Thursday, 14 November 2013

DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATION IN A FLEDGING AND EMERGING MEGACITY ( LAGOS A POLITCAL METAPHOR) AT A PUBLIC LECTURE COMMEMORATING THE BIRTHDAY OF PRINCE ADETOYESE OLUSI

Lagos is the commercial/ industry capital of Nigeria, indeed the major port of entry and exit, and the most significant city in the country. It is an undisputable fact that in Nigeria today, Lagos remains the most complex metropolitan centre of regional population and organization; a major focus of political, financial and cultural power for its own residents and for people in neighboring states after Abuja the federal capital.
On the one hand, the role, which Lagos plays, both locally and nationally complex , comes from the complex set of fuctions carried out within the metropolis. These functions range from essentially economic activities such as manufacturing to more socially oriented ones like government housing projects. Major decision affecting social and economic changes in Nigeria are made in lagos, as in Abuja, while lagos remains a major point of origin for the development and diffusion elaewhere, of significant innovations of all kinds.
The human density of the metropolis, its pace of daily life, the complexity of its transactions, and the cosmopolitan reach of its flow of products and people have all combined to project lagos as a member of the world metropolitan club. These attributes of the metropolis are usually regarded as the stimulants to cultural creativity and change that maintain the metropolis as a dynamic node within the national settlement system.
On the other hand, however, the housing situation in many parts of lagos leaves much to be desired. Many residents are homeless or live without in housing units described by the united nation s as a maenace to health and human dignity. Overcrowded slums in the metropolis have been found to contribute to a high rate juvenile delinquency; high rates of family dependence on members of the public for assistance ; high level of illetracy; high proportions of unemployment, poverty, and divorce; more non support cases , acholism, drug abuse; a higher rate of psychological disorders and mental defiency; low marriage rates ; a low average educational level; low residential mobility (due to acute shortage of residential building and land) and a generally higher degree of social abnormality, lawlessness, crime and fear.
Here then lies a public policy paradox and the issue or representation in a democratic space; many Nigerians dread the increasing rate of urban violence.
In thye city, while some would not even wish to live there; yet, according statistical records, lagos has more police stations than any other btown or city in Nigeria. How then could this rate of urban violence be stemmed, and how culd the solution found be replicated in other towns and cities in Nigeria? These are some of the issues concerning the adequacy, afficiency and quality or otherwise of our representatives at the various tiers of our democratic.
                                  A HISTORY OF THE GROWTH OF LAGOS
Lagos is located in a lagoon along the southweatern coast between latitude 6 degree and 7 degree north of the equator and between longitude 3 degree and 4 degree east of greenwhich. This lagoon extends from cotonou (republic of benin) in the west, to the niger delta in the southwest.
 As the only natural break along some 2,500 kilometer of the west African coastline, lagos became a very important seaport during the trading activities of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The expansion of lagos was due to the growth of the colonial economy of Nigeria. Having served as the seat of government between 1914 and 1992, after which the fedral capital was relocated to Abuja, lagos remains the largest seaport and the most important railway terminus, and enjoys prominence in the exported- oriented economy of Nigeria. The city acquired the status of a municipality in 1950, and its area was subsequently extended to incorporate parts of the main land
Today, metropolitan lagos is made up of 5 local government areas and 8 local council development areas , covering about 32 percent of the total area of lagos state, that is about 1088 square kilometers. About 209 square kilometers of the area is covered by water and unreclaimed mangrove swamps.
Three crucial factors have been identified as being responsiblke for the subsequent growth of the city of lagos and surrounding settlements, namel:
1.     the construction, in 1895, of a railway line as a means of linking the  city and port with the hinterland
2.     the development of the lagos harbor into the best on the west African coast between 1906 and 19
3.     the construction, in 1900, of carter bridge which was reconstructed in 1933 and again in 1979, to link the island with the mainland and the hinterland.
As the population of lagos increased, expansion became inevitable. In 1871, lagos island was 4 km2 and had an estimated population of 28,518. By 1931 the population of the city had increased to 126,108 and the area had expanded to 62.8 km2, ecompassing areas immediately outside the lagos island- a phenomenal increase of 342.2 population and 1,470 percent expansion in areas over the 1871 figures.
CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
As early as 1886, when lagos colony was separated from the gold coast, an executive council for the lagos colony was established. But federick lugard had reduced the powers of this executive council to the staus of legislative. In 1906, when lagos colony was merged with the protectorate of southern Nigeria, the competence of this legislative council was extended to cover lagos and the southern protectorate.
In order to compensate the inhabitant of the lagos colony who de jure british subjects and enjoyed the rights of british citizens, a small legislative council for lagos colony was introduced for the purpose of enacting laws and scrutinizing estimates and expenditure.the legislative council consisted of ten official and six unofficial members.
The almagamation of Nigeria in 1914 coincided with the establishment of a Nigerian council. The council compromised 24 official and 12 unofficial members. Six of the unofficial members were Europeans representing commerce, industry and banking. The six African unofficial members were chiefs namely; the sultan of sokoto, the alafin of oyo, chief douglas numa and one each educated Nigerian repreenting each of lagos and calarbar.
The Nigerian council was essentially an advisory body because It had no legisl;ative powers. The most traditional rulers could not participate effectively because of their inability to communicate in English. Some other means means of satisfying the demand of the Nigerian peple for some form of vrepresentative government had to be explored as the resistance of the indigenous population against the imposition of a centralized hierachial system of administration over traditionally acephalous societies, especially in eastern Nigeria, was very stiff.
Most notable was the excusion of the educated elite from participation in the governance of Nigeria, and the very limited opportunities in the administrative machinery for such elite.
The legal status of lagos as a colony whose inhabitants were british subjects also facilitated the demands for greater freedom of participation in political activities. Moreover, the comtemtuos attitude of the british colonial administration to Nigerian traditional rulkers. Eg. The eleko of eko,m chief jaja of opobo, chief nana of olurnu, further infuriated the indigenous population and elites; it thus inflamed the nationalist fervor led prince abibu ajao oki, founder and president of ilu committee while Herbert nmaculay was the secretary and recorder.
The Nigerian council and the small legislative council for lagos were abolished by order in council in 1922 (ezera, 1964). “prince abibu oki and other coastal elite had indeed, been agitating against the government in lagos for the imposition of water rates and the appropation of land for land for government projects even before Lugard became Governor General in 1914” (Nnoli, 1978).

