Opinion

By Ahmadu Shehu, PhD.

To continue our conversation on a better northern Nigeria, let me bring you three unlived legacies of Alhaji Ahmed Joda, one of the most accomplished civil servants in this country. These are fantastic ideas capable of turning around the socioeconomic situation of this region and the entire country for good.

For the benefit of those who do not know him, Ahmed Joda OFR, CON, CFR was born on February 13, 1930, in Girei, a village located a few kilometres from Yola, the capital of Adamawa state. His basic education started at Yola Elementary School, from where he proceeded to Barewa College Zaria, before graduating from Pitsman College, London, in 1956. Before delving into journalism, Baba Joda started his career in agriculture and later became one of the longest-serving permanent secretaries of various federal ministries, including education, information and industry.  

Sometimes in 2019, former minister of Federal Capital Territory Dr Aliyu Umar Modibbo invited us to a meeting with Alh. Ahmed Joda. At the age of 90, Baba Joda, as we fondly called him, had assembled younger minds to think about the way forward for Nigeria and rethink the approach northern Nigeria has taken in negotiating its state, status and privileges within the Nigerian state. Baba Joda was very particular about the unity of this country, just as he was deeply concerned about the socioeconomic problems bedevilling the north. I, particularly, was astonished to see that despite his age, Baba Joda was chairing a four-hour meeting, perusing through documents and making amendments where necessary. After several meetings, recruitments, and deliberations, that meeting resulted in the “Nigerian Platform”, a collection of thinkers, excelled public servants, professionals, and academics, helping to chart a way forward for this country. The rest, as they say, is history.

Having noticed our contributions at the meeting, Baba Joda ensured my friend Dr MD Aminu and I stayed close to him and learned about this country as much as possible. We, indeed, kept in touch, learned, benefitted and enjoyed our relationship with this seasoned civil servant, experienced administrator, excellent intellectual and a special breed of the Nigerian elites.

One of Baba Joda’s agendas behind mentoring young Nigerians is to develop what he envisaged as the Nigeria Unity Forum (or any name that might suit the cause at the later stage of its development). Under this cause, Baba intended to develop a genuinely Pan-Nigerian national platform where citizens of this country will come together to discuss their grievances without hindrance, fear or hesitation. This was (to be) the first platform under which Nigerians from all walks of life, backgrounds and social status would have a free space to discuss, analyse and subject any topic of national interest without limits or limitations. The aim was to start a citizen-driven healing process among Nigerians to guarantee the true unity of our country. In the beginning, Baba had sacrificed his farmland and the facilities therein for weekly/monthly meetings of the groups. He was also to provide funding and feeding for the takeoff meetings. 

Another concept Baba Joda nurtured was a Sustainable Agricultural Model in which he invested so much time and resources in its conceptualisation and trial. Noting the waning natural resources, especially land and water, and the ever-growing population, vis-à-vis climate change and the attendant crises we are already witnessing, Baba had commissioned research into various models adopted by other countries such as India and Botswana. These countries have faced or are facing similar socioeconomic and environmental challenges. After thorough comparative studies, Baba proposed an agro-livestock model that, in my opinion, will forever change our society for good. The most fascinating and novel aspect of his proposal is its capability to deal with land and water resources, and at the same time, create a sustainable economic model that will undoubtedly work for the majority.     

The third and most important to him was the creation of the National Livestock Development Authority. Again, looking at the proposal of this agency, one cannot help but see the extraordinary visions and foresight in the manner in which it was to be designed, administered and supervised. This would not be another government-funded agency that would serve as a conduit for financial embezzlement and docility. Instead, it was meant to be a self-funding, self-sufficient and revenue-generating government agency responsible for making money for the country via our large, prosperous, but abandoned livestock sector. It was going to be a multibillion-dollar government company, richer than the NNPC and most of our aviation agencies. It would have led to vast foreign investments into our livestock sector, building companies for our manure, beef, leather, blood and born, etc., all expensive raw materials that go untapped in this part of the world. It would have been a major regional investor in this part of Africa, as it will not have had competitors for many years to come.   

While all of these and many more programs were coming up slowly but steadily, we sadly lost Baba Joda on August 13, 2021, at the age of 91. While I pray to Allah for his forgiveness and mercy upon his soul, I equally pray that those of us who are alive and are lucky to have drunk from his ocean of wisdom and patriotism will continue the struggle for a better future. I also pray that Allah will lead many more people to this cause and that these dreams, these ideas, will see the light of the day. Since Baba Joda is no longer around to pursue these ideas, I invite you to join his disciples and those who genuinely love this country to vigorously pursue and patiently work towards realising these ideas and their possible implementation.  

Dr Ahmadu Shehu is a nomad cum herdsman, an Assistant Professor at the American University of Nigeria, Yola, and is passionate about the Nigerian project. You can reach him at ahmadsheehu@yahoo.com.

By Dr Abdulkareem Kabir Masokano

The announcement of a high profile committee by President Muhammadu Buhari on September 6,  2021, to be headed by his Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, to oversee reforms in Nigeria’s health sector, is a laudable and timely one. However, like most sectors in Nigeria, the health sector is, to put it mildly, in a state of stagnation that, with the existing structure and organisation, is practically impossible to make any headway despite the enormous potentials abound in the sector to the economy.

There are numerous angles to the problem bedevilling Nigeria’s fragile health sector. They include the collapse of the primary health care system, poor infrastructure, inter-professional rivalry, poor accountability, inefficient, limited health insurance coverage, etc. However, the single most important factor causing the apparent none progress of the sector is the absence of a robust, patient-centred health financing model. Every single one of the problems can be directly attributable to this.

Contrary to what many think, modern healthcare is too expensive to be offered for free anywhere in the world. Nigerians think other countries provide healthcare services almost free of charge to their citizens. Actually, these are products of either heavy government subsidies, strict universal taxation regimes, or compulsory insurance programs. Over the years, governments in Nigeria have gotten caught up with this delusion that they can offer free healthcare to their citizens from the little they generate of their internal and external revenues without any sustainable framework to ensure steady financing of such an important yet expensive sector.

The result of this thinking is the current problem of underutilisation of highly trained healthcare professionals across various tertiary hospitals in the country because of the unavailability of modern diagnostics and therapeutic equipment – all of which are very expensive to use and manage. For example, we have specialists across various surgical specialities with the necessary skills to perform highly technical surgical procedures like kidney transplants, open heart surgery and complex brain surgeries. However, the system is so designed that it cannot accommodate their expertise due to the unavailability of resources to sustain such programs. This leaves many Nigerian patients cumulatively spending billions on such medical procedures abroad, and Nigeria loses money tremendously.

Primary healthcare, the essential segment of any serious health system, is virtually non-existent in the country. This is not due to the absence of the structures. It’s because of the ‘internal’ brain drain within the levels of the existing health system. The primary healthcare centres are primarily under the care of the local governments in the country. Unfortunately, most of them cannot afford to employ the minimum required number of qualified doctors, nurses and other health workers who, by extension, are pulled by better-paying jobs available at the higher levels of the system. As a result, most of Nigeria’s primary health centres are manned by Community Health Extension Workers with minimal skills and expertise.

The National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), which is supposed to be the primary driver of universal health coverage in the country, is essentially running far below par due to the poorly regulated profit-driven model it is structured. According to various statistical sources, the NHIS covers less than 5% of all Nigerians (out of over 200 million people!). As a result, the vast majority of Nigerians resort to paying out-of-pocket to access specialised healthcare. With that proportion, the insurance pool can only generate a meagre sum of money.

Coupled with the profit-only motive that drives the Health Management Organisations (HMOs), one can only expect that the system cannot cover the comprehensive health needs of its enrollees, not to mention driving any meaningful growth in the sector. The state-run contributory health systems are even worse! They are fraught with inefficiencies, lack of transparency and corruption. And as far as I am concerned, they ought not to have been created as their creation only serves to decrease the pool and reach of the National Scheme.

From the preceding, it is evident that sustainable financing is the critical element missing in our health sector; the focal point of any meaningful health sector reform in the country should include improving it. The current model whereby health financing largely depends on what the governments generate from their dwindling revenue or generous donor agencies is not sustainable and cannot move the sector even an inch from its current state. Therefore, it is about time Nigeria’s policymakers look for other alternatives to fund our increasing healthcare needs, given our explosive population growth rate.

Accordingly, this high profile committee set up by Mr President should look into developing a comprehensive, sustainable, and transparent healthcare financing model that would cover every Nigerian’s most basic health needs. It should consider a complete overhaul of the country’s healthcare financing by the development of a hybrid health financing system at various levels of the healthcare system with varying blends of public, private and public-private partnership, through the creation of a compulsory basic healthcare taxation system to cover for a comprehensive healthcare financing at the primary level for all Nigerians regardless of socioeconomic class.

A comprehensive reform of the NHIS should supplement this to enforce the enrolment of all workers in the formal sector of the economy (public and private), cooperative organisations of the various non-formal entities of the economy like farmers, artisans, transport workers, among others. This will cover specialised healthcare across our tertiary and specialist hospitals, both public and private and broadening the insurance industry to include ethical health insurance systems like the Takaful system to increase inclusivity across the various demographics of the country.

The committee should also encourage creating windows for community-based contributory health safety nets to tap into the national health insurance pool to enable citizens from lower socioeconomic access to specialised healthcare at our tertiary health institutions.

Special funds can be set aside annually from the NHIS fund pool for research and development in our tertiary health institutions regarding funding for specialised healthcare services and preventive health. This should be enough to cover all the available infrastructure needed to procure, support and maintain modern diagnostic and therapeutic equipment.

The committee has qualified, world-class technocrats as members. It also has the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Vesta healthcare partners, and WHO as observers. Thus, we are optimistic that it will develop a sustainable blueprint for health financing as the bedrock of their essential task. May the government implement the committee’s recommendation for the needed reforms in Nigeria’s fragile health sector.

Dr Abdulkareem Kabir Masokano is a resident Surgeon, ABUTH, Zaria. He can be reached via abdulkareemmsk@gmail.com.

By Simbo Olorunfemi

Federalism is not a Nigerian creation, tempting as one might be led to assume it is. Federalism is a concept in Political Science, with a consensus on what constitutes its grundnorm and what its main features are. I had thought, as a student of Political Science, that I had a modest understanding of what federalism is, having taken a number of courses wholly devoted to it at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. But that was until Nigerians happened on the concept of federalism and I realised how little I knew about it. I have now come to accept that what Nigerians cannot happen to does not exist. Nigerians took hold of federalism, created the aberrant idea of ‘true federalism’, as if there is ‘false federalism’ in practice somewhere, and there has been no rest ever since.

Yet, even though dissensus over the definition of concepts is part and parcel of interrogation in the field of Political Science, there is, in fact, a broad consensus on the definition of Federalism. “What sets federal states apart from other national communities is not their values but a number of institutional design principles that include a division of legislative authority between two orders of government, each of which is elected directly by citizens, and each of which is sovereign in at least one legislative domain. This division of powers is set out in a written constitution that cannot be amended unilaterally by either order of government. In addition, federal states provide for the formal representation of their constituent communities (states or provinces) within the national legislature, although the means by which this is done range from direct popular election (Australia and the United States) to indirect election through constituent governments (Germany), and even to the appointment of friends and partisan colleagues of the prime minister (Canada)” (Watts,1998).

In simple terms, federalism is essentially about shared and self-rule is about sharing powers, functions and responsibilities, against the backdrop of forces of plurality and diversity pulling the people apart. In accordance with this principle considered by Political Scientists as the fundamental plank upon which the concept of Federalism rests, Watts (1996) submits that there are 23 federations in the world. “They vary widely, however, in the character of the underlying social diversity, in the form and scope of the distribution of legislative and administrative powers and financial resources, in the form and processes of the shared representative institutions, in the scope and role of the courts as constitutional umpires, in the character of intergovernmental relations, and in the processes for flexibility and constitutional adjustment”.

The variety out there again reinforces the argument against the ‘Nigerian’ assumption of one Federalism as true and another false. It is absolutely erroneous. As I have repeatedly argued, every federal arrangement is a work in progress, each with its imperfections, with no finishing line for any to arrive at, that it might be adjudged as having attained perfection. On account of constant friction and collision by what Tekena Tamuno described as ‘centre-seeking’ and ‘centre-fleeing’ forces, federations are often under stress and in a constant state of flux, coming under pressure to undergo recreation and adaptation.

In North America, Canada has been struggling with what Ronald Watts described as “three decades of political and constitutional crises, rooted deeply in its fundamental cultural cleavages”. Her neighbour, United States has her issues to deal with as the national and state governments clash. Mexico has its own issues, just like Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela in South America. The situation is the same in Australia, countries in Europe, India and of course, in Africa as well.

While the nature of the stress in Nigeria, as to be expected, does differ from that of other places, that does not in any way vitiate the position that what is in practice in Nigeria is federalism, contrary to what some argue. It is simply a confirmation of the fact that federalism is a coat of many colours, with our green-white-green been one of the variants.

I recall that it was in the course of our conversations around federalism five years ago, that the distinguished Prince, Adekanmi Ademiluyi anchored his submission around a statement he attributed to the former Canadian Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker that ” Federalism means that you eat what you kill”. I disagreed with his position then and I, obviously, still do now. I don’t even think the essence of Federalism is about pulling apart, as the statement seems to suggest, as it is about pulling together. I do not think the essence of the coming together is that each might farm with the mind of self, by eating on the strength of the kill, rather I would suggest that it is more about broadening the collective base, that there might be enough for the collective good.

I have, however, only just decided to check up on the statement by John Diefenbaker to gain insight into the context in which he might have made it. Unfortunately, I have been unable to track it. Well, what does it matter? The statement provoked enough curiosity in me to have inspired this interrogation. Taking a second look at it, I cannot find grounds to agree with it. I would even argue that Diefenbaker must have been misled about what federalism to have made such a statement. What will be the point of a federation if it is all about self? Why will anyone want to be a part of a federation if the fundamental plank upon which a group, diverse in culture and other respects, is just to “eat what you kill”?

As I have repeatedly argued, federalism is primarily about pulling together, with accommodation for the interests and peculiarities of the component parts, with a view to widening the pool and leveraging on opportunities that come with size and other factors.

Indeed, there is the economic component embedded in the political shell of federalism and for some, it is about the political component tucked inside an economic shell, especially for federalist arrangements that started out as ‘customs unions’. I do not even think that the primary essence of federalism is about eating. Eating what one kills is not and cannot be the driver for federalism. Fundamental to the concept is shared duties and responsibilities with governance.

As we have come to see, the Nigerian elite has managed to make the arrangement here about eating, the same way everything else is reduced to food. That misunderstanding of the essence of Federalism is at the root of a lot of the crises – real, imagined or contrived. It is what is fueling the confusion around VAT. It is behind the divisive and bigoted positions increasing dominating the civic space. It is about people assuming themselves to be better endowed arguing that it should be about “eat what you kill”. If only the mentality can change from that to “eat what you need”.

The argument about eating what you kill is largely about revenue allocation. On that, I had this to say in 2017:

“Much has been made of the revenue allocation system which many see as rather lopsided in favour of the FG and have called for a review. One Senator declared the formula being used by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC) illegal’ by some weird deduction.

There is really nothing new to the debate as finding the most appropriate revenue allocation formulae, just like the debate, is an age-long one. Some recommendations have been made, just as reviews have taken place over time, especially In the last 40 years.

Before independence, there was the Phillipson Commission set up in 1946, the Hicks-Phillipson Commission of 1953, the Raisman Commission in 1958 and the Binn’s Commission of 1964, even after independence, all with the mandate to work out an acceptable formula, to no satisfaction of any group.

There was the Dina Commission in 1968, the Aboyade Technical Committee of 1977 and there was the Okigbo Commission which largely influenced the 1981 Revenue Act which allocated 55% to FG, 30.5% to State Governments, 10% to LGs and 4.5% for Special funds.

Modifications were further made in 1984 and 1992 which allocated 48.5% to FG, 24% to State Governments, 20% to LGs and 7.5% for Special funds, of which 1% for mineral-producing states on the basis of derivation.

By virtue of the current formula, about 52.68 % is allocated to the federal government from the Federation Account, 26.70% to the 36 states and 20.60% to the local government councils in the Federation.

Please note that sharing revenue among State governments and local governments were done on the basis of 4 principles, with different weights attached to each – population; equality of states or LGs, as the case might be; social development factor, revenue factor.

Also note how the allocation to Local Governments, in terms of percentage, going from 10% to 20%, even when many argue that the LGs are mostly non-functional, delivering very little in value.

So, by and large, there have been only marginal reviews in the structure of the allocation formula, over the years, especially the vertical aspect of it.

That, in spite of the fact that experts like Prof Okigbo and others have worked on it. So, when some reduce this to a North-South thing or hide behind the finger of restructuring to push it, it is obvious that they are not as guided on process or details behind some of the issues they pick up or simply echo”.

So, am I saying that there is nothing wrong with the system as it is? Far from it. The point I make is that Federalism is a work in progress and that as the journey goes on, what people do is engage in the process of negotiation to navigate into a more acceptable arrangement. It is not about seeking to bring the roof down. Our undue obsession with who eats what, when and how, makes our conversations convoluted and unhelpful. How we redirect the conversation to enlarging the pot, rather than wanting to have a bigger spoon or even making away with the pot should be of greater concern, as I think that is what federalism is supposed to foster.

There is nothing to suggest, either from the historical, ideological or philosophical premise, that federalism is supposed to be a closed shop arrangement, which locks one variant in and a different type out. It makes allowance even for hybrids, with quasi-federalist arrangements as well receiving the nod, as fundamental to the adoption of federalism is the desire to seek accommodation for forces seeking to pull and push. That being the case, where each federation finds its solution and how it adopts it will be up to it, as long as it is democratic, for Adele Jinadu maintains that “democracy is a condition of federalism”.

The challenge with some of our conversations is not just a defective recollection of history but the tragedy of assumptions about a number of things. This time, it is about what federalism is. I would suggest that the real essence of Federalism is in the traditional motto of the US – “e pluribus unum” which means “out of many, one. At the end of the day, we must remember the words of J.J. Linz that “federalism can only assure that nobody could be fully unhappy but certainly not that everybody will be happy with the solution.”

