₦airaland Forum

letustalk:
the only concern i have is that only proponents of the government were invited with no counters whatsoever. in effect, their articulations will seem to hold sway on the show. i am surprised that AIT invited them alone when seasoned and knowledgeable actors could be on the program to tackle canvassed points.

It is a public awareness/sensitisation move to 'inform' and 'sell' the policy to Nigerians. It is normal and ethical.

[quote author=Mai-suya link=topic=843034.msg9934488#msg9934488 date=1326198820]Guys saying subsidy is unsustainable.

Do u now in the west pple r paid unemployment benefit? U r literarily paid money for sitting at home and being a white man, so what's wrong with our govt subsidising our fuel if they can't create jobs, not to speak of paying the unemployed some token.

The argument for subsidy removal is FUNDEMENTALLY wrong[/quote]Benefits are paid from oney collected from taxes including a FUEL TAX. In other words, there is no subsidy in the UK. Rather, the govt taxes fuel to raise money to pay benefits and run the govt. How many Nigerians pay taxes?
In any event, even the benefits syvtem in the UK is being reformed to make it more sustainable. As a result, benefits are now only paid to those who are genuinely unable to work due to a medical condition and those who have made efforts to look for work. in other words, if you just sit at home without making any effort to find work, the govt stops your benefits.

I agree with you.  A sincere labour union would not allow opposition party members (and even former aspirants like Bakare) to address their rally. This is because it would give political connotation to the protests. If opposition parties want to also protest, they ought to organize their own protests independent of labour.  
In the UK, despite the fact that the labour party gets a lot of money from the unions, the labour party leader refused to even categorically support the strike talkless of attending their rallies to support them.

otokx:
tot they said the east are not involved?

Yes, the east is not involved in protests. However, NLC are on strike. There is a difference between 'strike' and 'protest'.

Abia state Governor has directed civil servants to return to work immediately.
source: Channels TV

Akiika:
To me, if flights to Nigeria are been cancelled, it's a sign that activities are gradually going to a halt.

International flights were NOT disrupted by the absentee occupiers

samguru:
My co-protesters let continue 2morrow God ȋ̝̊̅§ our strenght

I thought it was supposed to be 'Occupy Nigeria'? How come you people went home? Oh, I just realised that you had to go to collect the day's pay from your sponsors and get briefing on the next day's work load.

saxywale:
The popularity of President Jonathan dropped dramatically nationally, except in his home, oil-rich state.  

Better to be popular in an oil-rich state and let the 'oil-poor' states protest.

labamo07:
Haru Mutasa of Al Jazeera was reporting live from Abuja,  I bet those who said the protest was a failure are absolutely insane, perhaps they do not know how much the Nation has lost just for today alone considering the GDP,

so the day was a success because the nation lost money belonging to all of us while the politicians would still be collect their huge salary and allowances by month end? Whatever the nation lost, the nation suffers.

Johnpaul2k2:
i am living in onitsha ,
i saw people that came from their various 'trading'
i was told nobody came to buy
So today was a Success

In other words, today was a success because the poor traders could not sell their goods while the FG that the protest was directed against sold crude oil? success must mean something else in Onitsha

MAYOWAAK:
T[b]he turn-out of people, in Lagos, Abuja and Kano, Ibadan was unprecedented. Never in all my years of existence have I witnessed the passionate crowd I saw today on the streets of Lagos[/b].

Yeah right cos never in all our years of existence that a Niger Delta is President of Nigeria. The fact that the protests was only 'massive' in the 4 places you mentioned should'nt give any 'Nigerian' joy.