After the amalgamation of 1914, “the nationalist fought against the exclusiveness and racial bias of the Crown Colony system of Government. Nationalist demand at this phase of the struggle was not the attainment of self-government but a measure of participation in the existing government” (Coren, 1981).

The Legislative Council
This was a product of the Clifford Constitution of 1922. This Council comprised 30 official members, 15 unofficial ones nominated by government, and three unofficial members representing the municipal areas of Lagos and Calabar.

The Council had a limited number of elected members and African members selected to represent the interest of those parts of the Colony and Southern Protectorate not represented by elected members.

But the franchise was restrictive and limited to males who were British subjects or natives of the Protectorate with 12months residential qualification and an income of not less than £100 a year. The first elections in Nigerian history were held in September 1923 and the Council was inaugurated in October, of the same year.

The Clifford Constitution was significant in the following respects: it introduced the elective principle and stimulated the formation of political organizations notably, Herbert Macaulay’s Nigerian National Democratic Party (ND) in 1923 and the Lagos Youth Movement (LYME) in 1934, founded by H.O. Davies, Dr. J.C. Vaughan, Dr. Kofo Abayomi, Ernest Ikoli, Nnamdi Azikiwe and Obafemi Awolowo which later transformed into the Nigerian Youth Movement (NYM) in 1936.

The colonial administration was not responsive to Nigerian public opinion as a means of vetting arbitrary actions. The NNDP – which was formed to contest the 1923 elections – dominated Lagos politics and Herbert Macaulay’s approach was rather too conservative for comfort, as he attacked only specific isolated policies of the colonial administration and not the colonial system itself.

His political goal  of a self-governing Nigeria within the British Commonwealth was unattractive to the new breed of more radical Nigerians in the 1930s.

Consequently, there emerged the need for a more territorially widespread organization other than the NNDP. This, along with the need for organized resistance to colonial rule in its entirety, rather than to isolated policies, culminated in the decline of the NNDP and the emergence of the Nigerian Youth Movement (NYM).

The NYM contested the 1938 elections with the NNDP and won the three Lagos seats. The British colonial administration branded the Movement a southern-based party and the Northern Emirs supported the British despite the mixed composition of the Jos Branch comprising members from both the North and South. The NYM had been critical of colonial methods of governing Northern Nigeria by proclamations emanating from the Governor rather than through direct elections. In the North, organized opposition came from the JOs Tribal League.

The NYM disintegrated over issues of leadership and representation. Nnamdi Azikiwe resigned from the Movement and all the Ibo members followed suit thus inaugurating the process of the formation of political parties.

The resultant political parties were the National Council for Nigeria and the Camerouns (NCNC) in 1944, the Action Group (AG) in 1950 and the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) in 1951.

