Nigeria’s former Vice President,
Alhaji Atiku Abubakar on Wednesday declared that the citizens were yet to
witness the change promised them by the All Progressives Congress-led
administration.
Atiku spoke at the University of
Nigeria, Nsukka, UNN, in a lecture series organized by the Senior Staff Club of
the University.
Addressing a large crowd made up
of academics, students, politicians, Igbo leaders, among others, he stated that
Nigeria had failed to realize her potentials as a result of refusal of the political
leaders to restructure the country.
“Restructuring will help to bring
the benefits of change we promised the people in the last election which we
have not seen.
“We need restructuring in order
to address the challenges that hold us back; these problems will remain
unaddressed unless we restructure.
“Issue of restructuring is beyond
resource control; there are more important issues. In my own vision,
restructuring will not make some states richer and some poorer; it is a win-win
situation for all the States. Nigeria will derive more revenue after
restructuring”, he declared.
Those present at the event
include former governors Chief Okwesiieze Nwodo, Obong Victor Atttah, Ohanaeze
President, Nnia Nwodo, Afenifere spokesman, Yinka Odumakin, among others.
In a remark, Nwodo who chaired
the event said “at no point have we had the kind of political tension we have
today; it is in time like this that leaders exhume courage.”
He advocaed for a Constitution
that will reflect the wishes of the people, stressing that the people of
Nigeria subscribed to previous constitutions because they had no choice.
Atiku was earlier invested as a
fellow of the Senior Staff Club.
His lecture read in full:
We have spent the last few years
making the case for the restructuring of our federal system. This is in
response to the cries of marginalization by various segments of country as well
as the realization that our federation, as presently constituted, impedes
optimal development and the improvement of our peoples’ aspirations.
As you all know, virtually every
segment of this country has at one point or the other complained of
marginalization by one or more segments, and agitated for change.
We have made tremendous progress
in our advocacy as more and more of key stakeholders have come to realize the
critical importance of restructuring for our country’s health, its unity, and
its future. The proponents of what we now call restructuring do not necessarily
mean the same thing, and do not necessarily have the same expectations in terms
of outcome. That is normal.
The agitations and propositions
are fueled by feelings of historical wrongs, of marginalization, of being
short-changed, of resentment and envy and of fear of domination. But one thing
they all agree on is that our country, as presently constituted, does not work
well and will work significantly better with changes in the structure of the
relationships among its component units.
Those opposed to restructuring
capitalise on the differences of opinion dismiss the agitations pointing to
what they regard as the imprecise nature of the definition of restructuring or
they claim that the proponents want to dismember the country.
In this presentation I shall
state my understanding of restructuring, and some of the steps we need to take
to bring it about in a peaceful, democratic manner. I do not intend to dwell so
much on why it is important as I can see an emerging consensus on that, even as
disagreements remain on what it should look like and who gets what when
actualized.
Different ideas have been floated
including resource control, fiscal federalism, true federalism, restructuring.
I said a week ago at another
forum in Abuja that it is normal for us to have different positions on
restructuring.
Eventually we shall sit down and
discuss, negotiate and arrive at a model that will be suitable for our country
and which will help ensure rapid development and mutual and respectful
coexistence.
Before I proceed, let me caution
us all that restructuring, by whatever name, is not a magic bullet that would
resolve all of Nigeria’s challenges or those of any section, region or zone of
the country.
Listening to some people, even
those who seek to dismember the country, you would think that once their dream
is achieved their part of the country or the country as a whole will become
paradise. But as we all know, life is not that simple. We need restructuring in
order to address the challenges that restructuring can help us address, and
which will remain unaddressed unless we restructure. Period. This also answers
the cynics who question whether restructuring is even important since it won’t
solve all our problems. No system would.
To me, restructuring means making
changes to our current federal structure so it comes closer to what our
founding leaders established, in response to the very issues and challenges
that led them to opt for a less centralized system. It means devolving more
powers to the federating units with the accompanying resources. It means
greater control by the federating units of the resources in their areas. It
would mean, by implication, the reduction of the powers and roles of the
federal government so that it would concentrate only on those matters best
handled by the centre such as defence, foreign policy, monetary and fiscal
policies, immigration, customs and excise, aviation as well as setting and
enforcing national standards on such matters as education, health and safety.
