Connect with us

Opinion

BEYOND RHETORIC

Published

on

Sometimes when Nigerian leaders speak and sermonize on how to make the nation’s economy grow, what comes to one’s mind is the popular cliché “talk is cheap”. Indeed, it is easy to mount the stage probably as a special guest to a public event, take the microphone and start reeling out all the beautiful ideas that will make Nigeria a better country.

It might not even be a difficult task to lobby the lawmakers to pass these ideas into laws, adding to the plethora of laws in the land. Using these laws to support an argument is no stress at all.  But where the issue lies is in walking the talk.

At the recently held National Manufacturing Policy Summit in Abuja, the Vice President, Kashim Shettima, made a case for the patronization of made-in-Nigeria products and prioritization of local content. Citing the Executive Order 003 which makes the patronage of locally manufactured products mandatory, he said, “Let us be reminded that we cannot achieve significant progress in our drive for industrialisation unless we deliberately promote the production of capital goods.”

“We must be focused on expanding our production base, prioritizing local content, and promoting made-in-Nigeria products.”

“I want to assure you that Executive Order No 003 – Support for Local Content in Public Procurement by the Federal Government, which mandates the patronage of locally manufactured products is still in effect.

“The relevant government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies are mandated to fully comply with the order,” he declared.

Is it the first time we are being told about the importance of embracing locally made products? Certainly not. Manufacturers, economists and various development experts have times without number harped on this, insisting that unless Nigeria’s exports outgrow imports, the balance of payment will remain negative, which is not healthy for the nation’s economy. …

The call for patronization of locally made products is not merely a patriotic gesture but a strategic move towards fostering economic resilience, creating jobs, and preserving the nation’s rich cultural heritage. Embracing locally made products offers numerous benefits that are crucial for Nigeria’s sustainable development.

Painfully, our leaders say something and do the opposite. They pontificate about patronizing made-in-Nigeria goods but everything they use both in their offices and at home are foreign products. Records have it that only Governors Chukwuma Soludo of Anambra State and  Alex Otti of Abia State use locally manufactured vehicles, Innosonvehicles, as their official cars.

So, it is possible that in the Vice President’s convoy to the venue of the summit where he preached about using made-in-Nigeria products, there was no locally made vehicle. It is possible that his attire, including his shoes, clothes and others were produced outside Nigeria. Stories even have it that some big men in Nigeria now sow their “babariga” in Morocco, Dubai and other countries because the special machine used for special designs on the clothes are lacking in Nigeria. it is possible that the food and drinks used in that event were imported.

They pontificate about patronizing made-in-Nigeria while they hardly patronize Nigerian hospitals and schools. Investment in these key sectors is not a priority leading to unsatisfactory output from them. So, they send their families to the best schools and hospitals in the world to enjoy their quality services.

As a matter of fact, Nigerians are patriotic. They do not need an Executive Order to mandate them to patronize Nigerian made products so long as they are of good quality, accessible and of good price. As an analyst rightly put it, “Nigerians love Nigeria. They love to patronize Nigeria.”  At virtually all social events in Nigeria today, hardly do they play foreign music. It is usually Nigerian music all the way. That is how good Nigerians love their products.

One must admit that some Nigerian made products are of low quality and expensive compared with the imported ones. Ordinarily, it should be expected that items manufactured in Nigeria will be cheaper than the ones imported from China but that is hardly the case. We all know why. Issues such as inadequate infrastructure, inconsistent power supply, access to finance for small businesses, and multiple taxation remain significant hurdles.

Producers and manufacturers borrow money from commercial banks at a very high rate. They spend millions of Naira on the purchase of diesel and petrol to run their businesses due to epileptic and expensive power supply. How then do you expect them to compete with producers and manufacturers in other countries whose interest rates are very minimal and power supply is not an issue?

Recently, Africa’s foremost entrepreneur and Nigerian businessman, Aliko Dangote, raised an alarm over the high interest rate in the country, saying that the increase of interest rate to almost 30 percent by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) will stifle growth and hamper job creation in the country.

For the presidential candidate of the Labour Party in the last election, Mr. Peter Obi, the recent monetary policy rate (MPR) by monetary policy committee (MPC) of CBN, on which banks benchmark their interest rate — from 24.75 percent to 26.25 percent, will have serious negative impacts on micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), which are the engine of economic growth.

“In February this year, I argued against the decision of the Monetary Policy Committee on MPR to 22.5% and CRR to 45% increases which, in my opinion, would further worsen the economic situation, as the increases would push interest rates on loans to above 30%, which would be very difficult for manufacturers and MSMES to borrow and repay”, said Obi.

So, Nigerian leaders should go beyond the rhetoric and take sincere and practical steps towards making the country’s economy more productive. The government should create an enabling environment through supportive policies, investment in infrastructure, and facilitating access to credit for local producers.

There should be improved electricity generation, distribution, and reliability to reduce operational costs and increase productivity. Energy security is key to the growth of any economy. You cannot expect the manufacturing sector to thrive when you remove subsidies on petrol and other sources of energy. Regular maintenance of roads, railways, ports, and airports is important to facilitate the movement of goods and raw materials.

Investment incentives such as tax breaks, subsidies, and grants to attract both local and foreign investors must be adopted in addition to provision of low-interest loans and credit facilities specifically for manufacturing businesses as well as strengthening financial institutions to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Our policy and regulatory framework must be looked into. The policy makers should come up with and implement consistent and clear industrial policies that support long-term investments. There should be a deliberate effort to simplify business registration processes, reduce bureaucratic red tape, and combat corruption.

 Development of policies that protect local industries while promoting exports through favorable trade agreements is inevitable likewise the promotion of the use of locally sourced raw materials to reduce dependency on imports.

The Ministry of Mines and Steel Development must wake up to their responsibility of developing the mining sector to provide raw materials for manufacturing and contribute to the economic growth of the nation.

The government must support manufacturers in accessing international markets through export incentives and trade missions. And producers must do their own bit by ensuring that their products meet international quality standards to compete globally.

Additionally, there is a need for a cultural shift in consumer attitudes. Marketing campaigns that highlight the quality, uniqueness, and benefits of Nigerian products can help change perceptions and encourage more people to choose local options. Educational initiatives that emphasize the importance of supporting local industries can also foster a more supportive consumer base.

Most importantly, our leaders should always walk the talk.  They should stop preaching about patronizing made in Nigeria products while they use foreign made one. In the words of Henry Ward Beecher, “ A good example is worth a thousand sermons”.

CALISTA EZEAKU

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending