Opinion

The masses as instruments

5 Mins read

On a day like this, Osun State readily comes to mind. As the state steadily approaches next year’s governorship election, what should the people watch out for in making the right choice? What should they expect from those jostling to become the state’s Chief Executive? Beyond the theatrical performances with loaves of bread or a concoction of WhatsApp-induced Greek gifts, should those who have nothing concrete to point to as achievements in life be given the opportunity to plunge the state into a mess?


By abiodun KOMOLAFE

Politics, ultimately, is about the people. Policymakers always allude to the interest of the masses as the raison dètre of their policy contents. It therefore goes without saying that all policies appear to be people-friendly until their implementation, when the real and intended beneficiaries are exposed. At the outset, every administrator tells the people that the policy he or she is making is tailored towards the betterment of the lives of the citizens. So, we are familiar with the expression, ‘on behalf of the masses.’ Due to the peculiar nature of politics and public administration, especially, in Nigeria, policies are made for the people, but without their inputs.  The masses are mentioned for political effects; but are seldom heard! They rarely know in whose interests the policies were made ab initio.

Talk is cheap! To rephrase it, it is easier to make a promise, but, fulfilling it is a different thing entirely. Once upon a time, Nigerians were told that the country would have food security, sufficiency in agriculture and food production enough to feed her citizens, and in fact, export food items from Nigeria to other lands. A policy was enacted, with fortunes from the nation’s treasury sunk into it. Regrettably, the policy failed; yet, no one was held accountable. Till date, Nigeria imports food and grains!

In 1976, the Olusegun Obasanjo-led military regime came up with a national agricultural extension and mobilization program, tagged ‘Operation Feed the Nation’ (OFN). Though the policy looked good on paper, it ended up being a stillbirth. As of today, our nation remains practically unfed! Four years after, Shehu Shagari foisted ‘Green Revolution’ on Nigerians. But, ‘instead of it getting better for the witch, all her children are females.’

In 1987, General Ibrahim Babangida put Larry Koinyan in charge of the Directorate of Food Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI). Ultimately, DFRRI and the proverbial great boasters ended up as Siamese twins! What of the Small, Medium-scale Enterprises (SMEs)? Well, the fault might have been in the name, more so as Commerce in our clime has remained perpetually small, reflecting a Lilliputian attribute.

When, in 2006, Obasanjo cleared Nigeria’s multibillion dollar debt to the Paris Club of creditor nations, few Nigerians agreed with the former president’s initiative. However, Nigeria’s current debt portfolio, with her unbridled tendency to acquire more debts, is not only frightening but will make Obasanjo’s critics to reconsider their stand.

At a point, Nigerians were told that energy could not be owned and properly managed by the national government. Therefore, energy experts told us to diversify. We did! Sadly, however, power supply in Nigeria remains epileptic, even, as we speak. While those who are supposed to be the end-users are groaning under a thick and suffocating cloud of ‘wattages of excuses’ from the nation’s energy managers, the situation has become so worse that, even, when there’s power supply on the national grid, many Nigerians can no longer afford it.

Earlier in 1973, General Yakubu Gowon had told a stunned world that Nigeria’s problem was not money but how to spend it. Unfortunately, the man who made this very brilliant, highly philosophical statement did not understand its rhyme while those to whom it was made misinterpreted its rhythm. So, Nigerians merely used the letters of the word, not the spirit, to judge ‘Jack from Lur.’ How do I mean? Had Nigeria spent our commonwealth wisely, she would perhaps have been one of the topmost economies in modern history. Had Nigeria not been a country where huge sums of money were budgeted and recklessly allocated to attack minor problems, dear country would have been better than most of the countries now hosting Nigerians as refugees. But, the irony of it is that, ‘on behalf of the masses’, Nigeria is still a case of ‘thief steal am, thief collect am.’ So, Gowon was right!

By and by, it is pedestrian to conclude that Nigeria’s problem is leadership. Without being immodest, the followership may perhaps be a bigger problem. Supposing the followership has a defined vision, being conscious of how they are to be led, and can ask questions where need be, ours will certainly not be a country adrift on good governance and sustainable development.

On a day like this, Osun State readily comes to mind. As the state steadily approaches next year’s governorship election, what should the people watch out for in making the right choice? What should they expect from those jostling to become the state’s Chief Executive? Beyond the theatrical performances with loaves of bread or a concoction of WhatsApp-induced Greek gifts, should those who have nothing concrete to point to as achievements in life be given the opportunity to plunge the state into a mess?

Integrity! Character! Courage! Respect! Gratitude! Influence! Empathy! Self awareness! Managerial skills! Ability to delegate! Experiential knowledge of power-play! As the saying goes, ‘one sees all sorts of knives on the day an elephant dies.’ Although, democracy welcomes all, the society owes itself a duty to scrutinise each probable aspirant to the highest office in the state. It is therefore simple logic that anybody who will aspire to the Office of the Governor of Osun should not only be seen as above average but also accepted by the social norms, to boot. He must be an ideal standard of who an Omoluabi should be, not a misfit. What each candidate has done in his or her life and how responsible and upright he or she has been must count. Most importantly, Nigerians must be able to see in such a candidate if he or she is of the tribe of those recently referred to as ‘deep thinkers and silent reformers and performers with Development Agenda hinged on adequate, quality and equitable service in all sectors’ by the Sultan of Sokoto, Saad Abubakar III.

In fairness to posterity, these first-rate qualities are not too difficult to discern, more so as their opposites have their smell. Listen to their praise, they deceive you! Listen to their attacks, they derail you! Thiers is a world where immature disciples and men without values or virtues speak through the spirit, not the spirit speaking through them.

Among the major contenders amid pretenders for the seat, a candidate is seen as standing out. And that candidate is Adegboyega Oyetola, the incumbent State Governor. Discreet investigations into the life and times of Oyetola have shown that he is not only a prudent and cheerful giver but also a quiet achiever in all the important sectors of human endeavour. An Insurance juggernaut, the Iragbiji, Osun State-born politician has successfully handled a conglomerate of companies and has been running Osun State in the last 3 years without borrowing a penny from anybody. Yes, it is not as if the state is free of crises, the good news is that Oyetola has successfully managed them; which therefore shows that he is a man of capacity. If given the job of governing ‘the Land of Virtue’, come November 27, 2022, Nigerians should be rest assured that he will not handle the state’s legacy with levity.

May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Osun State!

*KOMOLAFE wrote in from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk)

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
Cover StoryDevelopmentOpinion

Pedestrian Bridges: Rising Symbols of Renewed Hope in Abuja

2 Mins read
  By Ogefila Bayo Adewale Every morning, parents watch their children leave for school along Abuja highways, their hearts race each time…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileCover StoryOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Tinubu’s Reforms Deserve Continuity, Second Term Crucial — Onuigbo

4 Mins read
The President of Globe Legislators International, Rt. Hon. Sir Sam Onuigbo, has called on members and stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com