DEMOCRACY AND
GRASSROOTS DEVELOPMENT IN DELTA STATE: THE BEST WAY FORWARD
By
Otive Igbuzor,
PhD
LECTURE
DELIVERED AT THE TRUMPET INTERNATIONAL NEWSMAGAZINE 1ST LECTURE
SERIES AND AWARDS AT EXCEL SUITES HOTEL, OPPOSITE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, ASABA
ORGANISED BY TRUMPET INTERNATIONAL MAGAZINE.
INTRODUCTION
The concept of democracy has been
defined in various ways by different people. The most popular definition is the one
given by Abraham Lincoln who defined democracy as “the government of the
people, by the people and for the people.” According to C.B. Macpherson “democracy
originally meant rule by the common people, the plebeians. It is very much a
class affair; it meant the sway of the lowest and largest class.” According
to Lord Bryce,” democracy is government in which the will of the majority of
qualified citizens rule.” But to John Plamentz, “democratic government
means government by persons freely chosen by and responsible to the governed.”
From the above, it is clear that
scholars are not in agreement on the definition of democracy. However, it is
well established all over the world that democracy is the best form of
government. Democracy is so important in the world today that it has become the
driving force of development. In any case, different scholars put emphasis on
different issues, which they consider to be crucial to democracy. For instance,
Robert Dahl argued that “ a key characteristic of a democracy is the
continuing responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens
considered as political equals.” On the other hand, Thomas Hodgkin posits
that “ the central concept of democracy has normally been understood in its
classic sense as meaning essentially, the transfer of political and other forms
of power from a small ruling European class to the mass of the African
people…..the African demos”.
Despite the above differences majority
of scholars agree that liberal democracy contains some basic principles which
include citizen participation; equality; political tolerance;
accountability; transparency; regular, free and fair elections, economic
freedom; control of the abuse of power; bill of rights; accepting the result of
elections; human rights; multi-party system and the rule of law. It
is clear to us that Nigeria transited from military rule to civilian rule in
1999. But we are still very far from entrenching democracy. It should be
recognised that establishing and strengthening democracy is an ongoing process
demanding continuous effort and imagination. Meanwhile, democracy goes beyond
mere regular holding of elections for as Fayemi has argued, “polling booths and
voters are not all that make a democracy. Indeed, democracy at its core, is a
state of mind, a set of attitudinal dispositions woven into the fabric of a
society, the concrete expression of which are its social institutions.
Undemocratic social institutions cannot there for sire or sustain democratic
governments, no matter how often the ballot box ritual is enacted.” [1]
In this paper, we examine democracy and
grassroots development in Delta State. But first, we examine the different
perspectives on development, the challenges of development in Nigeria and Delta
State and budgetary allocation in Delta State from 2007-2014. I will also share
my personal experiences of trying to mobilise for democracy and grassroots
development in Delta State and conclude with the best way forward.
2. GRASSROOTS DEVELOPMENT IN DELTA
STATE
The challenge
of development and poverty eradication has attracted the attention of scholars,
leaders and the international community over the years. Although different
scholars have different perspectives on development, most students and
practitioners of development accept that it must mean progress of some kind.[2] It is seen as a multi-dimensional process, one that
changes the economy, polity and society of the countries in which it occurs.
Amartya Sen sees development as a process of expanding the real freedoms
that people enjoy. According to him, development requires the removal of
major sources of unfreedom: poverty as well as tyranny, poor economic
opportunities as well as systematic social deprivation, neglect of public
facilities as well as intolerance or overactivity of repressive states.[3] In this conceptualization, freedom is central
to the process of development and the achievement of development is dependent
on the free agency of the people. For the people to be agents of their own
development require advancement in five distinct types of freedom namely political
freedoms; economic facilities; social opportunities; transparency guarantees
and protective security.
Similarly, the
2010 human development report opined that human development is the expansion of
people’s freedom to live long, healthy and creative lives; to advance other
goals they have reason to value; and to engage actively in shaping development
equitably and sustainably on a shared planet. People are both the beneficiaries
and the drivers of human development, as individuals and in groups.[4] According to
Pat Utomi, development simply put is discipline. It is about how discipline
drives the human spirit to triumph over odds of poverty trap, physical
geography, fiscal trap, governance, cultural barriers, geopolitics, lack of
innovation and demographic trap.[5] Kambhampati argues that development requires growth
and structural change, some measure of distributive equity, modernization in
social and cultural attitudes, a degree of political transformation and
stability, an improvement in health and education so that population growth
stabilizes, and an increase in urban living and employment.[6] Cowen and Shenton have argued that the modern
doctrine of development was invented in the first half of the 19th
century to control the social disruptions of poverty, unemployment and human
misery caused by capitalism.[7]
From the above,
it is clear to us that even though there are different perspectives to
development, there is a general consensus that development will lead to good
change manifested in increased capacity of people to have control over
material assets, intellectual resources and ideology; and obtain physical
necessities of life (food, clothing & shelter), employment, equality, participation
in government, political and economic independence, adequate education, gender
equality, sustainable development and peace.[8] However, the
reality of the world today is that many countries are very poor and cannot meet
their development needs. It has been documented that more than 1.2 billion
people, one in every five on earth live survive on less that US $1 per day.[9] Wealth is concentrated in the hand of a few people
while the majority wallows in abject poverty. The UNDP in its 1998 report
documented that the three richest people in the world have assets that exceed
the combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the 48 least developed countries.
Similarly, the 1000 richest people in the world have personal wealth greater
than 500 million people in the least developed countries.[10] Recent report indicates that the 85 richest
people in the world have property more than 3.5 billion people (half of the
world population).
Robert Chambers
aptly captured it when he wrote:
I am so angry at what has been done, and continues to be done, in our
world. It is hard to believe that the nightmare is real. We seem trapped in
grotesquely unjust systems, more and more dominated by power, greed, delusion,
denial, ignorance and stupidity, fuelled by symmetries of terrorism and fundamentalisms.[11]
In a similar
vein, Amartya Sen pointed out that:
We live in a world of unprecedented opulence, of a kind that would have
been hard even to imagine a century or two ago…And yet we also live in a world
with remarkable deprivation, destitution and oppression. There are many new
problems as well as old ones, including persistence of poverty and unfulfilled
elementary needs, occurrence of famines and widespread hunger, violation of
elementary political freedoms as well as of basic liberties, extensive neglect
of the interests and agency of women, and worsening threats to our environment
and to the sustainability of our economic and social lives.[12]
There is no
doubt that the challenges of development and poverty eradication are enormous.