In Football, not everyone in the squad can make the team, not everyone in the team makes the field at once. Perhaps, there is something there as a cue. It should always be about what is in the best interest of the collective. As someone says, federalism can be a flexible system if the partners themselves are capable of flexibility.

Simbo Olorunfemi can be reached via simboor@yahoo.com.

By MA Iliasu

The chart showing the performance of Nigerian State governments in internal revenue generation has done its part in unveiling the mixed performances of the state economies. As expected, the public reactions, which to me are warranted, carry both the weight of reason and emotion. And maybe for the first time in the history of the Nigerian political economy debates aren’t taken over by regionalism and ethnic jingoism. Instead, it seems that consciousness has succumbed after realising how laziness and incompetence have been fairly distributed among both the northern and southern ruling classes, governors mainly.

Having learnt the flow of sentiments from the day the revenue rankings were released to date, I conclude that the discussions around Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) and Value Added Tax (VAT) are more skewed toward the search for self-actualisation rather than exclusive state independence. For which I’m hoping to be correct. Because if I’m wrong, that’ll mean most of the commentaries are not more than unwarranted emotional outbursts on how the economy really works.

Critical observation will tell that states like Kano are painfully underachieving. Possibly because the government ignores countless taxable entities and many other revenue streams, or it doesn’t care to investigate the conduct of the revenue agencies, it’s very self inclusive. For it’s a fact that the government source massive revenue not only from taxation but from the sales of valuable assets, among others.

On the other hand, without even mentioning Lagos that no economy has come close to compete with, you’ve Kaduna and Rivers states. The economies that can quickly be agreed to be of similar strength if not inferior to Kano’s. Yet with the astronomical difference in IGR. The defining factor in that dilemma lies in their respective self-actualisation and economic competence. The same can be said on the other high-earning states against their low-earning counterparts. And where that’s concerned, questions are right to be asked on why should a state enjoy a sizable share of other state’s hard work when in itself it’s in a unique position to contribute as much if not more.

The way I see it, that’s where the conversation becomes critical. The high-earners think every state should enjoy as it earns. While the low-earners think the economic union should not be dissolved because they’re geographically and industrially rigged by nature. The indigenes of high-earners agree with their state’s notion. As do that of low-earners who think isolating their state expenditure with its earned revenue will awake them from the shameless slumber and make them more creative. The important of all is, does the economy work that way?

To begin with, governors who believe nature hinders their income stream must know that geography in an economic context is either an advantage or a symbol of unique opportunity. For example, it’s a fact that Lagos and Rivers, as the custodians of Nigerian ports, have found it easy, therefore, advantageous to source revenue. But it’s the same with Jigawa, that’s strategically positioned to be a massive tech-hub and schooling environment across Sahara, Yobe that’s agriculturally equipped to grow the most unique seeds and Delta that’s attracted to the non-fossils industry. Therefore, using nature as an excuse is beyond lazy.

Nevertheless, no matter what any state does to achieve economic supremacy, one state must earn more than another. Thus, one state must record a deficit in trade with another. It’s a simple law of nature that’s very sensitive in economic policy, especially in accounting internal trade.

For instance, it makes sense that Kano, the largest textiles market and importer in Africa, pays more to Lagos and Rivers, who are the custodians of ports than it receives. Likewise, if Kano, as the distributor of the shipment, receives more from Bauchi, a retailer, than it pays. The same line of argument can be asserted to the states that own what other states need more than it needs from them. And so, recording deficit by the paying state is inevitable because needs and economies of scale can never be the same.

Due to that vivid notion, the famous British economist John Maynard Keynes argued that economies must be bound together to solve the inevitable rigidities that’ll be caused by the unavoidable deficit bred by such economic interdependence. According to Keynes, crises can be redemptive and non-redemptive crises. The redemptive crisis is the type of crisis that’s capable of becoming its own medicine. In short, any problem that can paradoxically become its own solution qualifies as redemptive. While the non-redemptive crisis is the type of crisis that can’t solve itself.

For example, the ever prophetic General Theory explained how a trade-off exists between inflation and unemployment. That’s to say, by compromising inflation, unemployment often rises, which give rise to another wave of cyclical negativity. Meanwhile, inflation can be risked to reduce the level of unemployment. And the lower level of unemployment means higher employment which can help eliminate inflation. That way, inflation has laid the very foundation of its demise. The very redemptive crisis that Keynes had explained concisely.

The phenomenon with our state economies is that the internal trade between those respective states records deficit in the books of payers and surplus in the books of the receivers. The receivers are often the highest-earning in the ranking of VAT, while the payers are mostly the low ranking. And the intriguing dilemma is that where deficit and surplus are concerned, a serious tension occurs to the market flexibility that’ll need cohesive effort by those states to be released. And if they’re isolated from one another by warranting each state only to enjoy as it earns, it won’t be possible.

It’s like two siblings in a family of three. The older is a farmer who therefore is discharged with buying food and consumables. While the younger is an engineer, who’s charged with water and electricity bills. It was agreed that none should interfere with any’s responsibility. Interestingly a period of bumper harvest keeps taking place for the older. But sadly, the younger hasn’t been able to secure a job. Food has been available. But no water and electricity. The family eats, but it reaches the level where there’s neither the water to boil the food nor the electricity to power the oven. The bathrooms are inept too. Their mother becomes worried. Things begin to fall apart because the house has gone insane, and a family meeting gets summoned. A tension of similar magnitude will happen if state economies are left to their own mercy.

Firstly, in an economic context, Nigeria is a single-family because the states are bound by a single currency and enjoy free trade with one another. Secondly, the states must collectively pay for one another’s incapabilities like beloved siblings because they live within the same family. The flaw of one can devastate the situation of the other. Just like what happened when the above younger sibling couldn’t secure a job while the older enjoyed bumper harvests. Thirdly, all that has been mentioned doesn’t need to be accepted or agreed upon but must be complied with, whether one side is lazy or hardworking because it poses a direct threat to the economic stability of Nigeria. Moreover, it’s compensation for inflicting deficit in the event of a trade, which was why the US and its dollar have been more stable than Europe and its Euro; all because the same currency binds them.

