I need to preface this article with a few
clarifications. I have taken a long sabbatical leave
from partisan politics, and it is real fun watching
the drama from the balcony. Having had my own
share of public service (I do not need a job from
government), I now devote my time and energy in
pursuit of other passions, especially abroad.
A few days ago, I read an article in Thisday
entitled “Where is Charles Soludo?”, and my
answer is that I am still there, only that I have
been too busy with extensive international travels
to participate in or comment on our national politics
and economy. But I occasionally follow events at
home. Since the survival and prosperity of Nigeria
are at stake, the least some of us (albeit, non-
partisan) must do is to engage in public debate.
As the elections approach, I owe a duty to share
some of my concerns.
In September 2010, I wrote a piece entitled “2011
Elections: Let the Real Debate Begin” and
published by Thisday. I understand the Federal
Executive Council discussed it, and the Minister of
Information rained personal attacks on me during
the press briefing. I noted more than six
newspaper editorials in support of the issues we
raised.
Beside other issues we raised, our main thesis
was that the macro economy was dangerously
adrift, with little self-insurance mechanisms (and a
prediction that if oil prices fell below $40, many
state governments would not be able to pay
salaries). I gave a subtle hint at easy money and
exchange rate depreciations because I did not want
to panic the market with a strong statement.
Sadly, on the eve of the next elections, literally
everything we hinted at has happened. Part of my
motivation for this article is that five years after,
the real debate is still not happening.
The presidential election next month will be won by
either Buhari or Jonathan. For either, it is likely to
be a pyrrhic victory. None of them will be able to
deliver on the fantastic promises being made on
the economy, and if oil prices remain below $60, I
see very difficult months ahead, with possible
heady collisions with labour, civil society, and
indeed the citizenry. To be sure, the presidential
election will not be decided by the quality of
‘issues’ or promises canvassed by the candidates.
The debates won’t also change much (except if
there is a major gaffe by either candidate like Tofa
did in the debate with Abiola). My take is that
more than 95% of the likely voters have pretty
much made up their minds based largely on other
considerations. A few of us remain undecided

During my brief visit to Nigeria, I watched some of
the campaign rallies on television. The tragedy of
the current electioneering campaigns is that both
parties are missing the golden opportunity to
sensitize the citizenry about the enormous
challenges ahead and hence mobilize them for the
inevitable sacrifices they would be called upon to
make soon. Each is promising an El-Dorado.
Let me admit that the two main parties talk around
the major development challenges—corruption,
insecurity, economy (unemployment/poverty,
power, infrastructure, etc) health, education, etc.
However, it is my considered view that none of
them has any credible agenda to deal with the
issues, especially within the context of the
evolving global economy and Nigeria’s broken
public finance.
The UK Conservative Party’s manifesto for the
last election proudly announced that all its
programmes were fully costed and were therefore
implementable. Neither APC nor PDP can make a
similar claim. A plan without the dollar or Naira
signs to it is nothing but a wish-list. They are not
telling us how much each of their promises will
cost and where they will get the money. None
talks about the broken or near bankrupt public
finance and the strategy to fix it.
Goodluck-Jonathan-new
In response to the question of where the money
will come from, I heard one of the politicians say
that the problem of Nigeria was not money but the
management of resources. This is half-truth. The
problem is both. No matter how efficient a father
(with a monthly salary of N50,000) is at managing
the family resources, I cannot see how he could
deliver on a promise to buy a brand new Peugeot
406 for each of his three children in a year.
Even with all the loopholes and waste closed, with
increased efficiency per dollar spent, there is still
a binding budget constraint. To deliver an efficient
national transport infrastructure alone will still cost
tens of billions of dollars per annum even by
corruption-free, cost-effective means. Did I hear
that APC promises a welfare system that will pay
between N5,000 and N10,000 per month to the
poorest 25 million Nigerians? Just this programme
alone will cost between N1.5 and N3 trillion per
annum.
Add to this the cost of free primary education plus
free meal (to be funded by the federal budget or
would it force non-APC state governments to
implement the same?), plus some millions of
public housing, etc. I have tried to cost some of
the promises by both the APC and the PDP, given
alternative scenarios for public finance and the
numbers don’t add up. Nigerians would be glad to
know how both parties would fund their
programmes.
Do they intend to accentuate the huge public debt,
or raise taxes on the soon to-be-beleaguered
private businesses, or massively devalue the naira
to rake in baskets of naira from the dwindling oil
revenue, or embark on huge fiscal retrenchment
with the sack of labour and abandonment of
projects, and which areas of waste do they intend
to close and how much do they estimate to rake in
from them, etc?
I remember that Chief Obafemi Awolowo was
asked similar questions in 1978 and 1979 about
his promises of free education and free medical
services. Even as a teenager, I was impressed by
how he reeled out figures about the amounts he
would save from various ‘waste’ including the tea/
coffee served in government offices. The point is
that at least he did his homework and had his
numbers and I give credit to his team.