But in the last two decades, there has been a lot of discourse on what needs to
be done to deal with the challenges. The UNDP has consistently argued that the
Millennium Development Goals can be met if there is political will combined
with good policy ideas which are then translated into nationally owned,
nationally driven development strategies guided by good science, good economics
and transparent accountable governance.[13]
Nigeria, which
was one of the richest 50 countries in the early 1970s, has retrogressed to
become one of the 25 poorest countries at the threshold of the twenty first
century. It is ironic that Nigeria is the sixth largest exporter of oil
and at the same time host the third largest number of poor people after China
and India. Statistics show that the incidence of poverty using the rate of US
$1 per day increased from 28.1 percent in 1980 to 46.3 percent in 1985 and
declined to 42.7 percent in 1992 but increased again to 65.6 percent in 1996.
The incidence increased to 69.2 percent in 1997. The 2004 report by the
National Planning Commission indicates that poverty has decreased to 54.4
percent. But by 2010, the poverty rate has increased again to 65.1
percent. Nigeria fares very poorly in all development indices.
Delta State is one of the 36 states in the federation of Nigeria with a
population of 4,112,445 according to the 2006 population census. Delta State
was created on 27th August, 1991 when the former Bendel State was
split into Edo and Delta States. The state is blessed with abundant human and
material resources with oil and gas accounting for about 30 percent of the
nation’s crude oil resources and 40 percent of the nation’s total gas reserve
of 150 trillion cubic feet.
Despite the
enormous resources of the State, the level of poverty is extremely high with
official statistics putting it at 84.25 percent in 2001 and 63.6 percent in
2010.[14] About 20-30 percent of children who enrol in primary
school do not complete primary education. 26 children die in every 1,000 live
births. 244 women die during child birth for every 100,000 deliveries. This is
unacceptable for a state with the kind of resources in Delta State.
3. CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPMENT IN
DELTA STATE
The challenges
of development in Nigeria are enormous. In recognition of the importance and
enormity of development, governments especially in Africa gave a lot of
prominence to development planning in the 1960s and 1970s. It has been
documented that in Nigeria, right from the colonial period, development
planning was viewed as a major strategy for achieving economic development and
social progress, particularly, in the spheres of socio-economic
infrastructures, industralisation, modernization, high rates of economic
growth, poverty reduction, and significant improvements in living standards.[15] Three plans featured in the pre-independence era for
the periods 1946-1956, 1951-1955 and 1955-1962. Over the 1962-1995 period,
three major phases in the planning experience emerged, namely, the fixed
medium-term planning phase (1962-1985), policy oriented planning (1986-1988),
and three year rolling plan phase (1990 till date). [16] Scholars have pointed out that the golden period of
planning on the African continent, 1960s and 1970s, could not be sustained from
the 1980s because of two major factors: failure of development planning to meet
the high expectations of rapid growth and development; and the resurgence of
liberalism and the implementation of short-term stabilization and structural
adjustment programmes which are predicated on liberalization and deregulation.
Meanwhile, these programmes that substituted for national development plans are
counter plans which have failed to solve Africa’s myriad of economic problems.[17] This is why some scholars have referred to the 1980s
and 1990s as the “lost development decades” for Africa.[18]
The National
Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) identified the challenges
to development in Nigeria to include among other things low per capita growth;
inefficient, highly volatile and unsustainable public sector spending; domestic
debt; low productivity; poverty; dysfunctional educational system and weak
institutions.[19] Similarly, the draft of NEEDS 2 identified the
challenges of development to include growth without employment; high
level of poverty; poor infrastructure; poor energy situation; abuse of human
rights, gender inequality; weak institutions; capacity constraints; weak
monitoring framework; weak data management culture; slow development of the
private sector; poor public sector performance; ethnic and religious conflicts;
desertification; import dependency etc.[20]
The United
Kingdom Department for International Development (DfID) identified the
fundamental constraint to Nigeria’s development to include institutionalized
mismanagement of public revenue particularly from oil; institutionalized
corruption and weak formal accountability; and a combination of “Dutch Disease”
and institutionalized rent-seeking behaviour that has undermined activity in
non-oil areas of the economy (particularly agriculture and manufacturing),
reducing non-oil sector economic growth, fueling unemployment and exacerbating
poverty and conflict. [21] But according to the Economic Commission for Africa,
the biggest threat to Nigeria is its structural vulnerability-problems of
governance, volatile oil prices, and ethnic tensions.[22]
Several
scholars have written on the challenges to development in Africa. One of the
most profound is that by Claude Ake who posited that:
Many factors have been offered to explain the apparent
failure of the development enterprise in Africa: the colonial legacy, social
pluralism and centrifugal tendencies, the corruption of leaders, poor labour
discipline, the lack of entrepreneurial skills, poor planning and incompetent
management, inappropriate policies, the stifling of market mechanisms, low
levels of technical assistance, the limited inflow of foreign capital, falling
commodity prices and unfavourable terms of trade, and low levels of saving and
investment. These factors are not irrelevant to the problem, Alone or in
combination they could be serious impediments to development. However, the
assumption so readily made that there has been failure of development is
misleading. The problem is not so much that development has failed as that it
was never really on the agenda in the first place. By all indications,
political conditions in Africa are the greatest impediment to development.[23]
From the above,
it is clear that over the years, various scholars, organizations and
institutions have documented the challenges of development in Nigeria. [24] The challenges include among other things poor
leadership; bad followership; poor strategy for development; lack of capable
and effective state and bureaucracy; lack of focus on sectors that will improve
the condition of living of citizens such as education, health, agriculture and the building of infrastructure;
corruption; undeveloped, irresponsible and parasitic private sector; weak civil
society; emasculated labour and student movement and poor execution of policies
and programmes. As a matter of fact, the lived
experiences of many Nigerians have turned them to experts of the challenges of
Development in Nigeria.