The Nigerian stock exchange was open today so the 'big' men bought more shares. Crude oil was exported today so the govt made more money. International flights in and out Nigeria operated so the 'big' were able to fly in and out. The 'big' man's businesses are insured so he would claim compensation froom his insurers for any loss he may suffer. The 'poor' man went with NLC(who by the way would still collect their salary by month end) to 'occupy' some parts of Nigeria. I don't know about success or failure but it is definitely the masses who lost today especially the unemployed protesters!

dayokanu:
According to this post

Nigerians protested the way the UK people protested last year

Why didnt the UK police shoot at them like the Nigerian cops have done

Oh! Apologies for misleading you. I meant to say you CAN'T (would modify it now) and I was really concerned with the way UK students and labour unions conducted their protest.

dayokanu:
^^ Pray tell how the current Nigerian protests were different from the UK riots of last year

As I have said before, the approach of the UK police during the riot has been condemned by the PM, Parliament and most UK citizens. Even the police has accepted that they made mistakes. I therefore wonder why you insist on using it as a 'best practice' scenario

dayokanu:
And did they need to shoot before the riots were finally stopped?

I agree with you that they did'nt need to shoot before the riots were finally stopped. However, they were only able to stop by floodiing the affected cities with policemen which they imported from other towns including scotland. The Nigeria police force cannot afford to do that in view of their overall number and the heighthened security nationwide. If they do not shoot when forced to, what do you want them to do. To be overrrun by the protesters, some of which are boko haramites?  

In any event, we should realize that while there is a duty on the police to be careful in dealing with protesters, protesters are also expected to conduct themselves peacefully. In the Uk, workers went on strike against pension reform queitly but did not go to the airports to stop those who want to work from working. Also, students protested against the rise in fees but they did not 'shut' down and threathen to shut down the country. Meanwhile, Comrade Abiodun Aremu, sec gen of one of the labour unions in Lagos was warning Nigerians who do not want to participate in the strike action to stay in-doors, or else they would be dealt with. Point is: You can't conduct a protest differently from the way it is done in the West and expect the Nigerian police to act the way police in the west acts.

pcicero:
@.was it not on this same NL that people were condemning church leaders for not being outspoken against government policies?

What is my business with the condemnation of church leaders by NLanders. Besides, should a church leader act according to the dictates of NL?
By the way, since you don't have anything to say on the point being made, could you not just ignore and waka pass as you have been adviced?

dayokanu:
When protesters in the UK set vans ablaze and set houses on fire

How many of them were shot?

They did not shoot any protester or use other 'appropriate' force which was one of the reason the riot spread. And guess what, they were heavily criticized for it. The PM was forced to cut short his holiday because of the 'soft' approach and when he came, he stated that the police erred by handling the matter as a 'public disorder' rather than a 'riot' which requires more force. This view was confirmed by the Home Affairs Committee of the Parliament which concluded that the police "failed to appreciate magnitude of riot task".

The Nigerian police appreciates the magnitude of the task and we should give kudos to them!
read the full report here:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news/plsd-report-publication/

pcicero:
@Muami: Were the British police shooting at protesters? Would the British PM have waited for two days, like you said, if anyone had been killed by the police during the
protest? It shows the level of insensitivity of our leaders. If people could protest in the USA, UK and even Egypt and Tunisia, why not in Nigeria? Why do you always find it convenient to make silly comparisons? I'm appaled at the level of people's reasoning.

Actually, the PM was forced to cut short his trip because the police were handling the matter with kids gloves( and trust me, this was the view of many in the UK). When the PM returned, he queried the police for dealing with the matter as a 'public disorder' rather than a 'riot' which requires more force. This view was confirmed by the Home Affairs Committee of the Parliament which concluding that the police "failed to appreciate magnitude of riot task".

I'm glad the Nigerian police appreciates the magnitude of the task and are dealiing with it!
read the full report here:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news/plsd-report-publication/

Channels TV is reporting that the Anglican Bishop of Ekiti diocese, Rev. Peter Adekaye led a huge protest around the state capital to protest against the removal of fuel subsidy. Meanwhile, he did not deem it fit to protest against the killing of his fellow christians. Obviously, he loves cheap fuel more than his congregation.