some 36 years later, the quality of political debate
and discourse seems to border on the pedestrian.
From the quality of its team, I did not expect
much from the current government, but I must
confess that I expected APC as a party aspiring to
take over from PDP to come up with a knock-out
punch. Evidently, from what we have read from the
various versions of its manifesto as well as the
depth of promises being made, it does not seem
that it has a better offer.
Let me digress a bit to refresh our memory on
where we are, and thus provide the context in
which to evaluate the promises being made to us.
Recall that the key word of the 2015 budget is
‘austerity’. Austerity? This is just within a few
months of the fall in oil prices. History repeats
itself in a very cruel way, as this was exactly what
happened under the Shehu Shagari administration.
Under the Shagari government, oil price reached its
highest in 1980/81. During the same period,
Nigeria ratcheted up its consumption and all tiers
of government were in competition as to which
would out-borrow the other. Huge public debt was
the consequence. When oil prices crashed in early
1982, the National Assembly then passed the
Economic Stabilization (Austerity Measures) Act in
one day— going through the first, second, and
third readings the same day.
The austerity measures included the rationing of
‘essential commodities’ and most states owed
salary arrears. Corruption was said to be pervasive,
and as Sani Abacha said in that famous coup
speech, ‘unemployment has reached unacceptable
proportions and our hospitals have become mere
consulting clinics’.
General Muhammadu Buhari/Tunde Idiagbon
regime made the fight against corruption and
restoration of discipline the cardinal point of their
administration which lasted for 20 months. I am
not sure they had a credible plan to get the
economy out of the doldrums (although it must be
admitted that poverty incidence in Nigeria as of
1985 when they left office was a just46%—
according to the Federal Office of Statistics).
We have come full circle. If the experience under
Shagari could be excused as an unexpected
shock, what Nigeria is going through now is a
consequence of our deliberate wrong choices. We
have always known that the unprecedented oil
boom (in both price and quantity—despite oil theft)
of the last six years is temporary but the
government chose to treat it as a permanent
shock. The parallels with the Shagari regime are
troubling.
First, at the time of oil boom, Nigeria again went
on a consumption spree such that the budgets of
the last five years can best be described as
‘consumption budgets’, with new borrowing by the
federal government exceeding the actual
expenditure on critical infrastructure. Second, not
one penny was added to the stock of foreign
reserves at a period Nigeria earned hundreds of
billions from oil.
For comparisons, President Obasanjo met about
$5 billion in foreign reserves, and the average
monthly oil price for the 72 months he was in
office was $38, and yet he left $43 billion in
foreign reserves after paying $12 billion to write-off
Nigeria’s external debt. In the last five years, the
average monthly oil price has been over $100, and
the quantity also higher but our foreign reserves
have been declining and exchange rate
depreciating.

I note that when I assumed office as Governor of
CBN, the stock of foreign reserves was $10 billion.
The average monthly oil price during my 60 months
in office was $59, but foreign reserve reached the
all-time peak of $62 billion (and despite paying $12
billion for external debt, and losing over $15 billion
during the unprecedented global financial and
economic crisis) I left behind $45 billion.
Recall also that our exchange rate continuously
appreciated during this period and was at N117 to
the dollar before the global crisis and we
deliberately allowed it to depreciate in order to
preserve our reserves. My calculation is that if
the economy was better managed, our foreign
reserves should have been between $102 –$118
billion and exchange rate around N112 before the
fall in oil prices. As of now, the reserves should be
around $90 billion and exchange rate no higher
than N125 per dollar.
Third, the rate of public debt accumulation at a
time of unprecedented boom had no parallel in the
world. While the Obasanjo administration bought
and enlarged the policy space for Nigeria, the
current government has sold and constricted it.
What debt relief did for Nigeria was to liberate
Nigerian policymakers from the intrusive
conditionalities of the creditors and thereby truly
allowing Nigeria independence in its public policy.
How have we used the independence? Through
our own choices, we have yet again tied the hands
of future policymakers. This time, the debt is not
necessarily to foreign creditor institutions/
governments which are organized under the Paris
club but largely to private agents which is even
more volatile. We call it domestic debt. But if one
carefully unpacks the bond portfolio, what
percentage of it is held by foreign private agents?
And I understand the Government had removed
the speed bumps we kept to slow the speed of
capital flight, and someone is sweating to explain
the gyrations in foreign reserves. I am just
smiling!
In sum, the mismanagement of our economy has
brought us once more to the brink. Government
officials rely on the artificial construct of debt to
GDP ratio to tell us we can borrow as much as we
want. That is nonsense, especially for an
economy with a mono but highly volatile source of
revenue and forex earnings. The chicken will soon
come home to roost.
Today, the combined domestic and external debt
of the Federal Government is in excess of $40
billion. Add to this the fact that abandoned capital
projects littered all over the country amount to over
$50 billion. No word yet on other huge contingent
liabilities. If oil prices continue to fall, I bet that
Nigeria will soon have a heavy debt burden even
with low debt to GDP ratio.
Furthermore, given the current and capital account
regime, it is evident that Nigeria does not have
enough foreign reserves to adequately cover for
imports plus short term liabilities. In essence, we
are approaching the classic of what the Shagari
government faced, and no wonder the hasty
introduction of ‘austerity measures’ again.
Fourth, poverty incidence and unemployment are
also simultaneously at all-time high levels.
According to the NBS, poverty incidence grew to
69% in 2010 and projected to be 71% in 2011,
with unemployment at 24%. This is the worst
record in Nigeria’s history, and the paradox is that
this happened during the unprecedented oil boom.