It is important
to point out that various theories have been propounded to explain the
challenges of development and underdevelopment of Africa. These theories
include classical theories; developmentalist theories and Marxist theories.[25] The classical theories argue that underdevelopment
arise from rapid population growth, lack of comparative advantage, low savings and
investment and low economic growth. The developmentalist theories point out
that underdevelopment arises from market failure, unbalanced growth, poor
linkages and inability to reach the “take off” stage for development. The
Marxist theories argue that underdevelopment comes from exploitation by
external and internal collaborators with negative impact from colonialism,
imperialism, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the general dependence
of Africa on the developed world coupled with the stagnation and incorporation
of Africa into the world capitalist system.
It is necessary
to analyse the Nigerian situation and apply these theories to the Nigerian
situation. In our view, Nigerians must change course for the country to
develop. We are of the view that what needs to be done to bring about
development is known. It is clear to us that every society has the capacity to
develop and people are the real wealth of a nation.[26] From past experiences, development scholars
have concluded that while there are no silver bullets, some development
approaches bring better outcomes. For instance, it has been proven that
progress in health and education can drive success in human development. In
addition, it has been shown that country factors such as policies, institutions
and geography are important.
Meanwhile, there is a lack of significant
correlation between economic growth and improvement in health and education
e.g. kerala in India, Costa Rica, Cuba and Sri Lanka attained higher human
development than the countries at their income level. Similarly,
experience has shown that markets are very bad at ensuring the provision of
public goods such as security, stability, health and education and a capable,
focused developmental state can help achieve development and the growth of
markets. Nigerians must strive for the right kind of knowledge that can develop
the country.
In Delta State,
there are additional challenges to the development of Delta which are unique to
Delta State in some ways in addition to the general challenges facing Nigeria.
These include:
· Insecurity
· Governance
· Wrong priorities
· Lack of unity among
the ethnic nationalities
4. BUDGETARY ALLOCATION IN DELTA
FROM 2007-2014[27]
Budget shows government priorities and
serves as a yardstick for measuring government’s commitment to fulfilling to
the letter, the ‘social contract’ it entered with the people. In other words,
accessing the actual level and allocation of public expenditure is the key to
understanding any government’s true expenditure priorities and coherence with
the government’s policy objectives.
It is a great challenge that requires
policymakers and civil society to demand for reliable and up-to-date
information on the structure of the sectors and their financing with special
interest in how much is budgeted for every sector. Other key questions which
are of great help include: How much is actually released for every sector? What
percentage of this actual release is spent? How equitably is it spent? What is
the distribution of expenditure among the sub-sectors? Answers to these questions
will provide a basis for understanding the government financial operations
which ultimately will contribute to the goals of resource allocation, usage
efficiency and fairly balanced spread of budget allocation among sectors.
Delta state for the period 2007-2014
has been implementing a 3-point Agenda for the short and
medium term development of the State. The Agenda consists of key elements such
as Peace and Security; Human Capital Development, and Infrastructure
Development.
Delta state budget for 2007–2014 was
analysed with special emphasis on the overall budget thrust and key sectors of
HIV/AIDS, health, education, agriculture, infrastructure, water resources as
well as gender. Applying simple percentages, priority and trend analysis, the
report found that in the revenue side, Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) of
the state dances around 8%-19% of the total revenue generation. Though this
may be considerably higher than most states in Nigeria but this situation is
not a plus to a state like Delta with all natural and human endowment
available. There is need for a conventional and potentially viable source of
revenue for the state government which will be far from oil. The state is
currently benefiting from the 13% oil derivation proceed and hence should show
serious effort towards state economy diversification.
There is also a concern in the level of
recurrent expenditure including the overhead cost in relation to personnel
costs in the state budget allocation for the period. Evidence reveals that the
ratio of overhead/personnel costs for the period 2007-2014 were between 0.7 and
1.09 and the size of personnel budget is an indication of the ambit of service
delivery duties/functions of the Ministries, Departments and Agencies of
Government (MDAs). During the period 2007-2014 in the Delta state, overhead
were disproportionately smaller than those for personnel hence may have
impaired efficient and effective service delivery and put the overall budget
targets/goals in jeopardy. Therefore, there is the need for an appropriate mix
of allocations for personnel and overhead for sustainable service delivery in
education, health, agriculture and other sectors.
On the expenditure side, priority
analysis reveals that on average, education, transport, works and
infrastructure, health as well as Government House and Governor’s Office
in the above order were the top five priorities of the Delta state government
looking at the percentage shares of the sectors for the period 2007-2011. It is
also quite interesting to note that on average for the period 2007-2011, government
house cum governor’s office received more budget allocation than agriculture,
commerce and industry, women affairs and social development and water resources
put together.
The period 2012-2013 marked a
significant shift in spending as works comprising of roads, bridges and
drainages got the highest allocation followed by basic and secondary education
and unfortunately lands, survey and urban planning before the health and higher
education sectors. Within the period 2012-2013, the office of the executive
Governor receives more allocation than housing and urban development,
agriculture and natural resources, water supply and resources as well as
commerce and industry put together while the office of the
secretary to the state government receives more allocation that women affairs
and social development as well as environmental sewerage and drainages put
together.
Further analysis shows that only works
and infrastructure, education and health sectors attracted more share of the
budget than Government House and Governor’s office while commerce, industry and
technology, agriculture and natural resources, women affairs and social
development, youths and sports, water resources, lands and housing as well as
environment attracted allocation less than that of the Government House for the
entire period.
The above findings in summary suggests
that priorities as shown in the state budget may not be people/policy/legal
driven but government driven priorities hence the sharp switches over the
period without a look on the achievement so far. Such practice may also be
as a result of not following the state policy thrust (three point agenda) as
well as the individual policies
guiding the sectors which the budget should finance rather than the interest of
the few (ruling class). There is the need to always ask the questions: how
has the budget performed in financing the policies as well as how has the
budget provided funds for the attainment of the required obligations under the
sector?