Some of what my ideas of
restructuring involve requires constitutional amendment; some do not. Take
education and roads for instance. The federal government can immediately start
the process of transferring federal roads to the state governments along with
the resources it expends on them. In the future if the federal government identifies
the need for a new road that would serve the national interest, it can support
the affected states to construct such roads, and thereafter leave the
maintenance to the states, which can collect tolls from road users for the
purpose. The federal
government does not need a constitutional amendment to start that process.
government does not need a constitutional amendment to start that process.
The same goes for education and
health care. We must reverse the epidemic of federal take-over of state and
voluntary organizations’ schools and hospitals which began in the 1970s, and also
transfer those established by the federal government to the states. We do not
need a
constitutional amendment to transfer federal universities and colleges as well as hospitals to the states where they are located. The University of Nigeria, Nsukka, the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and the University of Ife (now OAU) were built by regional governments when we had a thriving
federal system. We all know what then happened.
constitutional amendment to transfer federal universities and colleges as well as hospitals to the states where they are located. The University of Nigeria, Nsukka, the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and the University of Ife (now OAU) were built by regional governments when we had a thriving
federal system. We all know what then happened.
The federal government, awash in
oil revenues took them over, rapidly expanded them, and began to build more
federal universities in response to the inevitable demand from states that did
not have any located within their jurisdictions. The result is what we have
today: universities, including the first generation ones that are no longer
taken seriously anywhere in the world.
Local control makes for quicker
decision-making; makes for adaptation to local needs; makes the adoption of new
technologies and methods of teaching and learning quicker.
At the American University of
Nigeria, which I founded in Yola, we are currently building the largest solar
farm in the North East to provide power to the University and reduce our
reliance on the national grid and also reduce our carbon footprint. We have
since established an E-Library, which gives our students access to tens of
millions of library materials from around the world. Can you imagine if we were
part of the federal system of universities and were to wait on the federal
government for these investments? Take another example. When the current
security crisis in the North East began to grow, we quickly decided to recruit
a large number of security personnel, trained and equipped them to provide
security within and around the AUN campus to complement the efforts of already
over-stretched national security forces. We did not have to wait for a distant
organ in Abuja to come around to a decision on what should be done to protect
our students and staff. These kinds of decisions and investments are not just
easier with private organizations. They are easier within a decentralized
system where decisions are made by local authorities closer to the relevant
organizations. If you at UNN have to deal with a government at Enugu that has a
clearer understanding of the local conditions, needs and aspirations, you are
likely to accomplish more and return the UNN to its past glory.
These are possible first steps
and would be easy wins for the federal government and the country. They will in
part show the goodwill of the federal authorities in dealing with this very
serious issue, and complement the important consultations which the Acting
President has undertaken in recent times to douse tension in the country.
Indeed the federal government can
voluntarily withdraw from most of the items listed in the very thin Concurrent
Legislative List of our Constitution. I believe that the benefits accruing from
these first steps will help us as we move towards the changes that require
amendments to our Constitution. Let me mention a few critical ones just to
illustrate.
1. Creation of and Funding of
Local Governments by the Federal Government. Few things illustrate federal
overreach into state matters than the creation of direct funding of local
governments by the Federal Government. As I have said on numerous occasions, this
makes a mockery of the word “local.”
No good evidence has been
produced to show that our local governments are now doing better than they were
prior to federal intrusion. That intrusion must stop. Local governments are not
federating units. State governments should have the freedom to create as many
local governments as they wish or not to have local governments at all.
Citizens at every locality would
then know that it is the responsibility of their states to provide services for
their welfare. A possible compromise to help reduce opposition to this needed
change is for the existing number of local governments to be maintained during
the transition with the federal funds going the respective states as part of
devolution of resources. Henceforth local government administration should be
the responsibility of state governments. Period.