One theme I picked up listening to the campaign
rallies as well as to some of the propagandists is
the confusion about measuring government
“performance”. Most people seem to confuse
‘inputs’, or ‘processes’ with output. Earlier this
month, I had a dinner with a group of friends (14 of
us) and we were chit-chatting about Nigeria. One
of us, an associate of President Jonathan veered
off to repeat a propaganda mantra that Jonathan
had outperformed his predecessors.
He also reminded us that Jonathan re-based the
GDP and that Nigeria is now the biggest economy
in Africa; etc. It was fun listening to the response
by others. In sum, the group agreed that the
President had ‘outperformed’ his predecessors
except that it is in reverse order.
First, my friend was educated that re-basing the
GDP is no achievement: it is a routine statistical
exercise, and depending on the base year that you
choose, you get a different GDP figure. Re-basing
the GDP has nothing to do with government policy.
Besides, as naira-dollar exchange rate continues to
depreciate, the GDP in current dollars will also
shrink considerably soon.
We were reminded of Jonathan’s agricultural
‘revolution’. But someone cut in and noted that for
all the propaganda, the growth rate of the
agricultural sector in the last five years still
remains far below the performance under
Obasanjo. One of us reminded him that no other
president had presided over the slaughter of about
15,000 people by insurgents in a peacetime; no
other president earned up to 50% of the amount of
resources the current government earned from oil
and yet with very little outcomes; no other
president had the rate of borrowing; none had
significant forex earnings and yet did not add one
penny to foreign reserves but losing international
reserves at a time of boom; no other president had
a depreciating exchange rate at a time of export
boom; at no time in Nigeria’s history has poverty
reached 71% (even under Abacha, it was 67
-70%); and under no other president did
unemployment reach 24%. Surely, these are
unprecedented records and he surely
‘outperformed’ his predecessors! What a satire!
One of those present took the satire to some level
by comparing Jonathan to the ‘performance’ of the
former Governor of Anambra, Peter Obi. He noted
that while Obi gloated about ‘savings’, there is no
signature project to remember his regime except
that his regime took the first position among all
states in Nigeria in the democratization of poverty
—- mass impoverishment of the people of
Anambra. According to the National Bureau of
Statistics, poverty rose under his watch in
Anambra from 20% in 2004 (lowest in Nigeria then)
to 68% in 2010 (a 238% deterioration!).
Our friend likened it to a father who had no idea of
what to do with his resources and was celebrating
his fat bank account while his children were dying
of kwashiorkor. He pointed out that since it is the
likes of Peter Obi who are the advisers to
Jonathan on how to manage the economy (thereby
confusing micromanagement which you do as a
trader with macro governance) it is little wonder
that poverty is fast becoming another name for
Nigeria. It was a very hilarious evening.
My advice to President Jonathan and his handlers
is to stop wasting their time trying to campaign on
his job record. Those who have decided to vote for
him will not do so because he has taken Nigeria to
the moon. His record on the economy is a clear
‘F’ grade. As one reviews the laundry list of micro
interventions the government calls its
achievements, one wonders whether such list is all
that the government could deliver with an
unprecedented oil boom and an unprecedented
public debt accumulation.
I can clearly see why reasonable people are
worried. Everywhere else in the world, government
performance on the economy is measured by
some outcome variables such as: income (GDP
growth rate), stability of prices (inflation and
exchange rate), unemployment rate, poverty rate,
etc. On all these scores, this government has
performed worse than its immediate predecessor—
Obasanjo regime. If we appropriately adjust for oil
income and debt, then this government is the
worst in our history on the economy. All statistics
are from the National Bureau of Statistics.
Despite presiding over the biggest oil boom in our
history, it has not added one percentage point to
the growth rate of GDP compared to the Obasanjo
regime especially the 2003- 07 period. Obasanjo
met GDP growth rate at 2% but averaged 7%
within 2003- 07. The current government has been
stuck at 6% despite an unprecedented oil boom.
Income (GDP) growth has actually performed
worse, and poverty escalated.
This is the only government in our history where
rapidly increasing government expenditure was
associated with increasing poverty. The director
general of NBS stated in his written press
conference address in 2011 that about 112 million
Nigerians were living in poverty. Is this the record
to defend? Obama had a tough time in his re-
election in 2012 because unemployment reached
8%. Here, unemployment is at a record 24% and
poverty at an all-time 71% but people are prancing
around, gloating about ‘performance’.
As I write, the Naira exchange rate to the dollar is
$210 at the parallel market. What a historic
performance! Please save your breathe and save
us the embarrassment. The President promised
Nigeria nothing in the last election and we did not
get value for money. He should this time around
present us with his plan for the future, and focus
on how he would redeem himself in the second
term—if he wins!