It’s from that, therefore, that I learnt when Gov. Wike of Rivers suggested exclusive state supremacy on VAT, he was totally ignoring or ignorant of how the remittances among those states become what enables the highest-ranking states to record the surplus that they’re boasting about. It’s simple logic. As the lowest in the ranking, Bayelsa State is isolated with its small Internally Generated Revenue (IGR), its purchasing power would decline severely. And state’s purchasing power is the consumer’s purchasing power. If it drops, it’ll mean no buyers for the available commodities in the Bayelsa market, which will hinder restocking from the industries in Lagos and Anambra. When it persists, the commodity market will die. Deflation will strike, and consequently, the investment will disappear. Small enterprises will become bankrupt.

Trade deficit goes hand in hand with governments that are also in deficit. If an economic crisis occurs within any among the economies that are bound by the same currency, the fall in demand will trickle down to the deficit economies. Once the crisis began, whether in a surplus state or not, it would inevitably soon reach both the surplus and deficit states. Even if it arrived in the form of a slight downturn, some debtors would be made to feel that they were carrying too much debt. Keen to reduce their exposure, they would cut spending. But since, at the level of the national economy, society’s overall demand is the sum of private and public expenditure, when a large segment of the business community tries to reduce debt (by cutting expenditure), overall demand declines, sales drop, businesses close their doors, unemployment rises, and prices fall. As prices fall, consumers decide to wait for them to fall further before buying costly items. A vicious debt-deflation cycle thus takes hold.

Now that’s the question the Nigerian state economies must sit down and ask themselves; is this where we want to go?

From what we’ve learnt, recycling mechanisms are necessary to avoid the bubble from bursting. Likewise, it’ll be absurd to allow lazy economies to keep enjoying off the hard work of others. The best response, in my opinion, is to set a minimum threshold, one that each state must abide by. An evaluation of the state’s income streams must be made so that no state should source less than it should. Gubernatorial candidates must adequately explain henceforth how they intend to fund ambitious capital and recurrent projects. Both to the voters and intellectuals. Because the days of off-head projections are over. The truth is Nigeria is broke. And most states are lazy. While cutting them off will destroy the economy as a whole. The room for politicians who dreamt of becoming governors when they’re young is no longer there. What’s there is a capacity for difference makers. Policymaking bodies can no longer be filled with empty-headed pot-belly carrying nepotists. Trained economists must be engaged. For now, everything is up to the central authority; we shall see if it’ll tame the situation or sink the economy further.

MA Iliasu writes from Kano State. He can be reached via his email muhada102@gmail.com.

By Tajuddeen Ahmad Tijjani

As long as ignorance becomes the norm, insecurity, instability, lawlessness, and all sorts of violence will continue to erode, escalate, and nibble in every nook and cranny of Nigeria. According to statistics, the country has spent 6 trillion Naira on defence over the last ten years, with no end in sight. 

If a small fraction of this enormous sum of money had been spent on training the young people in the forest, the result would have been positive, with greater output and revenue for the country. Likewise, if herders were taught to raise cattle like Brazilians, Americans, and the rest of the industrialised world, the result would have been productive enough to cover the country’s domestic demands while increasing our foreign reserve.

Multiple flaws in the country’s administrative system and social values appear to be the source of these archaic sorts of violence. The federal government seems to have lost effective control over the North-West, particularly in relation to bandits and cattle rustlers, who have become more militarised and destructive in their operations, which have destroyed a significant portion of the economy and resulted in the deaths of an untold number of people with impunity. Lack of knowledge and cultural orientation are the causes of many forms of violence and insecurity. Education is the key to showcasing the human psyche’s behaviour pattern.

In fact, the vicious cycle of violence perpetrated by these hoodlums, murderers, and godless animals stands condemned by all well-meaning Nigerians. However, this shouldn’t allow us to forget that they are Nigerians who deserve a better life with the expectation of contributing their quarter to the country’s development. Unfortunately, they are brainwashed to take up arms against the state. Positive outcomes would have been much more likely if they had received adequate education.

These pastoralists are within our communities. It baffles me that ballot boxes reach them during elections, but they are hardly seen where Western and Islamic education is being taught. Perhaps they are considered second class citizens, but their ignorance has affected everyone in Nigeria. Only when they are well-informed educationally they can rationalise reasonably and be softhearted people who find it hard to deny any boon, whether it be for a friend or stranger or just general feelings towards humanity. 

Lastly, I would like to appeal to the government to consider educating these folks to reintegrate them into society. Thus, the hostility they have towards the Nigerian populace would indeed vanish, and innovations would emerge that could be of immense benefit to not only our country but the ‘world’ in general.

 Tajuddeen Ahmad Tijjani writes from Galadima Mahmud Street, kasuwar-Kaji Azare, Bauchi state.

By Muhammad Sagir Bauchi

Adam Smith, in “Wealth of Nations”, while discussing what he tagged as “Canon of Taxation”, outlines some principles he describes as “Principles of Good Taxation”. These principles include fairness, certainty, convenience and efficiency. By the principle of fairness, he meant that the taxpayer’s condition should be considered before enforcing tax on him; this is in addition to the ability of the taxpayer to pay the tax. By certainty, the taxpayer should be informed on why he needs to pay his tax and how such taxes are levied on him. By the convenience, he refers to how the taxpayer finds the process of paying the tax as easy as it is. The final principle of efficiency described how the tax payment should have no negative effect on the distribution of resources in the economy.

In a short story, a man came to someone and asked him, “what should I be giving you every day?” He replied: “Sand”. So, as requested, whenever he meets that person, he picks up sand on the ground and hands it over to him. 

One day, that man came to him to collect the sand, but he looked at him abruptly and said, “Why can’t you bend down and fetch it by yourself? Why should I be giving you what you can have if you work hard?”