The President has very many important issues to attend to and you don't expect him to rush and be issuing statements on protests and the consequential killings that were expected.
Tthe UK PM only cut short his vacation during the August riots after the 2nd day and following the spread from London to other parts of the ccountry.
In any event, it is the NLC that you should be questioning. The NLC  cannot expect to 'protest' without casualty. A reasonable labour union, knowing the state of security in the country would have adopted a more safer approach to press home their demands eg. picketing, sit-at-homes etc

queensmith:
This is the reason why a government exists! In a country full of HAPPY people that are not SUFFERING. A country full of YOUTHS THAT HAVE EDUCATION, A STAKE IN SOCIETY WELL PAYING EMPLOYMENT FOOD TO EAT WATER TO DRINK CLOTHES ON THIER BODY AND A ROOF ON THIER HEADS, they will never resort to criminalities. This is what happens when a population is fustrated, violence, property destruction, looting, protesting and the likes!

if they didnt know before now they will find out!!

Please google "August 2011 riots in the UK", read about it and you would realise that a criminal mind is a criminal mind everywhere.

Pain:
Yeah Right. The Guy killed in Ogba, Lagos today and the other Guy in Kwara last week were near the Government House.
How do low lives like these make their way to nairaland? Oh God Help Me!!

This thread is not about police killings nationwide. It is about protesters who "set vans ablaze"and "sought to set fire on CBN gov's home!" and how the police reacted. I like to keep separate issues separate.

Pain:
How many citizens were shot and killed in the last riots in the UK?

By the way, 153 students were arrested. 7 were chrged for common assault, criminal damage or public order offences while the remaining 146 were charged with "breaching the peace after they refused officers' orders to disperse".
Lawlessness is not tolerated by any govt even in the West!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8172147/Student-protest-153-arrested-in-London-demonstration-against-tuition-fees.html

Pain:
How many citizens were shot and killed in the last riots in the UK?

How many of them went near No 10 and attempted to forcefully enter there?

alj harem:
[img]http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg877/scaled.php?tn=0&server=877&filename=1jdsb.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640[/img]

see Romeo and Juliet dey pose for Camera na im somebody say dem dey protest

humblebee:
mor0n, wat if it was one of your relative that was shot

I don't have dumb relatives who would go out and violently protest against a policy that is in the interest. Vo the question of if does not arise

manny4life:
Protesters turning into "burning down houses and residences", this is serious o,  



How do you know that protest hasn't been done aggressively @ the White House? Ask the Tea Part Group as well as other groups who have protested @ the White House. [b]Apparently you won't climb over the gates [/b]but it doesn't mean anyone was shot. Haba, you guys should carry news that you know of.

The bolded nullifies the point you are making and support my view that if you attempt to breach No 10 or the White House, you would be dealt with. so whats your point?

REP S NIG:
Today alone, the police have actually shot and killed a protester in Lagos.

Only one protester shot? Thats not good enough. Anyway, you are next in line for shooting!

REP S NIG:
By the special grace of God, one day VERY SOON, you will be shot to death.

You are not only an intellectual illiterate but also a religious illiterate who don't even know what the 'grace of God' is.
For your info, the grace of God works the other way round.

alj harem:
what a mumu, shot them and see how they would kill u instantly

maybe you have forgotten we are not in any DICTATOR REGIME

They simply did not shoot because they have been infiltrated by Boko Haram.
Yes, we are not in dictator regime just as protesters are not dictators. so if they ask for it, you give to them. Try and use protest to breach No. 10 or the White House and see if you would not be shot.

The police should have shot to kill. Does the govt house look like NLC secretariat?