Sectoral budget analysis for the period
shows the presence of locations in most of the line budget items unlike some
other states of the federation which shows some level of transparency. It is
also noteworthy that control of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted
diseases attracted only a capital allocation of N460 million or 2.37% of total
capital allocation to the Health sector while preventive measures for other
illnesses attracted N917 million or 4.73% of total capital allocation to the
Health sector for the period 2007-2011. The period 2012-2013 in the health
sector was not better off as over 70% of the capital health allocation went to
construction, renovation and rehabilitation with 0% to HIV/AIDS, 17% to drugs,
medical equipment and medical consumables, 2% to administration issues as well
as 10% to preventive measures. The above situation makes one wonder how the
fight against HIV/AIDS and other diseases will be won in the state if funding
is inadequate and unsustainable?
Also noteworthy is the fact that health
sector budget in the state were full of construction while drugs and medical consumables attracted only 22.48% in the
period 2007-2011 and reduced further to 17% in the period 2012-2013 which is
less than a third of the amount meant for construction, rehabilitation and
renovations of healthcare outfits (71%) for the entire period 2007-2014. Such
diminuendo of funding for drugs and medical consumables as well as preventive
medical cases is an issue to be worried about because of the effect on the out-of-pocket
(OOP) expenses incurred by Delta State households. Also
conspicuously omitted in the Delta State budget for the period 2007-2014 are
issues and provision for mental health
and dental health, immunization against the major infectious diseases and the
provision of care during pregnancy and childbirth which is the main strategy
identified in its vision, including access to emergency obstetric care for
mothers.
Delta State
three point agenda Vision 2020 recognised education as a major tool and a
strategic lever for the socio-economic development of the state and for
individual socio-economic empowerment and poverty reduction under the human
capital development. The agenda and vision identified payment of NECO and WAEC
fees for public secondary school students in Delta State; as well as the
establishment and equipping of various skill acquisition centres across the
State as key strategies toward achieving the above goal. An analysis of the
education capital budget for the period reveals a 25.46% to primary, 44.81% to
secondary and a 29.73% to tertiary education. The same trend were maintained in
2012 and 2013.
For the period (2007-2014) apart
from N100 million for teacher training colleges in the state in 2007 capital
budget no other line item was provided for capacity building of the teachers
(teacher training, teachers exchange programme, etc) were found in the
respective capital budgets. This is a clear
contradiction of the state education mission which is to use education as a major tool and a strategic lever
for the socio-economic development of the state and for individual
socio-economic empowerment and poverty reduction under the human capital
development.
Further
analysis of the education sector allocation for the period shows the need for
another look at the allocative and distributional efficiency of the
sector and by so doing there is need to answer the question: Are the right
programmes being financed that will have the greatest impact? Answer to this
question will help Delta state education sector to make headway in achieving
its set goals and targets.
Some of the major agricultural products
from Delta state include oil palm, plantain/banana, rubber, timber/wood,
cassava, yam, maize, melon, cocoa, cocoyam, fruits and vegetables, as well as
livestock and fisheries products. Interesting programmes and projects initiated
by the state include:
·
Farmers empowerment programme (mobilization of rural women for sustainable
Agriculture (MORWSA) which has a total allocation of N103 million for the
period;
·
Young farmers’ club/farmers associations which has a total allocation of N129
million for the period 2007-2013;
·
Procurement of modern tractors for farmers with an allocation of N3.5 billion
for the period 2007-2013;
·
Small holder cocoa scheme which has a total allocation of N54 million for the
period;
·
Food productions programme/live and own a farm (LOAF) which has allocation of
N253 million for the period;
·
Rice production programme with allocation of N200 million for the period
2007-2013;
·
Cassava development initiative programme with a total allocation of N3.13
billion for the period 2007-2013;
·
State subsidized fertilizer procurement programme with an allocation of N970
million for the period 2007-2013 and
·
National programme for food security (NPFS) with a total allocation of N70
million for the period.
Further analysis reveals that during
the period, there were allocations to assist farmers, allocation to farm
settlements and allocation to communal farms. It is
commendable, the introduction of the above programmes and projects but more
funding and proper monitoring and evaluation as well as details cost-benefit
analysis have to be carried out regularly if the targets of the sector must be
met. Sustenance of these newly introduced programmes as listed above is also
necessary if research founds them beneficial to farmers.
An analysis of the state budget for the
period 2007-2013 shows no significance budget allocation that will lead to
sustained improvement of the welfare of women, children, physically challenged
persons and the aged as necessary in reducing social exclusion. Evidence from the detailed capital allocation analysis
shows that the state is still tackling gender and social development issues
using the charity model whereby activities by society “help” disabled or
vulnerable person or group, who is “helpless”.
Analysis of water supply capital budget
for the period 2007-2010 shows allocation to different water supply schemes in
the state to the value of N3.899 billion in 2007, N2.842 billion in 2008,
N5.482 in 2009, N5.978 billion in 2010 and N2.386 billion for 2011 through
allocation were provided for retinue of projects in 2012 and 2013. The trend of
capital allocation to water shows a gangster swagger movement which is not
healthy for Delta state. NBS (2008) put access to drinkable water in Delta
state to less than 50% hence this movement from high to low and back to high
allocation makes planning by the state water authority difficult.
It is also noteworthy that issues
around water sanitation and hygiene have no place in water supply capital
allocation for the state during the period which is unfortunate for the state.
This is because better water, better education (especially for women), better
sanitation and hygiene, better nutrition etc., are important complementary
factors leading to better health. The impact of better health services in
part depends on these other influences. This implies that government should not
treat any of this issue in isolation rather be handled collectively and
comprehensively.
Delta state has two ministries
dedicated to issues of roads, transportation, bridges, drainages and housing.
The Ministry of Works and Transport handles roads, transportation,
re-surfacing, bridges, and drainages while the Ministry of Housing is in charge
of housing issue in the state. Analysis reveals allocations to several roads,
transportation, bridges, drainages and housing over the period 2007-2014. Road
construction, maintenance, reconstruction, and rehabilitation dominated across
locations dominated the state works and transport capital budget during the
period as well as the allocation for Asaba Airstrip. Other major allocation
went to flood and erosion control measures, drainage construction as well as
construction of concrete drains. Major housing capital allocation expected to
benefit the populace during the period include N450 million, N246 million, N115
million, N100 million and N70 million to low and medium cost housing scheme in
oil producing area in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively.