Recently, there has been an uproar between Federal Inland Revenue Services (FIRS) and Ekiti State Government. As a result, the state government came up with a law regulating Value Added Tax (VAT) collection. With the new law, the Ekiti state government will have absolute power to utilise the VAT generated from that state instead of the usual remittance to the Federation Account! Ab initio, a State high court granted an order to the Ekiti government to move on with their new VAT policy since they have already enacted a law to that effect. Still, a move by the FIRS through the Appeal Court blocked Ekiti State Government from putting the law into effect.

In the beginning, the will to challenge the Federal Government on VAT collection by the states was spearheaded by a single state. Still, by looking at the fruition that may come out from the success of such a legal battle, some states from the South-South joined Ekiti in the suit, thereby sending their representative to the Appellate Court.

Before going further, we need to understand what VAT refers to; for that, we will shed more light on the desperation and motives of these states to have the right to deduct VAT within the economy of their states.

According to FIRS, VAT is “a consumption tax paid when goods are purchased and services rendered“  to this, “all goods produced within or imported into the country are taxable except those specifically exempted by the VAT act”.The authorities responsible for the deduction of the VAT are; indigenous companies with non-resident companies within the country; government ministries, statutory bodies and other agencies of government; and companies operating in the oil and gas sector. These are the statutory bodies saddled with the responsibility of deducting the VAT in Nigeria.

From 2016-2020, Nigeria recorded more than five trillion naira from VAT deduction, but surprising, about three point nine trillion of that amount came from Ekiti and Lagos State. And as usual, the whole amount was shared between the three tiers of government with some amount given to the FIRS for its VAT deduction services! Naturally, human beings are similar to those two people mentioned that one gives sand and the other received, which at the end one expressed tiredness. 

Sentiment aside, it is hard to imagine how a state or region would work diligently harnessing such a hefty amount, in which, in the end, it will be shared with others that contributed little out of it.

Before discovering oil in commercial quantity, the Northern Region of Nigeria was the main contributor to GDP growth, which means that the agricultural sector was the primary source of foreign exchange to the country. But today, despite the contribution of agriculture to the GDP, Northern States rely primarily on what is given from the federation account. Today, it is no longer a secret that only some few Northern states can stand on their own to pay their workers salaries and wages, fulfil their financial commitments, not to mention financing their annual budgets. Most of them would go broke and insolvent if the federal government decided to withhold their monthly allocation for a single month!

To some analysts, the action of Ekiti and Lagos State Governments is nothing but a display of absolute selfishness. Still, to me, it is nothing but expressing their worth and importance to their counterparts.

Amidst this VAT controversy, a new statistical report on Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) of the 36 states of the federation for the fiscal year of 2020 was released. Lagos State is topping the list with about 418bn, Rivers with 117bn and Delta as the third. The report stated that only two Northern States are among the top 10 states with highest IGR, that’s Kaduna and Kano State. And it is not surprising since Kano is the commercial hub of the North. But, surprisingly, even the commercial nerve of the North is generating less IGR than Kaduna. Are commercial activities taking place in Kaduna greater than that of Kano? This shows that there’s transparency and accountability in Kaduna state more than that of Kano.

If one analyses that IGR statistical report and the five-year VAT table, he will weep for the sorry state of the northern states! And the implications of the possible ruling favouring those two states (Ekiti and Lagos) by the Appellate Court against the federal tier, then not only the northern states, but the remaining 34 states would find themselves in deep economic crises.

Then, what should the Northern policymakers do to improve their IGR and move away from dependence on monthly federal allocation?

I foresee a bright future for the northern states out of this development if only their policymakers pursue policies with a serious positive impact on the income of its majority (who are peasant farmers) other than policies that could only favour the wealthy and those in the government. For instance, if the agricultural sector will be given proper attention, thereby coming up with policies that could boost commercial farming through accessibility to quick/soft agro related loans, hybrid seeds with the ability to stand these ever-changing climatic conditions, mechanised farming equipment, setting up subsidised agro-allied chemical industries in the region, provision of good accessible roads connecting all the remote areas, all year round farming and a fair export zones, with these, its unemployed youths will surely seize that opportunity and venture into agro-businesses without looking up to the government for job opportunities in the government sector. But imagine an agricultural intervention program meant to cushion farmers difficulties is deeply flawed in I don’t care attitude of government officials, deliberate delays and nepotism, in the end, such interventions may not meet the majority of farmers on time!

Other regions in Nigeria cannot feed themselves without the support of the Northern farmers. So, why should we be panicking when they try to withhold their money? Why can’t the North stand up and bring out those opportunities? 

Despite the insecurity in almost all parts of the Northern region, one fact that can never be denied is that the area is blessed with arable land, enough for cultivating in dry and rainy seasons. Therefore, adequate farming inputs and machinery should be provided, either in loans or at a subsidised rate by the Northern states governments.

Curbing insecurity is another point that all the governors of the 19 northern states should work hand-in-hand to achieve.

Senators, Representatives and States Assembly members should focus on things that harmonise them with their governors to formulate policies that will boost their states IGR, rather than engage in their usual political war, which deprives millions of citizens of opportunities that may bring development to their livelihood and the region at large.

The impact of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in boasting every economy can never be neglected in every sound economy. But in northern Nigeria, those SMEs are either forced to shut down due to unfriendly tax policies or poor environment to carry out their activities. So, those SMEs should be given more reason to be alive than to seize to exist, thereby granting them soft loans with zero interest or a low interest rate and a friendly environment to carry out their activities.

Most of those states with high IGR have different means of gathering or sourcing revenue within their states. But in the North, both the tax collectors and taxpayers are not up to their responsibility. Therefore, a transparent and professional agency should be enacted in every state with the sole aim of creating awareness on the importance of paying tax, why they should be taxed and the transparent manner in which their tax is utilised.

Lastly, the principle of fairness, certainty, convenience and efficiency should be put into practice to generate more tax to boost IGR for those states.

Sagir writes from Bauchi State and can be reached via ibrahimsagir1227@gmail.com and 07019718681.

By Habib Sani Galadima

I was one of the persons that took social media (SM) as a joke. I used to think that SM was only for chatting with family and friends. I thought that one could not build a career or improve oneself there except if they belong to a small group of people who obtained certificates and special skills abroad.

