|
Obasanjo gets 2005 budget priorities wrong-Abba Aji
The 2005
Appropriation Bill presented to the National Assembly is already throwing up
heated debates with some legislators insisting that the executive gets the
country’s priorities wrong. One of such critics is Senator Mohammed Abba
Aji (ANPP, Borno Central). In this interview with our Correspondent Paul Mumeh, Aji says the President has turned
a blind eye on the farmers whose farms are being devastated by Quellea birds in
the North, arguing that the Federal Government has misplaced its priorities in
the 2005 budget proposal which gives little to agricultural production, which
is an antidote to urban and rural crimes. He also faults the poverty
alleviation programme of the Federal Government, arguing that PDP officials have
hijacked the project to fund election campaigns. He also criticises the
incessant increases in the prices of petroleum products, arguing that the
palliative measures being planned by the government will be ineffective to
tackle the hardships brought about by the rise in fuel price. Excerpts:
What do you make
of the 2005 Appropriation Bill presented to the National Assembly by President
Olusegun Obasanjo?
Well, it is a sweet
and sour budget proposal. Sweet in the sense that I like the emphasis given to
pensions. Pension payment in Nigeria needs to be addressed squarely. We have
spent a lot of money on pensions, yet it has remained a big economic and
political problem. I think the emphasis given the implementation of the new
pension reform is a very good development. The substantial allocation to
pensions in the 2005 budget proposal is quite inspiring because I think that is
the best way to tackle the crisis.
But I also consider
the 2005 budget proposal sour because it appears to have misplaced the priority
position of agriculture in our country. In Nigeria, agriculture still employs
the majority of our people and for that sector to attract less than 30 per cent
of the budget is to misplace the priority altogether. Indeed, the increased
allocation given to the Police to address the seeming increase in crimes will
not yield the desired result because crime, in most instances, does not result
from inadequacies of the police or inadequate funding for them. The upsurge in
crimes is more the direct result of the explosion in number of unemployed
youths in our land today. In this regard, we are talking of urban youths.
But remember that
we still have those we call the rural youths, who form the majority of the
Nigerian youth population. They are engaged in the rural areas, in farm works
mainly. Therefore, you don’t see them, or see them featuring in our crime
records. But when you take away funding to agriculture, the way Mr. President
has done in this budget proposal, you will see an upsurge in rural crimes and
growth in youth participation in rural crimes
.
The President
talked about a social safety nets targeted at youths, women and children.
Don’t you see that as a major campaign against rural poverty?
You see, these are
rhetoric and mere political talks. The poverty alleviation programme has failed
and they want to replace it with a safety net that is not even properly
defined. A lot of money has been expended in the name of poverty eradication in
the last five years, but poverty is still here with us. So it is, or should be
obvious to the government by now that poverty cannot be solved by throwing
money this way and that way.
There are other
strategies, other super-structures that you have to put in place, a good
monitoring device to determine if the money is meeting your target… the
targeted growth and if it is making the desired changes in the lives of the
people.
The poverty
alleviation programme failed because the President kept throwing money and the
politicians in the PDP turned it into party money… and they began to use
it for their campaigns. That is why the programme failed. All the poverty
alleviation programme coordinators were appointed by the PDP secretariats at
both national, state and local government levels. They became PDP officers and
they utilised the money that came to them to facilitate the election of the PDP
candidates in the 2003 elections. So, the so-called safety nets, which is more
ill-defined than the poverty alleviation programme, will meet worse situation
of abuse.
The President
said that we may produce enough food for export next year. Don’t you
share that optimism?
That again is the
contradiction in the budget proposal. If your ambition is to produce so much,
so that you can export the surplus, do you then cut the funding for that
sector? How will reducing funding to the agricultural sector next year
facilitate the ambition for food surplus? Again, though the rains were good
this year, Mr. President must have been told of the devastation in some states
of the federation. He must have been informed of the expected infestation of
locust which will definitely reduce the expected yield this year. But if he had
not been reasonably briefed, then he should send some people on fact-finding
missions to bring him first hand report on the menace of these pests in the
North at least. He will be amazed at the level of devastations to farmlands in
this area. I have written him a letter on the menace of Quellea birds in the
North. I wrote another letter to the minister of agriculture, the
director-general, NEMA and even the finance minister, all in attempt to draw
attention to the problem. My latest letter was to the Vice President who has
graciously acknowledged my letter.