Sadly the government’s economic team is very
weak, dominated by self-interested and self-
conflicted group of traders and businessmen, and
so-called economic team meetings have been
nothing but showbiz time. The very people
government exists to regulate have seized the
levers of government as policymakers and most
government institutions have largely been
“privatized” to them.
Mention any major government department or
agency and someone will tell you whom it has
been ‘allocated’ to, and the person subsequently
nominates his minion to occupy the seat. What do
you then expect? The economy seems to be on
auto pilot, with confusion as to who is in charge,
and government largely as a constraint. There are
no big ideas, and it is difficult to see where
economic policy is headed to.
My thesis is that the Nigerian economy, if properly
managed, should have been growing at an annual
rate of about 12% given the oil boom, and poverty
and unemployment should have fallen dramatically
over the last five years. This is topic for another
day.
So far, the Government’s response to the self-
inflicted crisis is, at best, laughable. They blame
external shocks as if we did not expect them and
say nothing about the terrible policy choices they
made. The National Assembly had described the
2015 budget as unrealistic. The fiscal adjustments
proposed in the 2015 budget simply play to the
gallery and just to pander to our emotions.
For a $540 billion economy, the so-called luxury
tax amounts to zero per cent of GDP. If the
current trend continues, private businesses will
come under a heavy crunch soon. Having put
economics on its head during the boom time, the
Government now proposes to increase taxes during
a prospective downturn and impose austerity
measures. Unbelievable!
Fortuitously, just as he succeeded Shagari when
Nigeria faced similar situations, Buhari is once
more seeking to lead Nigeria. But times have
changed, and Nigeria is largely different. First, this
is a democracy and dealing with corruption must
happen within the ambit of the rule of law and due
process. Getting things done in a democracy
requires complicated bargaining, especially where
the legislature, labour, the media, and civil society
have become strong and entrenched.
Second, the size, structure and institutions of the
economy have fundamentally altered. The market
economy, especially the capital market and foreign
exchange market, impose binding constraints and
discipline on any regime. Third, dealing with most
of the other issues— insecurity, unemployment/
poverty, infrastructure, health, education, etc,
require increased, smarter, and more efficient
spending. Increased spending when the economy
is on the reverse gear?
If oil prices remain between 40- 60 dollars over the
next two years, the current policy regime
guarantees that foreign reserves will continue the
precipitous depletion with the attendant exchange
rate depreciation, as well as a probable
unsustainable escalation in debt accumulation,
fiscal retrenchment or taxing the private sector with
vengeance. The scenario does not look pretty.
The poor choices made by the current government
have mortgaged the future, and the next
government would have little room to manoeuvre
and would inevitably undertake drastic but painful
structural adjustments. Nigerians loathe the term
‘structural adjustment’. With falling real wages and
depreciating currency, I can see any belated
attempt by the government to deal with the
bloated public sector pitching it against a feisty
labour. I worry about regime stability in the
coming months, and I do not envy the next team.
The seeming crisis is not destiny; it is self-
imposed. However, we must see it as an
opportunity to be seized to fundamentally
restructure Nigeria’s political economy, including
its fiscal federalism and mineral rights. The current
system guarantees cycles of consumption loop
and I cannot see sustainable long term prosperity
without major systemic overhaul. The proposals at
the national conference merely tinker at the
margins.
In totality, the outcome of the national conference
is to do more of the same, with minor
amendments on the system of sharing and
consumption rather than a fundamental overhaul of
the system for productivity and prosperity.
President Jonathan promises to implement the
report of the national conference if he wins. I
commend him for at least offering ‘something’,
albeit, marginal in my view. I have not heard
anything from the APC or Buhari regarding the
national conference report or what kind of
federalism they envisage for Nigeria.
In Nigeria’s recent history, two examples under the
military and civilian governments demonstrate that
where the political will exists, Nigeria has the
capacity to overcome severe challenges. The first
was under President Babangida. Not many
Nigerians appreciate that given the near bankrupt
state of Nigeria’s finances and requirements for
debt resolution under the Paris Club, the country
had little choice but to undertake the painful
structural adjustment programme (SAP).
I want to state for the record that the foundation for
the current market economy we operate in Nigeria
was laid by that regime (liberalization of markets
including market determined exchange rate, private
sector-led economy including licensing of private
banks and insurance, de-regulation, privatization of
public enterprises under TCPC, etc). Just
abolishing the import licensing regime was a
fundamental policy revolution. Despite the
criticisms, these policy thrusts have remained the
pillars of our deepening market economy, and the
economy recovered from almost negative growth
rate to average 5.5% during the regime and
poverty incidence at 42% in 1992.
Under our democratic experience, President