I was scrolling down my Facebook timeline on a particular Friday night in 2019 when I got a post by Ibrahyim Elcaleel. He was jokingly talking about LinkedIn. I did not know anything about the platform, so I hurriedly went to check it on Google. I read the information about it until I was convinced to create an account with them.

Honestly, I didn’t take the platform seriously, for I didn’t even put a profile picture, let alone my academic details there. Coincidentally, in the first quarter of 2020, I read three articles, in a row, of late Prof. Ali Muhammad Garba, Mal. Muhsin Ibrahim and Dr Adamu Tilde advising youths to learn skills. One of these articles attempted to convince people to add the skills to their SM profiles.

Before then, I thought that only people who go to the highest level in many aspects of life beautify their profiles. So, doing that by an average translator like me is an exaggeration. In my experience, the only things I know that I could beat my chest to reference are two translation projects from Amnesty International and Al-Qalam University, Katsina State, and a few more from some national companies that need not be mentioned.

Still, I know that I have some writing skills, mainly translation, but I do have not many certificates to create a pretty CV to be read like a journal. Nevertheless, the late Prof. Ali Muhammad Garba said something that rehabilitated my conscience to move forward, thus: “There is the difference – between knowledge and skill. The former says you are aware of it, while the latter says you can do it. Which one do employers seek or value? The former is evidenced by a certificate (of attendance. The latter is evidenced by ability (buried in the anecdotal stories and case examples). Both are valuable, but one (skill) even more so. One addresses the question of “What?”, the other addresses the question of “How?”

Reading those articles by the people mentioned above pushed me to go back to my LinkedIn profile to edit it —adding academic details and some skills that I didn’t think were worthy of review.

Surprisingly, in one year, from the time I edited the profile, I did three projects, two from Northern Nigeria and the other from the southern part of the country. And my profile was reviewed by Writers.Gig, which is a part of success as a friend who works with them said. They review few people among many.

The mighty problem is how we consider ourselves “local”. We learn a skill, but we keep it unpublicised, assuming our friends on Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms know it since they know us. Many people keep their heads low in terms of humility, while it is a lack of confidence. Understanding the difference between humility and lack of confidence will help a lot. People have the latter, thinking it is the former. You can humbly show your skills to the world.

Dr Marzuq Abubakar Ungogo says, “As demand for skills increases worldwide, one easy way to lose opportunities is to show that you have no skills. But you actually have so many skills than you think of, mainly coming from your education, unpaid labour, charity or voluntary work. What skills need is packaging and honing. You can start by having a deep reflection on possible skills you have, then present them in the most marketable way possible. There are specific terminologies that you should also use. Once you do that, you also start working on getting better at them. This is not meant to stop. Constantly update!”

Habib Sani Galadima writes from Kano. He can be reached via habibmsani46@gmail.com.

By AF Sessay

The data you don’t talk about comes back to haunt you!  And when it does come, it comes violently. Many years of corruption, nepotism and neglect of the basic rights of citizens quickly metamorphose into all forms of crime. While government inaction is not and cannot always be the cause of citizen-on-citizen crime, yet research suggesting the correlation between corruption in public places and crimes on the streets should not be taken with a pinch of salt.  

This is also true for the failings in high places and the ugly effect this has on battlefields. Because beyond artillery and manpower, there is a great need for strategy, intelligence, consistent supply of food, effective and top-notch communication and above all, sincerity of purpose. Unfortunately, in the situation where the cankerworms of embezzlement latch and sucks blood out of any of these in the security value, the figurative blood usually becomes pools of real blood. So, when it lingers, question the data. Who does what, and where are the numbers to say they are really doing it? 

Nigeria currently stands on a tripod of corruption, injustice and hope (no matter the percentage of that hope). 

Corruption keeps the corrupt healthy and well-nourished to perpetrate more acts of corruption with hands, heads, tongues and minds.

Injustice keeps the people blind to the truth. It is an essential spear in the hands of many African leaders and former leaders to strike and blind the advocates for truth, make deaf the masses, and cripple the nation.

As for Hope, it is always a ‘good’ magic wand, or opium, or weapon (depending on who is defining it) to mobilize the people for elections, discourage them from revolting and contain them till the next election.

On top of this tripod rotates the head of change. In every season, every decade, every century, there is always one head dressed with a different colour to match the epoch and circumstance. The change of this era is the change from a corruption-ridden nation to a corruption-free state.

Now, how many people are not corrupt so that they can serve as models of integrity for the corrupt? It seems this is a difficult question; let’s turn it the other way round. How many people are corrupt and ready to serve as models of corruption to others? The statistics here are too terrifying to betray the calculus of any optimist on the future of Nigeria and the African continent.

While the masses shy away from their responsibility to come out and spearhead this journey to a reformed Nigeria, the corrupt are on the other side of the divide, ever determined to embolden their fingerprint on the face of civilization! No wonder they get most of the honours, most of the honorary degrees, most of the titles, most of the praises, most youths ready to die for the “good cause”, most of the best universities for their children…

Are you surprised? Why should they not be determined and willing to sacrifice their wealth and might to fight for the continuation of corruption? See! Listen! They were born in it, bred and nourished in it, educated in it, employed in it, voted in it and possibly wish to die in it.

They are not scared of sitting on the corpses of millions of their brothers if that is the only throne they can find to sustain their Kingdom of Corruption. They are very okay with the fact that the millions awaiting their grave permit languish and die in scarcity, adversity, poverty, obscurity – you name it. This is nothing compared to losing a single day in their lives to integrity and probity.

They will fight, hire the best lawyers, get the cruellest thugs, sponsor many false reports to raise public ire and angst against the people who seek to “unjustly” drive them from their ‘paradise.’ They will make many human sacrifices. They will even invent new smart devices of iniquity. Don’t underestimate their ingenuity when it comes to protecting corruption. Never underestimate them.

Alas, how long will they fight before they run out of vim? How long will they endure against the harsh winds of change? How long will they live to eat the billions they have amassed over seasons and seasons of rot, corruption and cruelty in this farmland of the world. How long will they procure mass graves for hundreds of citizens so as to exercise their will to power? They call our youths to their graves while their duplexes and children and girlfriends enjoy the loots of Nigeria in Dubai and London.

