonal geodemographic nature of the economy as we have spelt out in
this proposal. This entails a revisiting of existing plans and policies
including the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the Economic
Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP).
I believe that as we adopt these proposals and take these
steps towards building a new nation, we will see breathtaking economic
miracles. With the world transiting from crude oil, the northern zonal
economies will become hubs of sustainable energy harnessing solar power and
biomass while deploying solid minerals like lithium in the emerging electric
automobile industry. Meanwhile, the southern zones will harness the huge gas
reserves while optimizing the vast coastal waters for wind turbines.
The president, the National Assembly, the Judiciary, the
state governments, the State Houses of Assembly, the Council of State,
political parties, the private sector, and the generality of Nigerians all have
a critical role to play in initiating, implementing, sustaining and defending
the process and its outcomes. We must think, not as sectionalists but as
nationalists; not as sceptics who only see obstacles, but as optimists, who see
opportunities; not as politicians, mindful only of the next election, but as
statesmen mindful of the next generation.
By the grace of the Living God, who calls those things
that be not as though they are, and according to the proportion of my faith in
Him who cannot lie, I call forth today, the 1st of October, 2017, the New North
and the New South to come together to the table of brotherhood and negotiate
the destiny of a New Nigeria with mutual respect and trustful give and take
void of mutual suspicion.
Finally, I urge all Nigerians, with unassailable courage,
unalloyed patriotism and unrelenting faith in the destiny of our nation, to
arise and seize this opportunity to build a great nation, with the confident
assurance that “there is no army powerful enough to stop an idea whose time has
come.” (Victor Hugo). For, in the words of President Theodore Roosevelt, “The
government is us; we are the government, you and I.”
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless our country,
Nigeria.
(Nigerian Tribune)