Obasanjo inherited a bankrupt economy (with the
lost decade of the 1990’s GDP growth rate of
2.2% and hence zero per capita income growth for
the decade). His regime consolidated and
deepened the market economy structures
(consolidation of the banking system which is
powering the emergence of a new but truly private
sector-led economy and simultaneously led to a
new awareness and boom in the capital market;
telecommunications revolution; new pension
regime; debt relief which won for Nigeria policy
independence from the World Bank and Paris Club;
deepening of de-regulation and privatization
including the unbundling of NEPA under PHCN for
privatization; agricultural revolution that saw yearly
growth rate of over 6% and remains unsurpassed
ever since;
sound monetary and fiscal policy and growing
foreign reserves that gave confidence to investors;
establishment of the Africa Finance Corporation
which is leading infrastructure finance in Africa;
backward integration policy that saw the
establishment and growth of Dangote cement and
others; established ICPC and EFCC to fight
corruption, etc).
The economy roared to average yearly growth of
7% between 2003 and 2007 (although average
monthly oil price under his regime was $38), and
poverty dropped from estimated 70% in1999 to
54% in 2004. Obasanjo was his own coordinating
minister of the economy and chairman of the
economic management team— which he chaired
for 90 minutes every week. I met with him daily.
In other words, he did not outsource economic
management.
We expected that the next government after
Obasanjo would take the economy to the next
level. So far, we have had two great slogans: the
7-point agenda and currently, the transformation
agenda. They remain empty slogans without
content or direction.
Let me suggest that the fundamental challenge for
the next government on the economy can be
framed around the goal of creating twelve million
jobs over the next four years to have a dent on
unemployment and poverty. The challenge is to
craft a development agenda to deliver this within
the context of broken public finance, and an
economy in which painful structural adjustments
will be inevitable if current trends in oil prices
continue. Most other programmes on corruption,
security, power, infrastructure, etc, are expected to
be instruments to achieve this objective.
So far, neither the APC nor the PDP has a
credible programme for employment and poverty
reduction. The APC promises to create 20,000
jobs per state in the first year, totalling a mere
720,000 jobs. This sounds like a quota system
and for a country where the new entrants into the
labour market per annum exceed two million.
If it was intended as a joke, APC must please get
serious. On the other hand, President Jonathan
targets two million jobs per annum but his strategy
for doing so is a Job Board— another committee
of sort. Sorry, Mr. President, a Job Board is not a
strategy. The principal job Nigerians hired you to
do for them is to create jobs for them too. You
cannot outsource that job, Sir. Creating 3 million
jobs per annum under the unfolding crisis would
task our creativity and audacity to the limits.
I heard one politician argue that once we fix power,
private sector would create jobs. Not necessarily!
Well, this government claims to have added
1,700MW to the national grid and yet
unemployment soars. Ask Greece, Spain, etc with
power and infrastructure and yet with high
unemployment. Structural dislocations play a key
role. For example, currently in Nigeria, it is
estimated that more than 60% of graduates of our
educational system are unemployable.
You can understand why many of us are amused
when the government celebrates that it has
established twelve more glorified secondary
schools as universities. I thought they would have
told us how many Nigerian universities made it in
the league of the best 200 universities in the
world. That would have been an achievement.
Surely, creating millions of jobs in this economy
would, among other things, require ‘new money’
and extraordinary system of coordination among
the three tiers of government plus the private
sector.
Unfortunately, from what I read, the CBN is largely
likely to be asleep at this time the country needs
the most revolutionary finance. This is a topic for
another day. Only the President can lead this
effort. Moreover, we are waiting for the two
parties/candidates to spell out HOW they will
create jobs, whether it is the 20,000 jobs per state
by APC or 2 million per annum by President
Jonathan. Let us know how you arrived at the
figures. Whichever of the two that is declared
winner will have his job cut out for him, and I
expect him to declare a national emergency on job
creation.
Surprisingly, none of the parties/candidates has
any grand vision about African economic
integration, led by Nigeria. There is no programme
on how to make the naira the de facto currency of
ECOWAS or the international financial centre that
can attract more than $100 billion per annum.
Where is the strategy for orchestrating the
revolutionary finance to power the economy during
this downturn? For President Jonathan, I find it
shocking that the most important initiative of his
government to secure the future of the economy by
Nigeria refusing to sign the ruinous Economic
Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European
Union is not even being mentioned. President
Obasanjo saved Nigeria from the potential ruin of
an ECOWAS single currency while to his credit
Jonathan safeguarded our industrial sector/
economy by refusing to sign the EPA. Or does the
government not understand the import of that? It
will be interesting to know the APC’s strategy for
exploiting strategic alliances within Africa, China,
and the world for Nigeria’s prosperity