By T Iboroma Akpana

My friend and colleague Comrade Abdul Mahmud wrote "Comrade IB, on this national subsidy wahala, your silence amounts to betrayal o! Your wall
is dead to the issue. This is unlike you, " Now the Comrade and I have had extremely heated albeit good natured debates on the issue of subsidies since the 1980's and I am not in the least surprised that he has brought his characteristic passion and intellect to bear on the debate this time around. On my part, my weariness is largely a reflection of the fact that over the years, my views have ossified and there really cannot be any epiphany for me! The Comrade and my girl Alexis have now sought to rouse me from my blissful state of ennui! This debate really represents each of our most deeply held underlying beliefs about what works in society and how our society should be organized to mean the most to its citizens. Of course over time the debate has been framed slightly differently but at its core, the issues have not changed. For the record, I remain irrevocably opposed to this inefficient and corrupt subsidy regime that imperils the future of our children and places a disproportionate burden on the most vulnerable in our society. This debate is really about the future of our children and as a parent of three young children myself, I cannot find common ground with anything that imperils their future any further and denies them the chance to have a real shot at a decent and productive life. Over the years the pro-subsidy argument has been largely schizophrenic with a capacity to mutate itself but shorn of all grandstanding, it has three essential strands having lost the economic argument for the subsidy retention. Briefly, they are; 1. Nigeria produces oil and so the subsidy is a benefit and reward of our citizenship especially in a country without social safety nets - simply put entitlement; 2. A fortiori, it is a safety net for the "poor" who will be most affected by any price spikes and are already suffering the brunt of leadership failure over the years; 3. Our government is wasteful and profligate so why should we accept any policy that puts more money into their hands whilst demanding further sacrifices from an impoverished citizenry? In any event, the govt should do its job and plug all leakages and corruption so we do not have to suffer for their ineptitude. I recall sometime in the 1980's during these debates, the Late Stanley Macebuh (one of the finest public intellectuals of his generation) raised a poser thus "Should any generation be allowed to consume wily nily, a common resource that belongs to us all without any consideration for future generations?" That question represents my response to those who make what I refer to as the entitlement argument. More recently Sanusi Lamido Sanusi put this poser "Assuming we take a sovereign bond with a 25 year maturity period to finance the 1.5 trillion Naira subsidy; can it be right that our children a made to pay such a debt so we can buy petrol at 65 Naira?" These two posers define my attitude to this subsidy regime. In any event, why 65 Naira? Why not free? Will free petrol abolish poverty or all the ills of government in our country? If it really is for the poor, why don't we target the poor and make this subsidy available to them? Of course that is not possible and experience teaches (several studies conducted on the issue of subsidies) conclusively that subsidies serve no useful function as a basis for organizing social relations in society. And to the folks who say government should rein in the cabal and check corruption they miss the point completely and it reflects their views about the limits of government. The entire subsidy architecture is one that rewards and incentivizes opportunistic behavior. Given our nature as rational maximizers, we are likely to behave opportunistically and seek to game the system. The mischief can only be solved by removing the structure that incentivizes corruption. In any event, given our acceptance of our institutional weaknesses, is it not counter intuitive that we seek the retention of a system whose monitoring is left to the same government? On a personal level, my underlying conservative beliefs mean that I am distrustful of all governments. In this case, I am also not a fan of the current federal government so I would much rather markets, imperfect as they are determine the efficient allocation of this important and wasting national asset. I agree with those who call for spending cuts across board with various branches and levels of our government. These cuts are necessary and we must continue to engage to reform our government. That is what our citizenship demands of us but to pine for the retention of a wasteful policy in response to government ineptitude is really a case of cutting our noses to spite our face. More importantly, we should never forget that this debate properly framed is about the future of our children. Let us vote for a better future for our children. Understandably, the labor, "yuman rights" activists and sundry do-gooders have called this a fight for the "poor" but with a little rigor and sincerity, it is clear that most of them are being self serving and sanctimonious. The way to lift people out of poverty is to create an economy that provides opportunities for growth. As to the issue of timing, there really is no good time and because govt resources are finite, those who request that we create the perfect society in every sense before proceeding with a necessary policy choice are being disingenuous. Let this subsidy go! And there you have it,