Rivers State Commissioner of Police, Tunde Ogunsakin (middle), with his deputy, CP Alkali Shaba (right) and Assistant CP, Administration, G.F Esele (left) in a group photograph with Etche Brothers Assembly, during their courtesy visit to the Commisisoner of Police in Port Harcourt, recently. Photo: Egberi A. Sampson

Privatisation has been
identified globally as one of the best economic measures of structural reforms programmes in developing and developed countries , especially in the drive towards market competition among nations.
Privatisation in a broad sense, involves the transfer of ownership and control rights of firms from the public to the private sector. In this case, the government does not exempt from the economic sector, rather it changes its role from that of an operator to a regulator.
The decision to privatise in many countries stem from prevailing circumstances of debt, fiscal pressure, and service failure, and the influence of external agents like the World Bank, IMF and other donor agencies.
Thus the objectives of privatization in a society include the following” to achieve higher allocation and productive efficiency, to strengthen the role of the private sector in the economy; to improve the public sectors financial viability and to free resources for allocation to other more important areas of government actively.
In developing countries, the proponents of privatization have argued that it is the bulwark of accentuating economic freedom among these countries and thereby enhancing their performance in the international market competition, as well as raising standards of living of the people.
The objectives of privatization when analysed by experts and theorists, appear the only panacea for economic growth and development especially among third world countries.
Taking into account the institutional, economic and financial conditions of these so called  third world countries, especially in Nigeria, it could be rightly deduced that the prospect of privatization, in terms of design and implementation tends to worsen the alreading demeaning economic structures prevalent in these societies. Economic programmes in these regards are strategically designed to favour a particular sphere of people, the ordinary masses are in a no win situation under the strangle grip of emasculating political and economic programmes.
It is one thing to embrace a policy, but it is another to see to its  trident implementation . Privatisation is therefore not bad policy .
A process were substantial portion of share is transferred to large groups of private buyers through public distributions of shares to citizens either for free or minimum charge can create a high level of public participation in the economic system and political acceptance.
Profit making is the prime objective of any business concern and economic system. Privatisation as an economic and business policy therefore has the maximization of profits as a basic objective. However this must be done with adherence to a regulatory standard that will protect the interest of the free enterprise system.
There is a common notion that what ever policy introduced in Nigeria is programmed to fail. This rather pessimistic notion stems from the fact of existence of misguided schemers and experts in strategic deception who seize on the slightest opportunity to exploit the policies in their personal interest.
Without branding Nigeria’s capitalists as exploiters, there is need for a change of attitude towards the realization of their herculean responsibility towards the sustenance of a  thriving free enterprise system.
Wiston Churchill once said, “The trouble with socialism is socialism but the trouble with capitalism is capitalists”. A business man who insists on cutting corners and breaking laws in his quest for profit, sets on course that could wreck the entire free enterprise. In Nigeria today, the profit margin on which the economy operates is definitely to high. The margin need too balance not only the expansion need for stable development, but in the interest of national strength and survival.
The earliest prophet whose writing we may suppose ourselves to posses is Amos, the peasant prophet. In 750BC, he saw and denounced the crime of exploiters; “you men who crush the humble and oppress the poor, only muttering when the Sabbath will be over, that we may sell our wheat? Small you make your measures, large your weights. You cheat by tampering with scales and to buy up innocent folk, to buy up the needy for a pair of sandals and to sell to them the very refuse of the grains”.
The prevalence of a climate of political opportunism in our body polity and the conferment of exclusive economic rights to a certain portion of the society tends to defeat the very reasons for privatizations in the country, since only wealthy politicians with their business acolytes are actively involved in privatization, with the Nigeria masses as spectators and pawns in the game. Not only the accumulation of wealth and gain, but the independence and security of the free enterprise in the society appear to be materially  connected to a nation’s economic prosperity.
There is therefore need for a level playing ground in the capacity of the society to produce the capital investment that makes a productive economy. The economy must be relatively stable and the masses protected against baseless exploitation.
Some economic humbugs and casuists will no doubt argue that the implementation of privatization policy in Nigeria is working and concluding that the economy is sound. That may be true, but the soundness of the economy is a little mournful, a little doleful. This is because despite that the economy puts a cajoling good face, the widening economic gulf in the country indicates an economic prosperity with high blood pressure.
Unnecessary political deal-making and negligence of obligation to society combine to devalue the foreseeable gain of privatization in Nigeria, thereby making the policy a covering cloak for politicians, capitalists and business exploiters.
The crisis of unemployment and poverty in the land is portrayed by the   avoidable death of some job seekers at the ill-fated recruitment exercise of the Nigeria Immigration Service. Perhaps, due to the interchanging interest in the world business and the world of politics, one may come to two conclusions: That politicians should not advise businessmen if they don’t know the difficulty in carrying payroll and statistic accumulation, secondly that businessmen should not advise politicians if they don’t know the difficulties in carrying precints. Both must appreciate the limits and inconvenience, of their actions to each other and their overriding responsibility to the government and society. Herein lies that path to true economic growth.

Taneh Beemene