The Bogey
of Reforms
By
Said Adejumobi
culled from GUARDIAN, August 16,
2006
The cliché of economic reforms by the
current administration has become the new political slogan on the lips of every
politician who aspires to public office in 2007. The fear of those reforms or
better still, the fear of the political forces behind those reforms is the
beginning of wisdom for every politician. In order to sound "politically
correct" or to appear 'good' in the eyes of Mr. President, every politician
brandishes the clichZ of reforms in the media. What they are all echoing quite
uncritically is, "when I get into power, I shall continue those reforms". Quite
a number probably do not know the content of those reforms or the implications
they may have for the future economic wellbeing of the country, yet they are all
falling on each-other to glorify the reforms. All of them have become 'reform
compliant'. What a shame!
Beyond the fickle character of many politicians in mere wanting to please the
president, the president himself has left no one in doubt that he would not hand
over power to those who do not believe in him, and the reforms he is
undertaking. Recently, the president listed the criteria of his would-be
successor, criteria unknown to the Nigerian constitution on the qualification
for the presidency. Those criteria were a checklist of reform compliance. As
such, in order to gain power, the politicians have succumbed to 'reform flu',
coughing, smiling, sneezing, dreaming, talking and singing loudly their
allegiance to the reforms to the pleasure of Baba's ears. The media is also
reinforcing it, 'we must not return to those unreform days'. Apparently, Baba is
enjoying the mood, a delight of leaving a lasting legacy for posterity,
especially after the failure of the third term agenda.
The World Bank Country Director in Nigeria, Hafez Ghanem, also added his
voice to the reform compliance by the politicians in Nigeria. He was reported in
the media as indicating the preference of his Bank in terms of a presidential
candidate for the country (See The Guardian, July 10, 2006, with the caption,
"World Bank pledges to oppose anti-people president"). Nigeria's next president
should be a pro-reformer; otherwise, the Bank may likely withdraw its support
for the country. This statement, in my view, borders on professional
irresponsibility and indiscretion. A World Bank official should on no account
meddle in the internal politics of a member-country. Every country has a right
to choose whoever it wishes, even if the person is a fool. George Bush is
certainly not one of the brightest in the United States of America, nor is he a
people oriented reformer, yet Americans have voted him twice into power. Why did
the Bank not complain? Wolfowitz, the new Bank president is a member of the Bush
team.
More importantly, the Bank's reforms record in Africa is one of complete
failure. The Bank was the arrow head of the structural adjustment programmes (SAPs)
of the 1980s and 1990s in Africa; policies that destroyed not only the economic
wellbeing of many Africans but the social fabric of society and reduced Africa
to a continent of 'second hand" and 'tokunbo' people. The Bank country director
should be less flippant in his utterances. Honestly, I am usually very
circumspect on the issue of reforms especially when they are based on free
market ideology. I am also not convinced that we are having reforms for the
first time in the last 20 years in this country. Two regimes-the Babangida and
Abacha juntas anchored the credibility and legitimacy of their governments at
the doorsteps of economic reforms. Ibrahim Babangida took us through a painful
but largely unrewarding SAP, regularly praised by the World Bank. While SAP
lasted, it was not short of apostles at home. Olu Falae, Kalu Idika Kalu, and
several other characters consistently but arrogantly affirmed that we either
take SAP or perish. There was no alternative to SAP, so the story went.
Neither civil society nor the general populace was allowed to discuss or
raise issue on the alternative to SAP. When a coalition of civil society
organisations tried to organise an "Alternative to SAP" conference in Lagos,
they were violently disbanded and attacked by state security forces. SAP was
immortal, mortal cannot question it! Today, we know better. SAP meant more
poverty, unemployment and pauperisation for the people. Our leaders and the
World Bank fed on the pains of the people. Under Sani Abacha, economic reforms
were also 'the only game in town'. Abacha claimed that he wanted to sanitise the
banking sector. He arrested and jailed directors of failed banks and adopted a
fake nationalist posture. After Abacha died abruptly, what did we see? A rogue
leader, who looted the treasury with impunity.
I am, therefore, sceptical when I hear clichZs like, "this reform is good for
you, take it or leave it", "there is no alternative to these reforms", etc.