Based on the findings, several issues
and questions were raised both at the overall budget thrust as well as the
sectoral analysis and possible recommendations were given at every level of
analysis to help improve the budget and the budgeting process of the state. The
major recommendations include:
·
Elimination of all forms of repetitions of line items that abound in almost
every MDA in the state which shows lack of transparency and weak legislative
oversight function both at the enactment/approval and monitoring/evaluation
stages of the budget process.
·
Capital budget provision for planning, research and statistics in all the MDAs
in the state.
·
The adoption of the principles of zero budgeting than just incremental budget
since zero budgeting is based on the evaluation of the sectors and their
expenditure need i.e. budgeting process assuming that the sectors under
consideration require a new budget outlay every year, according to the
development in that sector. Zero budgeting is more development oriented
and with the introduction of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF)
budgeting will be more focused and help in achieving the MDGs if implementation
is carried out appropriately.
·
Given the role of education and health in all spheres of development (social,
economic and environment) there is need for an upward surge in allocation to
act as tools for the total socio-economic and political
empowerment of every citizen of Delta, irrespective of gender, age,
geographical location or terrain and tribe and to make Delta economically
vibrant and politically stable.
·
Overall, current avenues for political participation are insufficient and
consequently youth in many places are perceived as apathetic or disengaged. In
Delta therefore, the reform of political structures is necessary so that
democracy may truly engage and utilize the populace. There is need for more
young people breaking through the mold of traditional political avenues and
moving beyond voting as their sole civic responsibility. This includes the
release of timely, detailed information to allow the involvement of civil
society and the media also.
·
CSOs and other stakeholders participation can facilitate the strengthening of
these linkages and ensure equitable and, in particular, gender and youth
sensitive application. Civil society organizations can play an important role
in complementing and substituting for the traditional social networks.
·
The budget is an effort to continue the government’s multifaceted and holistic
approach to addressing the situation of unemployment and poverty in the state:
ensuring security and also focusing on developing infrastructure, grass-roots
empowerment, and the preservation and restoration of the environment should be
highly encouraged in achieving this overall goal of the state.
Delta state is dominated by
agricultural population and there is need to remember that MDG 2 which is about
universal education has the most indirect linkage to agriculture. A more
dynamic agricultural sector will change the assessment of economic returns to educating
children, compared to the returns from keeping children out of school to work
in household (agricultural) enterprises.
Delta state government should also have
in mind the economic stipulation of the Nigerian Constitution. The economic
objectives in Section 16 of the Constitution provides for a number of general
issues but the most relevant and pointed part of Section 16 of the Constitution
provides as follows:
(2) (d) that suitable and adequate
shelter, suitable and adequate food, reasonable national minimum living wage,
old age care and pensions, unemployment and sick benefits and welfare of the
disabled are provided for all citizens.
5. MOBILISING FOR DEMOCRACY AND
GRASSROOTS DEVELOPMENT IN DELTA STATE: MY EXPERIENCE
The desire to
mobilise for change in society that will benefit poor people was inculcated in
me at the University of Benin in the 1980s when I joined the League of
Patriotic Students (LOPS), a Marxist-Leninist organisation committed to
revolutionary reconstitution of society. Since then, I have tried in all
circumstances and organisations that I am involved in to struggle for change
that will benefit the poor and down trodden. It is this drive that made me to
make a career change from a thriving Pharmacy practice into the development
sector in 2000 when I joined the Centre for Democracy and Development.
From my
knowledge of societal development, it is clear to me that the greatest arena to
bring about change to society is government. Therefore, during the transition
to civil rule in 1998, I contested the primaries for election into the Delta
State House of Assembly during the Abatcha regime. When Gen Sani Abatcha died
and Gen Abdulsalami announced his transition plan, many of us did not believe
him and I did not participate.
The conduct of
elections especially in Delta State in 2003 and 2007 where voting did not take
place in many of the places including my polling unit and ward and results were
announced made me not to consider participating in electoral contest. But in
2011, there was voting in many places including my unit and ward and this
encouraged me to join the gubernatorial race for Delta State in 2015.
The process
started in 2011. Along with fifteen other professionals, we formed an
organisation known as Delta Development Initiative (DDI). The DDI noted
that over the years, there is progressive degeneration in governance and
development in Delta State. Violence, brigandage and mafia style behavior has
been introduced into the body politic. Merit, professionalism and decency for
which Delta State was known in the past have been completely jettisoned. The
cliché Delta- Number One has gradually become Delta no dey
carry last. Instead of our usual first position we now struggle for
last position in many aspects of life especially the standard of living of the
people. There is degeneration of values. The values of respect, hardwork,
integrity and self pride are being completely eroded. Deltans, both young and
old have been turned to beggars in the name of empowerment. Begging which is
alien to our culture as Delta people is now being entrenched. Immorality is
increasing. DDI opined that the present state of affairs in the social,
economic and political affairs of Delta State need collective rescue by all
well meaning Deltans. It therefore argued for the need for awareness and
re-orientation of who we are as Deltans. It emphasized the need to
introduce decency, professionalism and accountability in governance and make
the welfare of citizens and the development of the state the primary purpose of
government.
After much
reflection, we formulated a framework for mobilisation for change focusing on
strategy, organisation and people.
- STRATEGY: It is clear to us that we can utilise at least three strategic
approaches to mobilise for change in Delta: monopolistic strategy,
oligopolistic strategy and distinctive strategy. Monopolistic strategy
will involve an approach that will annihilate all opposition to the change
process and emerge as the only dominant force to take power with little or
no competition. Oligopolistic strategy will involve forming alliances with
power caucuses across the state to overcome opposition to the change
process to wrestle power from the ruling clique in Delta. Distinctive
strategy will involve a process of mobilising citizens for change with a
clear programme and approach that is different. It was clear to us from
the beginning given our strengths and weaknesses that we will use
distinctive strategy but will align with several groups across political,
class and ethnic groups.