f Buhari wins, he will ride on the populist wind for
“change”. Most people I have spoken to who have
decided to vote for Buhari do not necessarily know
the specifics of what he would offer or how Nigeria
would be different under him. I asked my driver,
Usman, whom he would vote for President.
He responded: “If they no rig the election, na
Buhari everybody go vote for”. I asked him why,
and his next response sums it: “The man dey
honest. In short, people just want to see another
face for that villa”. But if he wins, the honeymoon
will be brief and the pressure will be immense to
magically deliver a ‘new Nigeria’ with no corruption,
no boko haram or insecurity, jobs for everyone, no
poverty, infrastructure and power in abundance,
etc.
As a first point, Buhari and his team must realize
that they do not yet have a coherent, credible
agenda that is consistent with the fundamentals of
the economy currently. The APC manifesto
contains some good principles and wish-lists, but
as a blue print for Nigeria’s security and prosperity,
it is largely hollow. The numbers do not add up.
Thus, his first job is to present a credible
development agenda to Nigerians.
The second key challenge for Buhari and his team
will be to transit and transform from a group of
what I largely refer to as aggrieved people’s
congregation to build a true political party with a
soul from the patchwork of political associations. It
is surely easier to oppose than to govern. This
should not worry us much. After all, even the PDP
which has been in power for 16 years is still an
assembly of people held together by what I refer to
as dining table politics.
I am not sure how many members can tell you
what their party stands for or its mission and vision
for Nigeria. The third but more difficult agenda is
cobbling together a truly ‘progressive team’ that will
begin to pick the pieces. The lesson of history is
that the best leaders have been the ones who went
beyond their narrow provincial enclaves to recruit
talents and mobilize capacities for national
transformation.
In Nigeria’s history, the two presidents who made
the most fundamental transformation of the
economy, Babangida and Obasanjo, were
exceptional in the quality of the teams they put
together. I therefore pray that Buhari will be
magnanimous in victory – if he wins—to put
together a ‘team Nigeria’ for the rescue mission.
If Jonathan wins, then God must have been
magnanimous to give him a second chance to
redeem himself. Most people I know who support
Jonathan do so either out of self-interest or fear of
the unknown. As a friend summed it: the devil
you know is better than the angel you do not
know. One person assured me that we would see
a ‘different Jonathan’ if he wins as he has been
rattled by the harsh judgment of history on his
presidency so far. I just pray that he is right. In
that case, I would just draw the President’s
attention to two issues:
First, beside the coterie of clowns who literally
make a living with the sing-song of transformation
agenda, President Jonathan must know that it
remains an empty slogan. His greatest challenge is
how to save himself from the stranglehold of his
largely provincial palace jesters who tell him he
has done better than God, and seek out ‘enemies’
and friends who can help him write his name in
history. Propaganda won’t do it.
Second, Jonathan must claw back his powers as
President of Nigeria. He largely outsourced them,
and must now roll his sleeves for a new beginning.
I take liberty to tell you this brutal truth: if you are
not re-elected, there is little to remember your
regime after the next few years.
On 7th January 2004, I made a special
presentation to an expanded economic
management team to set agenda for the new year
(as chief economic adviser). The focus of my
presentation was for us to identify seven iroko
trees that would be the flagship markers for the
administration as well as how to finance them. I
use the same framework to evaluate your