Definitely, there is alternative to everything in life. There may be different
routes to a single destination. Reforms may take different forms and shapes, and
not necessarily the way a given regime conceives it. Leadership is about
different styles, ideas, initiatives, and vision. A leader that is voted into
power (not rigged) has the confidence of the people to create his own ideas and
visions of society. He/she should not be stampeded or blackmailed into the
vision of his predecessor.
There are some parallels, if only at the level of symbols, between what we
saw under IBB and what we are seeing now. Like the IBB era, Baba's reform
apostles, his 'economic team', is unabashedly arrogant. They talk of due process
but have no iota of respect for people and institutions. They abuse anybody who
dares questions them. They inveigh the parliament, and often do not honour its
summons. They are the only 'honest' and 'decent' Nigerians on the planet.
Everybody else is a 'thief' that cannot be trusted. Hiding under Baba's
political cover, they are more powerful than those we voted for, or better still
those who rigged their way into power.
Some of the reforms may be good, but they are not unproblematic. Let's take
two examples - the bank consolidation and privatisation exercises. The creation
of mega-banks may be a right step, but may not be enough to prevent bank
failure. The same 'cowboy' bank investors, who collapsed the medium and small
banks in the 1990s, can also collapse mega-banks. Again, is there no place for
small banks in a chronically under-banked society like ours? Do all banks have
to be mega-banks to be functional? In my view, the first step to take in
preventing bank failure is to strongly criminalise it. A bank is a public trust,
a public entity (no matter the ownership), not another private investment or
property. Any individual who partakes in bank failure deserves to spend the next
20 years behind bars without option of bail or pardon. Other measures should
complement it. Many of those who destroyed yesterday's banks and the lives of
millions of people with it are freemen today and have moved on, in life.
Three main arguments suffice for privatisation - efficiency, cost saving for
government, and economic democratisation. I am not sure whether we have achieved
the first two objectives, but certainly not the third. Few Nigerians have
participated in privatisation, not because they would not have wanted to, but
because they are victims of scourging poverty. Privatisation is not one of their
priorities. Those who cannot feed themselves or cater for their families will
never think of buying shares in divested government companies. Also, the methods
of disposing some of those government assets have in some cases left much to be
desired. Privatisation has created a new but greedy noveaux riche in Nigeria, at
the expense of the people.
If concentrating wealth in the hands of a few is a strategy by the government
to create a national bourgeoisie, which would serve as engine of capitalist
development in Nigeria, then the focus is wrong. A national bourgeoisie cannot
concentrate its attention and energy in the service sector. Manufacturing and
industry are at the heart of sustainable economic growth and development, not
service sector investments. Unfortunately, this emergent bourgeoisie is
virtually absent in those crucial economic sectors. They patronise the cheap
money spinning service sector and have bought up all our collective assets in
this sector. It is a lazy but over-pampered bourgeoisie.
In its economic reform programme, the government should think less about
false figures of 10 per cent GDP growth rate; it must talk about the
fundamentals that make an economy work: electricity, good roads and
transportation system, security, and low interest rates. Whether under NEPA or
the new brand name, PHCN, electricity is still a luxury in Nigeria, the roads
are death traps and the rails have disappeared. The President should visit the
Lagos-Badagry express way, on an unscheduled visit, to see the shame of a
country in the road sector. The road is a gateway to the country, but in a big
mess. A reform programme that cannot deliver uninterrupted electricity supply,
provide motorable roads, revive the rail sector, and put smiles on the face of
manufacturers with one digit interest rate requires some creative rethinking.
The truth is that in spite of the hue and cry about reforms, institutions are
still not functioning in Nigeria. The civil service is a shadow of itself, the
police is still as corrupt as ever, the judiciary suffers from executive might,
the electoral body is weak and incapacitated, and our universities are in deep
crises. Building institutions would have been a better reform agenda in Nigeria.
Making reform compliance a precondition for a political successor is a futile
exercise. Manipulating the political process to clear the coast for a member of
the economic team to take over power in 2007, in order to ensure reform
continuity will also not work. Many of them lack political clout and the
political savvy to lead a country. What the president should do in order to
promote policy continuity, is to ensure free, fair, transparent and credible
elections in 2007. After all, 120 million Nigerians cannot be wrong.