- ORGANISATION: The movement started with the inauguration of Delta Development
Initiative (DDI). The inaugural meeting of DDI was held on 4th
December, 2011 with 16 professionals to mobilise for the development of
Delta State. The first project was analysis of Delta State budget from
2007-2011. The report was published. The second project was on Strategic
Transformation of Delta State for holistic development. The report was
published and a workshop held on 12th March, 2012. It then
dawned on us that we needed a more politically focused organization to
mobilise for radical change in Delta State. In March, 2012, the Delta
Rescue Mission (DRM) was formed with a core group and six directorates:
Mobilisation, Education, Youth, Women, IT and Communication.
From
April-December, 2012, the Delta Rescue Mission (DRM) moved across the three
senatorial districts and 25 LGAs of the state mobilizing for change. From our
contact and work with the grassroots, two things stand out clearly:
- Deltans
are yearning for a radical change and a complete break from the past.
- They are
looking forward to a leader that they can trust. They have been deceived
several times in the past and are very suspicious of anyone.
In December,
the core group was constituted into a task force of three groups, one for each
of the senatorial districts to register members for each of the wards across
the 25 LGAs of the state. The response of Deltans to our mobilization for
change has been to say the least overwhelming.
Any organisation
that want to struggle for change must realise the importance of platform. The
platform for organising for change is political party. From analysis of
political parties in Nigeria and Delta State, it is clear to us that the best
political party to mobilise for change is the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The importance
of political parties in a well-functioning democracy in a modern state in the
twenty first century cannot be overemphasized. It has been documented that
representative democracy cannot exist without political parties and attempts at
having democratic government without political parties have consistently
failed. A political party is normally formed with the main purpose of
gaining political power. In the process of organizing to win power, political
parties formulate programmes and manifestoes to make the citizens to vote for
them.
We have argued
in the past that the manifestoes of political parties in Nigeria contain no
clear ideologies, diagnostics and strategies to address the challenges of
development in Nigeria. However, the registrations of the All Progressive
Congress (APC) appear to have changed that scenario in Nigeria.
The All
Progressive Congress (APC) was registered a political party from the merging
legacy parties (ACN, ANPP, CPC and APGA) by the Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) on 31st July, 2013. A few weeks
later, the party released its manifesto. The manifesto of the party is
refreshingly different from the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and even
the parties that merged to form the party in many respects.
First and
foremost, the manifesto of the party clearly states that its mission is “to
construct a progressive state anchored on social democracy, where the welfare
and security of the citizenry is paramount.” (p.1).
Secondly, the
manifesto clearly recognizes the role of the state in the development process
and the need to protect the weak and vulnerable from the vagaries of the
market. The manifesto clearly states that the party will work for the promotion
of “broad based market economy providing opportunities for developing our
abundant natural resources and harnessing the economic potential of individuals
and groups, but protecting society against predatory capitalism.” (p.4).
Thirdly, the
party has a clear programme to tackle corruption. In fact, war against
corruption is number one among the seven cardinal programmes of war against
corruption, food security, accelerated power supply, integrated transport
network, free education, devolution of power, accelerated economic growth and
affordable health care.
Fourthly, the
programmes of the party are deliberately formulated to favour the poor. The
manifesto states clearly that “power must be used in the interest of the people
rather in the interest of the public office holder.” (p1). Indeed, the party
commits to “the primary purpose of good governance which is the welfare of
Nigerians and shall strive to eliminate poverty and create job opportunities.”
(p3). Some of the pro-poor programmes include Free Education; Farm settlements;
rural electrification; programme for persons living with disabilities; one
million housing units per annum by direct social housing programme and others;
promotion of human rights, poverty safety net for senior citizens above 65
years old and youth programme.
Finally, the
manifesto of APC recognizes the place of women in governance and development.
The party has clear programmes for women including political empowerment
programmes, economic empowerment programmes, Nigerian women’s charter and free
education for the girl child up to tertiary level.
These features
are revolutionary in political party manifesto in Nigeria. They represent a
marked departure from the past of wholesale adoption of unbridled
neo-liberalism and anti-poor programmes and policies.
The challenge
is for the leadership and members of the party to know and understand the
implications of these progressive pronouncements and put in place the right
kind of leadership, systems, structures and people that can deliver these
programmes.
Given the
philosophical and programmatic direction of APC, it was not difficult for me to
align with it and register as a member.
- PEOPLE: We are very conscious of the fact that great people make great
organization. The key to organizational performance are people.
Organisation scholars have pointed out that any organization made up of
selfish and indisciplined people cannot go far. We therefore carefully
selected our core group made up of committed people to change in Delta. We
deliberately avoided political entrepreneurs and chalartans.
CHALLENGES OF
MOBILISATION FOR CHANGE
We have faced a
lot of challenges in mobilising for change in Delta. Let us outline a few of
them.
- DEMAND FOR MONEY: One of the greatest challenges that we faced is
unreasonable demand for money. The demand ranges for legitimate demand for
school fees which I was doing for many people before my declaration to run
for office to support for marriage and burial ceremonies. The greatest
number of demand is for vehicles. Many groups daily inundate me and the
Director General of Dr. Otive Igbuzor Organisation, Mr. Tive Denedo with
proposals for mobilisation for my success. Most of the proposals
have budget with outrageous amounts. Some of the items are just
ridiculous and when you look at the prices, you just wonder whether the
people think that you live in another planet. When they are told that the
campaign must be in phases and that the first step is to mobilise people
to register as members of the party, they go about saying that you do not
want to spend money or you are not ready for the election.
- POLITICAL ENTREPRENEURS: There are a lot of political entrepreneurs in
Delta State especially in opposition politics. Many of them do not
have any reasonable means of livelihood. They openly proclaim that they
are professional politicians. They target small parties without base in
Delta State to become state executive members. They have no intention of
winning any election or fielding any candidates. Politics is their means
of livelihood. Their intention is to be invited to national meetings of
the party and paid transport and accommodation allowances. On Election
Day, they will collect the money from the party for the state and do
little or nothing to mobilise for their political party. In fact, they go
to the polling unit for the major parties to settle them and be allowed to
rig the elections. I heard a story of a situation where one of the
political entrepreneurs went to Zamfara during the preparation for the
2011 elections. He collected the money for the delegates from Delta State
and it took the intervention of the police for the money to be given to
the delegates who would have been stranded. Their popular refrain is that
receipts are not normally given with political money and therefore cannot
be accounted for. There are many of the political entrepreneurs in Delta
State.