I felt disappointed
not because these other people, including Mr. President, have not acknowledged
my letters and the existence of the problem, but because Mr. President has not
acknowledged it as a national crisis in the budget speech. Even the word
‘Quellea bird’ was not mentioned in the speech when it is obvious
that over three million metric tones of foods have been lost already.
It is worrisome
enough that Nigeria is not in the coalition of the 12 West African countries
collaborating to fight the infestation of locus. Why has the country’s
leadership failed to even acknowledge the existence of the problem? It is
surprising, indeed!
What did you
expect from the government with regard to the invasion of the Quellea birds in
northern Nigeria?
Well, the
government missed a great chance, and that chance was yesterday (Tuesday
October 12, 2004). The President of the Federal Republic was expected to
acknowledge the presence and devastation of Quellea birds, particularly in
northern Nigeria. He was also expected to announce to Nigerians, and in particular
the farming population, a convincing blue print on how he intended to tackle
it. In addition to that, he was expected to come up with a contingency plan on
how to ameliorate the pains and loss suffered by the affected farmers. We have
nearly two million hectares of farmland that had already been destroyed by
these birds.
But he did not. He
did not mention one word in that regard. The budget did not even acknowledge
the existence of the pest let alone the devastation. It does not contain any
assistance for the affected farmers and with agriculture featuring very low in
his administrative packing order, it is difficult to begin to advance any
solution now.
Personally, I am
not really hopeful that Mr. President really cares about the agricultural
sector of this country. I kept thinking that as a farmer himself, that Mr.
President will be by now so heart-broken by the losses suffered by his
colleagues, that he will come running to their help without any prompting. But
as it were, he has abandoned the farmers to their fate.
So with that
kind of mindset, what do we expect from the National Assembly when it finally
begins work on the 2005 budget proposal?
You can expect
great deal of changes. We will change the features and structures of the budget
to get the priorities right. We will not allow it to sail through in the form
it was presented to us; you can bet on that.
But could it be
that Mr. President was not advised appropriately on the pest attacks in the
North?
I cannot say for
sure that the minister of agriculture did to draw the attention of Mr.
President to that problem and that of the impending locust infestation. What I
do know is that it is unfortunate that Nigeria is not represented in the
coalition of 12 West African countries now battling the locus problem. I am
also aware that the ministry is not doing enough to contain the Quellea bird
menace through extensive aerial spray of chemicals. I don’t know if
indeed he actually made efforts to persuade Mr. President on the need to join
the collective campaign against locust and Quellea birds. I wish he had done
that.
It is ironic that
while our farmers in the North are agonising over their loss to the invasion of
the Quellea birds and already the infestation of locust which may come by
November or December, Nigeria in her usual magnanimity has donated a plane and
money running into millions of dollars to Senegalese to fight the locust in
their country.
The President has
not even acknowledged the resolution of the Senate in which he was advised on
how to address the menace, but the Senegalese President came and he got the money
and plane to attack the pest in his country. So ultimately, the pest will now
head towards Nigeria where there will be less resistance.
What did you
request from NEMA in your letter to the agency?
I told them to
expect the worst and prepare for more requests for relief and to provide that
in their 2005 budget estimate. I told them that with effect from January 2005,
they will begin to see many requests coming as a result of this calamity.
People will come for food and seeds for next farming season. This is so because
most of the farmers lost everything they cultivate in the 2004 cropping season.
In a different
letter to the minister of agriculture, I also advised the ministry to prepare
for the challenges ahead and provide for that in their 2005 budget estimate so
that in 2005 the attack on the pests will be more effective and decisive.
What has been
the response to all these letters you wrote on the devastations of the Quellea
birds?
The only person,
who had communicated me in the way of acknowledgement, and to whom I am
immensely grateful to, is the Vice President. He also took action that the
farmers should be happy with. Nobody else has acknowledged my letter.
What actions has
the Vice President taken?
In his letter, he
said he had asked the minister to urgently address the menace, and I am happy
with that response.
The President
has acknowledged the performance of FEMA. Do you share that sentiment?
His assessment is
based on reports coming to him from government officials. The people have not
spoken. They will sooner or later, so let’s wait for the verdict of the
people.
How about the
sundry efforts to cushion the effects of fuel price hike?
In the first place, we have no business raising the prices
of petroleum products to the point that they constitute threat to the policy.
Secondly, the real option is to revert to the old price because there is no
other way to cushion the effect. Is the government going to go on the streets
to share money to the people to meet the general inflation in the economy? How
exactly can they expect to realise that ambition? They should revert to the old
price and safe us that deceit.
|