They will fight, but the people will also fight back. And as far as I know, no Empire or force or fight is powerful enough to stop the might of the people when they are determined for reform.

Do you want to join this fight? In which army will you prefer to fight? If you must join the side of those who want reform in the polity, then you must do so while you are well armed with patience and firm belief in God then the leader’s ability to bring change. Don’t be carried away by the plots and ploys of the corrupt. Correct when mistakes are made, tell the truth where and when needed, be just and bold in your assessment but never be a recruit (though subconsciously) in the army of the corrupt!

AF Sessay writes from Lagos. He can be reached via amarasesay.amir@gmail.com.

By Rabiu Muhammad Gama

Introduction

Have you ever wondered why Americans go on vacation while Brits go on holiday? I am sure you have. Or haven’t you ever heard that American kids like candy while British kids are crazy about sweets? Our Law of Contract lecturer, who was so lucky to do his PhD in England, once told us how nice his flat was when he was in England. On the other hand, one of our learned professors, who was privileged to have some training from Harvard Law School, lamented that he suffered before he could afford an apartment during his stay in the US. Curious?  Well, I can’t actually blame you for that. I think all these go to show us how beautiful the English language is.

British and American English

That famous Irish playwright, George Bernard Shaw, once said, “the United States and the United Kingdom are two countries divided by a common language.” That was Shaw. And he wasn’t entirely wrong.

There are many varieties of English today: American English, British English, Australian English, Canadian English, Caribbean English, to mention but a few. However, for some historical and accidental factors, American and British Englishes are the most widely used across the globe today. These two Englishes,  I am confident you may be aware of, are not always the same. However, they are not very different either. As far as this article is concerned, American English is that variety of the English language widely written and spoken in the United States and some parts of Canada. While British English, just as the name hints, is the standard dialect of the English language spoken and written in the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland).

The most noticeable areas where British and American Englishes differ are vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and, though very rarely, idiomatic expressions. Forget about pronunciation; it does not count – as far as Standard English is concerned, pronunciation is not an accurate barometer for measuring “good English”. Ask around if you doubt me.

Vocabulary

This is arguably the most significant area where the two Englishes differ. Americans don’t say lifter; they say elevator. It’s the Britons that call it lifter. Had Leonel Messi moved to Manchester City rather than Paris Saint-Germain, he would have been playing football by now. But, if he were to move to any football team in the US, say, the indomitable Seattle Sounders or the New York City FC, he would be playing soccer. Donald Trump, the most confused American president in recent history, is crazy about expensive automobiles. It may shock you to hear that the current Prime Minister of England, Boris Johnson, doesn’t know how to drive a car! If you go to the US, you will need an airplane to commute from Orlando to Las Vegas (the Sin City) because the cities are very far from each other. Go to the UK afterwards; you won’t need an aeroplane to move from Liverpool to Manchester – the two cities are only a stone’s throw from each other.

Spelling

There are many spelling differences between American and British English. Words like color, labor and honor are found only in American English. In England, they would write these words as colour, labour and honour, respectively. In words like these, where the Americans use an “o”, the Britons would use “ou”. Where an American would ask you if you know any good theater, a Briton would ask you if you know any good theatre, “er” in American English changes to “re” in British English. The Britons organise programmes, but the Americans only organize programs. I am sure you got this last point, too, don’t you?

Grammar

In addition to spelling and vocabulary, there are specific grammar differences between British and American English. For instance, collective nouns are considered singular in American English, while they’re mostly treated as plural in British English. For example,  where an American would tell you that “his family is large”, a Briton would, most likely, tell you that “his family are large.” The Americans always take a shower, while the Britons mostly have a shower. The word “gotten”, the past particle of “get”, is now dead and buried in British English. Surprisingly enough, the word is still alive and kicking in American English.

On a final note, American English is the child of British English. Nonetheless, the former is the most widely written and spoken English today, thanks to America’s technology and robust economy. So, don’t be shocked whenever you read that the Brits actually introduced the language to the Americans because it’s true. Anyway, it is not uncommon to see a child that overshadows his dad. It’s, however, very unusual, perhaps unprecedented, to see a child reporting his mom to an anti-graft agency!

Rabiu Muhammad Gama is a level 300 Law student and  English Enthusiast. He can be reached on rabiuminuwa327@gmail.com or 09061912994.

By Garba Sidi

Attitudes are fundamental to understanding social perceptions because they strongly influence our perception of people we meet, the people we live with, the groups we join or avoid, and colleagues in our various communities. In addition, attitudes are essential in organising information about other people. Thus, as we interact with different individuals, objects or situations from time to time and in different environments, we tend to form specific attitudes just as others form attitudes about us.

As psychologists said, our attitudes are formed firstly from family, society and schools. These three places are where children shape their attitudes, either negative or positive. Children will not pass without family, so that means the family is the first chain for shaping a child’s attitude. Whatever role the family play is how their children will grow and develop cognitively.

Family combine parents, sisters and brothers in nuclear family and grandfather, grandmother and uncles are included in the extended family. Each one of those members has a role to play in shaping a child attitude positively and negatively. Family is like a tree; any branch and leaf have a role in contributing to the survival of that tree. Failure of one branch or leaf will cause damage to the entire tree. That’s how the wrong role of one member will cause an unwanted attitude to the children of that family.

Sadly, nowadays family ignore their responsibility and substitute it with hatred, showing concerns to only biological sons and daughters. Even some parents leave their sons and daughters to live like sheep without shepherds. This careless behaviour that emerges today is hazardous, and it’s the central foundation of the problems we indulged in today.

Unfortunately, frustration is what leads the majority of children to form all these kinds of undesirable attitudes. Some children find themselves in a family full of challenges like hatred toward the mother by one’s stepmother, father not taking responsibility for his children, etc.

All these will lead a child to form unwanted behaviour after indulged in frustration. No doubt, our society is ravaged by kidnappers, sexual immorality, drunkenness and armed robbery. Children lack a sense of duty with lofty aspirations of becoming rich overnight to fulfil their needs. They engage in cultism and occultism, a fastest ritual way of getting rich and are subjected to unbearable pains and suffering.

May Allah save us, amin.

Garba Sidi can be reached at sidihadejia@yahoo.com.