The 2015 General Election will mark a deep watershed in Nigeria’s History just like the 2011 election, which held immediately after Nigeria bids farewell to the First 50 years of Political Independence (and 96 years of existence as a Country). Hopefully, the election will usher in the Set of Leaders that will lay the Foundation for the Journey to the 2nd millennium of the existence of Nigeria as a nation.

Like every other election all over the world, the 2015 elections in Nigeria should be mainly about the economy. Our first 50 years had a chequered history as we struggled to forge a nation out of the disparate nationalities. The first few years of independence, with the regional economies as the driving force, saw spectacular growth of the economy. With oil came a neal economy based essentially on consumption- distributional politics rather than production.
We seem to be saddled with an oil resoursce curse and a political economy that emasculate the future. We have gone thrugh a series of development plans, programmes, visions, etc. on paper, some were far reaching. We have also had the courage to implement some radical reforms. But, without a holistic systemic change and commitment to sustain reforms, we often take three steps forward and four bacjwards.
It appears that the future is foggy and serious discussion about the new Nigeria in the next 50 years have begun. The debate so far is about who would be president and so on, and not about what trhey wil offer. I am afraid that we again conduct elections without any serious issues beign canvassed.
I recall the robust debates relating to the alternative ideologies and manifesto of the five political parties during the 1978/79 elections, I remember specifically listening to chief obafemi awolowo in 1979 explaning how much it would cost to implement free education at all levels and free medical care, and how he would reconstruct public finance to squeeze out the money to implement them.
Not anymore! There are no alternative vision no ideologies and no programmes that offer the voters clear choices about their future.
Most political parties have no clear road map for the country. Rather, they are concererned about how to grab power, and I am not sure how many party members can coherently explains what their party stands for. Some of us joined political parties in the hope of changing it from within, and we have not given up.

I am a strong believer in our future and in its destiny to lead the black race. If an emerging Lagos megacity fails and Nigeria does not make it, sub-Saharan Africa cannot make it. That is why some of us have elected to devote the rest of our lifetimes to work for a Nigeria’s future encapsulated in a sound democratic representation.

The challenges are herculean, and the next two years are critical. The tragedy is that our representative have no clue or implementable plan to ster a different outcome. Under the current political economy, the Vision 2020 will remain what it is – a beautiful dream! Neither the investment levels nor the productivity (given the decaying educational system and poor skills) required to realize Vision 2020 will happen.

For Nigeria to take a shot at 2020, the socio-economy needs to be growing at about 14-15% a year (more than twice the current rates of 6-7%).

I am deeply worried. As a consequence f deliberate choices made by present ublic sector managers and the constitutional/structural bottlenecks, the present leadership at all tiers cannot generate ideas and will power that can stimulate the required impetus to secure prosperity for all.

With massive government borrowing during a boom and paradoxically very low levels of public investment, the private sector is stymied into a trap. Who has the strategy to unbind this trap?

Effectively, we are repeating the worst forms of the mistakes of the late 1970s to early 1980s – accumulated huge debts and raised government consumption to unsustainable levels during the slump. As it is, the economy and the future of hundreds of millions of Nigerians are hinged on a life support of a temporary oil boom. Our economy is still driven by the volatile primary co at 20%, we are commodity sector   - oil, gas and agriculture. With poverty incidence at about 50% and the urban youth unemployment at over 20%, we vare sitting on a ntime bomb.
The good news is that Nigeria has all the potentials to be great. There are huge idle resources that can be put to productive use but this can only happen when round pegs are put inside round holes.
This is where the debate needs to begin. Candidates and political parties needs to outline their visions of Nigeria in the next 50 years and how they intend to rapidly create a broadly shared and sustainable prosperity. The debate must begin.
Can fundamental results be achieved by tinkering with programmes or will major changes in the political structure and constitution be required? It is time the prospective candidate roll out their agenda, and how they intend to finance them! Nigerians will no longer be content with a plethora of platitudes and wish list.
Each candidate must tell us how he/she intends to finance each programme, the deliverables and time lines. More specifically, we need to know where they stand on critical national issues, even if they have no concrete plans on them. This is a necessary element of a democratic process.
The first issues we need answeres to is how the candidate hope to reconstruct our public finaces and put it back on the path of sustainability. How can they rein in the obtuse and rapacious state bureaucracies, balance our budget during this period of the oil boom, and yet spend at least 40% of the budget on capital expenditure as required by the fiscal responsibility acts?
Personally, I am not convinced that we need more than ministries and 10 ministries and 10 ministries at the federal level. They should explain to us their contingency plans in case the oil prices crashes tomorrow.
Candidates should also let us know their views on, and framework for, borrowing (when to borrow, for what, and how it will be paid back) without clarity on these issues, much of the talk about government providing electricity and infrastructure on a sustainable basis will remain a joke, as funding will always remain a binding constraint. In other words, candidates should tell us their plans to shrink the domain of the public sector to free resources to enlarge the domain of the private sector in order to enlarge the domain of the private sector in order to truly have a private sector led, led market economy.