- BAD POLITICIANS WITHOUT ETHICS AND MORALS: The popular belief is that in politics, there
are no ethics and morals. During the preparation for registration of APC
members in Delta State, I met the Chairman of the registration committee
in Abuja-Mr. Ben Oranusi. For effective registration of members that will
be able to face the ruling party in the State, I thought that all the
leaders should be involved in the mobilisation of members. I therefore
gave the name and contact of leading APC members in the state to Mr. Ben
Oranusi including Olorogun Otega Emerhor; Olorogun Festus Keyamu, Senator
Adego Eferakeya, Major Okobia, Sir Fedelis Tilije, Mr. Tive Denedo and so
on. Many of my supporters could not understand this and many have not
forgiven me till today. In their calculation, some of the people are my
potential opponents during primaries and should be excluded from the
registration process if possible. I do not think so. In addition, many of
the politicians have consistently told me that you cannot practice
Christianity in politics. In a meeting to review the challenges of the
congress at Emonu-Orogun on 9th May, 2014, many of the speakers
counselled me to separate Christianity from politics. It is clear to me
that those people do not understand what Christianity is otherwise their
advice would not have come. What will it profit a man to gain the whole
world and loose his soul? In my view, politics in Nigeria need more
godly people to bring back ethics and morals into politics.
- INTERNAL PARTY DEMOCRACY: APC REGISTRATION AND CONGRESS. The first
thing that happened after the formation of APC is formation of Interim
Executive for the national level and states according to certain criteria.
The first major activity was registration of party members. As a team
poised to mobilise for change, we participated actively in the
registration process using our structures across the 25 LGAs in the state.
The next major activity was the party congresses to elect officers for the
party at the ward, local government and state levels. Unfortunately, the
congress elections was hijacked by undemocratic elements within the party.
Results were written without election in many of the wards. Petition has
been written to the national secretariat of the party and the trajectory
of the party in Delta State will depend on the response of the party
because a house built on sand cannot stand.
I have always
argued that change is inevitable in any society when the conditions for change
(objective and subjective conditions) exist.[28]Objective conditions exist when situations are
evidently abnormal with huge contradictions which can only be resolved by
change. The subjective conditions are the organizational preparations required
to bring about change. In our view, the objective condition for change is ripe
in Delta State. There is poverty in the midst of plenty. There are huge
contradictions and gap between the poor and the rich. The development strides
in the state cannot be compared with the resources of the state. The State
cannot continue in the way it is presently being run. The challenge is to
build the organization with dynamic and visionary leadership as well as a
committed followership that is dedicated to change. Therefore ongoing attempts
to build the requisite organization, leadership and followership for change
must be assisted, nurtured and consolidated for the necessary change to occur
in Delta.
The drive to
struggle for equity, fairness and justice runs in my blood. Anywhere I find
myself, I will continue to struggle for change. Whatever position I find
myself, I will continue to fight for change. Struggle for change is not a
dash-it is a marathon.
6. GOOD CONCEPTS, HOLLOW CONTENT
In the past few
years, Delta State government has brought out some good concepts and slogans
that apparently resonates with the people such as Delta without Oil and Finishing
Strong. The concept of Delta without Oil is premised on the vision
that Delta State will remain self-sufficient and be able to cater for the needs
of its people in the absence oil.[29] The strategy is to leverage revenue from oil and
diversify the economy with special emphasis on manufacturing, infrastructure,
agriculture, mineral and human resources. There is no doubt that the concepts
and slogans are good. But as Emmanuel Addeh has argued, “the highly publicised
attempts to shift Delta from its current dependence on federal allocation
remains either dawdling, stunted or a complete mirage.”[30] For instance, oil revenue still constitute over 90
percent of Delta State revenue after many years of sloganeering. Meanwhile, we
are yet to reap the benefits of huge budgetary allocation for the development
of Koko Export Free zone, Warri Industrial Park and State Independent Power
Project.
The concept of
Finishing Strong comes from the book titled Finishing Strong by Steve Farrar.
He argues that for a Christian, it does not matter if you had a great start or
poor start. What matters most is how you finish which will determine your
eternity. Therefore, for a human being, if you are an armed robber all your
life but you repent one minute before you die or rapture takes place, you have
finished strong. This concept cannot be applied to government. A government
cannot spend seven years poorly for instance and finish strong within one year.
It will be better for Deltans for every government to start strong and finish
strong.
7. THE BEST WAY FORWARD
Delta State is
at a cross road. It is clear us that the people of Delta are yearning for a
change. They need leaders that they can trust. But there is a huge challenge of
the strategy, organisation and people that can bring about the required change.
There is no doubt that you cannot use the strategy of the status quo to bring
about change. Change requires correct strategy and effective organisation built
on a solid foundation. A house built on sand cannot stand. The people must be
ready for change. There are many good people in Delta State with the required
knowledge, capacity and resources to bring about change. But many of them are
standing apart and watching. Let us be reminded by the words of Frantz Fanon
that every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor and by the words of Edmund
Burke that for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
ENDNOTES
[1] Fayemi, K. (2001), Preface in Agozino, B. and Idem, U
(Eds), Nigeria: Democratising a Militarised Civil Society. London, Centre for
Democracy and Development Occasional Paper Series No. 5
[2] Kambhmpati, U. S. ( ), Development and the Developing
World. Uk, Polity Press
[3] Sen, A. (2008), Development as Freedom. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
[4] UNDP (2010), The
Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development. New York, United Nations
Development Programme
[5] Utomi, P. (2006), Why Nations are Poor. Lagos, Centre
for Applied Economics, Lagos Business School.
[6] Kambhampati, U. S.(2004), Development and Developing
World. Uk, Polity Press.
[7] Cowen M. P. and
Shenton, R. W. (1996), Doctrines of Development. London, Routledge
[8] Igbuzor, O (2005), Perspectives on Democracy and
Development. Lagos, Joe-Tolalu & Associates.
[9] United Nations Development Report (UNDP) (2003),
Millennium Development Goals: A Compact among Nations to end Human Poverty.
Oxford University Press.
[10] Shetty, Salil
(2005), Millennium Declaration and Development Goals: Opportunities for Human
Rights in International Journal on Human Rights, Year 2, Number 2.