administration.
What I say to you, Mr. President, is that your
record of performance so far is like a farmland
filled with grasses. Yes, they are many but there
is no tree, let alone any iroko tree, that stands
out. Think about this. The beginning of wisdom for
every President in his second term is to admit that
he is racing against time to cement his legacy. So
far, your report card is not looking great. You
need a team of big and bold thinkers, as well as
with excellent execution capacity. So far, it is not
working!
Under the executive presidential system, Nigerians
elected you to manage their economy. You cannot
outsource that job. Our constitution envisages a
federal coordination of the economy, and that
function is performed by the National Economic
Council (NEC) with Vice-President as chairman.
Indeed, the constitution and other laws of Nigeria
envisage the office of the VP as the coordinator
on the economy.
All major economic institutions of the federal
government are, by law, chaired by the Vice-
President including the national planning (see
functions of the national planning commission as
coordinator of federal government economic and
development programmes), debt management
office, National Council on Privatization, etc. As
chairman of National Planning (with Ministers of
Finance, Agriculture, CBN governor, etc as
members), the VP oversees the federal planning
and coordination.
Then the Constitution mandates the VP as
representative of the federal government to chair
the NEC, with only CBN governor and state
governors as members—to coordinate national
economy between federal and states. No minister
is a member of NEC. Many people do not
understand the logic of the design of our
constitution and the role of the VP. Of course, the
buck stops on the desk of Mr. President. Only the
President and VP have our mandate to govern us.
Every other person is an adviser/assistant. I bet
that you will only appreciate this article AFTER
you leave office. Now that you are in power, truth
will only hurt! Be assured that those of us who are
prepared to die for Nigeria will never spare you or
anyone else this bitter truth.
Nigeria must survive and prosper beyond Buhari or
Jonathan!
Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, was former CBN governor.

OP,

Kindly provide a link to the source please.

OP,

I can't wait for the source link any longer!

I will take it as given that Mr. Soludo indeed put this article together.

I do not necessarily agree with all the actions that Soludo took while in office. For one thing, I think his proposed re-denomination of the currency, (a policy which never came to fruition) - was not very well thought out and was never fully explained to the public. How was the adjustment in prices expected to take place in a country with an informal sector accounting for over half of GDP? It is also incredible that Mr Soludo's said nothing about the Obasanjo administration's mind boggling record on official corruption. - the thinly disguised image laundering for that administration is repulsive.

But this article isn't about Soludo as such. And it must not be forgotten that he was the architect of the recapitalization of deposit money banks - one can only imagine what would have happened if our 80+ banks had been left in the state they were before the 2008 financial crisis. For that policy action alone, Soludo definitely should be given credit.

But as I said, this article isn't about Soludo. I think it is a fair, honest and clear assessment of the economics (and politics) of the Jonathan administration and its misadventures over the past half decade. And the hard choices facing us all (or most of us) in the coming months, regardless of who wins the election. My only regret is that this piece is coming out so late.

This is the kind of issues based public policy analysis that has been lacking in our environment. Why did it take you so long to put this together, Mr. Soludo?