Nigerians would like to know the plans of the candidates for reconstructing our political structures to create the new Nigeria with a new sustainable prosperity. Currently, we are running unitary – federalism, with a plethora of fiscally unviable states as the ‘federating units’, with the attendant wasteful duplication of bureaucracies all over the country. So far, as everyone is spoilt with monthly allocations from oil rents, there is no incentive to recreate the prosperity engendered by the palm or cocoa plantations and groundnut pyramids of the old regions.

Every village wants to become a state in so far as ‘allocations continue to come from Abuja to pay salaries’. Nigeria’s fiscal federalism seems to have its incentive system upside down, supporting a political economy based upon consumption- distribution rather than production. Should this continue?
Where do we stand on state creation? Should we create eight states per zone as being proposed, or consolidate the existing ones into six regions with Abuja, Kano, Lagos and Port Harcourt as special territories, as is being proposed by others? What do we do with revenues from exhaustible natural resources such as oil, gas and solid minerals?

Some people propose that we can create as many states as we want (perhaps until every village becomes a state) but that revenues from the Federation Account should never be used for recurrent expenditure but only used as matching grants to create wealth and productive capacity for present and future generations, such as only for infrastructure, security and education. Where do candidates stand on this issue?

What kind of constitutional chances are required to create a functional fiscal federalism, and appropriate devolution of powers from the centre to the states and regions to ensure effective economic management? What is our plan for effective policing of the country to ensure security of life and property? Where do we stand on the proposal for a state or regional police force?

On specific sectoral issues, the questions are endless. Who has the strategy to achieve uninterrupted power supply over the 2015-2019 period? Where is the strategy to ensure an accurate population census with the biometric data of every citizen? If the last census figure is correct, then Nigeria’s population is exploding without any plans for the children of today and tomorrow. Are we happy with the rate of growth of our population or will someone have the courage to propose a r oust population policy?

Since our current university system is a road to nowhere producing largely unemployable graduates, candidates need to flesh out their plans to revolutionize the sector for Nigeria to join the 21st century. The Financial System Strategy 2020 (FSS 2020) was designed to make Nigeria Africa’s financial hub and an international financial centre by 2020. What is the commitment of the candidates to making this happen?

How will the candidates address the various cries of marginalization by sections of the country, especially the southeast? What are the plans for women and youth, as well as the physically challenged? How do we deal with huge but unrecognized national emergencies such as erosion and desertification?

Furthermore, the future depends on how we deal with the tripartite problems of poverty, urbanization and unemployment. Candidates need to spell out how they intend to solve the pervasive poverty in the north (averaging over 70% compared to an average of less than 35% in the south).

To create high-value-added jobs and reduce poverty in the medium term requires more than quadrupling productivity in agriculture as well as mainstreaming large scale commercial agriculture. We need to hear the plans of candidates in this regard given the current irrigation level of less than 6%.

More specifically, we need to hear from the aspirants how many jobs they can create over the four-year period and the strategies for doing so. There is also the challenge of urbanization and urban renewal strategies. At about 5.3%, Nigeria’s urbanization rate is one of the fastest in the world, with the attendant urban decay, slums and urban unemployment, poverty and crime.

What is the plan to stem rural-urban migration? In the medium term, what special strategies are there for the renewal of mega cities like Lagos, Port Harcourt, Aba/Onitsha, Abuja and Kano, which continue to receive the largest influx of young people in search of nonexistent opportunities? What are the strategies for providing safe drinking water for our population?

There is a housing deficit in Nigeria of some 20m units, Lagos account for 25% of this deficit. What strategies do prospective representatives have to unleash a housing boom?


The questions and issues are legion. The essence of this piece is to provoke debate. The next 50 years will make or break Nigeria. Next year marks the beginning of the journey. The current players have a duty to lay a solid foundation for the future. As things are, that future cannot be guaranteed without a big struggle. Those we know, and who have the capacity to contribute to the struggle for a new, prosperous Nigeria, nay Lagos megacity region must stand up now to be counted! Elite indifference to the political process is not an option. Since we have adopted US-style state primaries for the elective offices, can we also adopt US-style debates in various states among aspirants of the same party? When will the debate begin? The world is watching, and Nigerians are awaiting for answers. 

No comments:

Post a Comment