[11] Chambers, R. (2005), Ideas for Development. London,
Institute for Development Studies.
[12] Sen, A. (2008), Op cit
[14] Delta State CGS Publication
[15] Obadan, M. I. (2003), National Development Planning and Budgeting in
Nigeria: Some Pertinent Issues. Lagos, Broadway Press Limited.
[18] Cheru, F. (2002), African Renaissance: Roadmaps to the Challenge of
Globalisation. London, Zed Books.
[19] National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) (2004).
Abuja, National Planning Commission.
[20] National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy- 2 (NEEDS-2) (2007).
Abuja, National Planning Commission.
[21] Heymens, C and Pycroft, C. (2004), Summary Report of Drivers of Change,
DfID Unpublished report. Cited in World Bank (2005), World Bank Group Strategy
for the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Partnership with the Department for
International Development (UK) (2005-2009).
[22] Economic Commission for Africa (2002), Economic Report on Africa 2002:
Tracking Performance and Progress. Addis Ababa, Economic Commission for Africa.
[23] Ake, C. (2001), Democracy
and Development in Africa. Ibadan, Spectrum Books Ltd
[24] Igbuzor, O (2009),
Challenges of Development in Nigeria. Lagos, Robitos Alliance Publishers Ltd;
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS)(2004). Abuja,
National Planning Commission and Nigeria Vision 20:2020 Economic Transformation
Blueprint. Abuja, National Planning Commission.
[25] Cypher, J. M. and
Dietz, J. L. ( 1997), The Process of Economic Development. London, Routledge.
[26] UNDP Human
Development Report, 1990
[27] This section is culled from a commissioned study of
Delta State Budget Analysis (2007-2014) by Dr. Amakom Uzochukwu
[28] Igbuzor, O (),
Perspectives on Democracy and Development. Lagos, Joe-Tolalu and Associates.
[29] Egene, Goddy (2013),
“The Delta Beyond Oil” Vision in ThisDay 16th June, 2013.
[30] Addeh, Emmanuel (2012), Beyond Uduaghan’s “Delta
without Oil”. The Punch, 19th May, 2012,
[1] Fayemi, K. (2001), Preface in Agozino, B. and Idem, U (Eds), Nigeria:
Democratising a Militarised Civil Society. London, Centre for Democracy and
Development Occasional Paper Series No. 5
[1] Kambhmpati, U. S. ( ), Development and the Developing World. Uk, Polity
Press
[1] Sen, A. (2008), Development as Freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
[1] UNDP (2010), The Real Wealth of
Nations: Pathways to Human Development. New York, United Nations Development
Programme
[1] Utomi, P. (2006), Why Nations are Poor. Lagos, Centre
for Applied Economics, Lagos Business School.
[1] Kambhampati, U. S.(2004), Development and Developing
World. Uk, Polity Press.
[1] Cowen M. P. and Shenton, R. W. (1996),
Doctrines of Development. London, Routledge
[1] Igbuzor, O (2005), Perspectives on Democracy and Development. Lagos,
Joe-Tolalu & Associates.
[1] United Nations Development Report (UNDP) (2003), Millennium Development
Goals: A Compact among Nations to end Human Poverty. Oxford University Press.
[1] Shetty, Salil (2005), Millennium
Declaration and Development Goals: Opportunities for Human Rights in
International Journal on Human Rights, Year 2, Number 2.
[1] Chambers, R. (2005), Ideas for Development. London, Institute for
Development Studies.
[1] Sen, A. (2008), Op cit
[1] UNDP 2003 Op cit
[1] Delta State CGS Publication
[1] Obadan, M. I.
(2003), National Development Planning and Budgeting in Nigeria: Some Pertinent
Issues. Lagos, Broadway Press Limited.
[1] Obadan, M. I. ibid
[1] Obadan, M. I. Ibid
[1] Cheru, F. (2002),
African Renaissance: Roadmaps to the Challenge of Globalisation. London, Zed
Books.
[1] National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) (2004).
Abuja, National Planning Commission.
[1] National Economic
Empowerment and Development Strategy- 2 (NEEDS-2) (2007). Abuja, National
Planning Commission.
[1] Heymens, C and
Pycroft, C. (2004), Summary Report of Drivers of Change, DfID Unpublished
report. Cited in World Bank (2005), World Bank Group Strategy for the Federal
Republic of Nigeria in Partnership with the Department for International
Development (UK) (2005-2009).
[1] Economic
Commission for Africa (2002), Economic Report on Africa 2002: Tracking
Performance and Progress. Addis Ababa, Economic Commission for Africa.
[1] Ake, C. (2001),
Democracy and Development in Africa. Ibadan, Spectrum Books Ltd
[1] Igbuzor, O (2009), Challenges of
Development in Nigeria. Lagos, Robitos Alliance Publishers Ltd; National
Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS)(2004). Abuja, National
Planning Commission and Nigeria Vision 20:2020 Economic Transformation
Blueprint. Abuja, National Planning Commission.
[1] Cypher, J. M. and Dietz, J. L. (
1997), The Process of Economic Development. London, Routledge.
[1] UNDP Human Development Report, 1990
[1] This section is culled from a commissioned study of Delta State Budget
Analysis (2007-2014) by Dr. Amakom Uzochukwu
[1] Igbuzor, O (), Perspectives on
Democracy and Development. Lagos, Joe-Tolalu and Associates.
[1] Egene, Goddy (2013), “The Delta Beyond
Oil” Vision in ThisDay 16th June, 2013.
[1] Addeh, Emmanuel (2012), Beyond Uduaghan’s “Delta without Oil”. The
Punch, 19th May, 2012,
Otive Igbuzor, PhD
President, Institute of Strategic Management, Nigeria
(ISMN) and
Executive Director, African Centre for Leadership,
Strategy & Development (Centre LSD),
Headquarters: Suite 27-28,
Second Floor, Tolse Plaza,
4, Franca Afegbua Crescent,
Off Mariere road,
After Apo Legislative Quarters,
Abuja, Nigeria.
Niger Delta Office: No. 1 Ralph Uwechue Way,
Off Okpanam Road, Opposite Legislative Quarters,
Asaba, Delta State.