2. A constitutional amendment
allowing for the establishment of State Police is another critical element of
the required restructuring. With that, the Federal and state governments should
be able to decide on jurisdictions and which matters would fall under federal
statutes and which under state statutes, and where there would be joint
jurisdiction (in which case the federal government can take over in cases of
conflict). One thing about federalism that we seem to have forgotten is that it
is about freedom, autonomy and choice.
State police would not be
mandatory for every state. Those states which, for whatever reason, prefer
federal police would work out arrangements with the federal police on
cost-sharing and other matters related to policing their jurisdictions.
3. Reduction in the Number of
Federating Units. I strongly believe that we need to reduce the number of
federating units. The decades of excessive reliance on oil revenues and the
relative neglect of other revenue sources as well as our near addiction to
states-creation mean that even the increase of the resources transferred to the
states may not make many of the financially non-viable states to become viable.
Those calling for new states seem
oblivious of the fiscal crisis the existing states are in and how dependent
they are on transfer payments from Abuja. If we are to maintain the current
state structure, how do we ensure their financial viability? Obviously they
would have to diversify their economies and revenue sources, but what happens
to those unable to do so?
One option that I have suggested is a means-test
requiring states to generate a specified percentage of their share of federal
allocations internally or be absolved into another state. Or we may revisit
Chief Alex Ekwueme’s suggestion that we use the existing geopolitical zones as
federating units rather than the current states. Using the zones would ensure
immediate financial viability and scale and also address the concerns of
minorities about domination by our three major ethnic groups.
4. The issue of Resource Control
is perhaps the most contentious. It is the big elephant in the room but the one
most proponents and opponents of restructuring prefer to dance around while
often throwing insults at each other. Fear, greed, envy, and resentment are at
the centre of our disagreements on resource control. On the one hand, those who
feel they are better endowed with the currently important or exploited national
resource, oil, express some level of greed and resentment and a desire to
monopolize those resources. On the other hand, those who feel less well-endowed
express some degree of fear, envy and resentment. We must start from the point
of view that no country’s regions or localities are equally or uniformly
endowed. Diversity is the norm, and often the strength. And there are also
historical swings or changes in fortune: the well-endowed areas of today may
become less so tomorrow. Sharing is part of human existence and part of what
makes human societies possible. I have consistently advocated for local control
of resources but with federal taxing powers to help redistribute resources and
to help address national priorities. Local control will encourage our federating
units to look inwards at untapped resources in their respective domains and
promote healthy rivalry among them.
I must point out that all of
these do not have to be done in one fell swoop. Change is often difficult,
especially for those who feel that they are beneficiaries of the status quo. We
can start with the less contentious ones, including state police, and returning
jurisdiction for local governments to states.
Discussions and negotiations
among leaders from across the country can be speeded up to ensure timely
resolution of these contentious issues. Our generation cannot afford to be the
one that is unable to negotiate and bargain for a workable federal system that
truly serves our peoples and enables them to live in peace and harmony with
mutual respect.
The Nigerian federation is a work
in progress. We just have to continue that work, a truly serious work, to build
bridges across our various divides.
That’s what we need in order to
create the kind of country where our young people can thrive and realize their
full potentials, young people such as Ms Immaculata Onuigbo, the best
graduating student and Valedictorian for the Class of 2017 at the American
University Nigeria, Yola. We owe it to them and the generations to come.
I thank the Senior Staff club of
the UNN for inviting me to share these thoughts with you and for honoring me
today. Thank you for your attention.
Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everydayAdvertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
APC shame!
ReplyDeleteShame on Nigerians for falling for their lies and deceit and even refusing to acknowledge the failures of the government, 2 years after, Fashola still blames Goodluck on power
Deleteeven when we didnt support APC we couldnt deny Fashola as a good ambassador, it goes to show that even the bright ones will fail in the structure the party operates
selah!
sometimes I wonder who approves comments, cos with swear words and pure racism, I see a lot of approvals for comments against Fani.........
Delete