CONTINUED FROM LAST WEEK
A budget speech given in the Western House of Assembly, Ibadan, on 22nd March, 1955.
THE second criticism under this head overlooks the fact that differing wages lead to migration of workers from the areas of low wages to those of higher wages. I appreciate the fact that such a concentration of workers in cities would tend to force wages down, and that in consequence of economic forces, there might be a dispersal of workers back to their homes. Vanity, which is ingrained in all of us, though in different degrees, makes it impossible for economic forces to bring about such a dispersal. Many such workers prefer to remain in the cities once they are there, hoping against hope for the best. Perhaps it pays some of the employers in the cities that the supply of labour should exceed demand, as indeed is now the case!
Furthermore, differing costs of living are never static. It has been shown by statistical figures that they fluctuate from time to time. This quarter, the cost of living in A may be higher than in B, C and D, and next quarter it may be higher in D than in A, Band C. Are we to make adjustments in wages from quarter to quarter? I think not. In any event, it does not always follow that the cost of living in the cities is higher than in the rural areas. According to the recent information provided by the Statistical Department of the Federal
Government the cost of living in the fourth quarter of 1954 was higher in Ejinrin, Abeokuta, I1esha, Akure, Okitipupa and Benin, and much higher still In Ijebu-Ode and Warri, than in Lagos. Yet the Federal Government pays workers in Lagos 41 – whilst those in the provincial towns mentioned received much less. In view of the statistical figures, one would expect that the reverse would have been the case. I dare not suggest that the workers in Lagos have been paid this higher wage as a price of virile articulation.
In the fifth place, it has been argued that instead of raising the minimum wage, it is rents and prices of foodstuffs and other articles on which workers spend their money that should be controlled. I do not want to be drawn into theoretical argument as to whether or not this is the real answer to workers’ problems. Such an exercise may delight the academician, but it confuses the layman. The facts, however, as we know them from experience, are that both rent control and price control have failed in places and on occasions in which steps have been taken to enforce them. And present indications are that they will fail again if introduced in the present setting of our society. It is extremely uneconomic to argue that in normal circumstances you can control the price of anything which is progressively in short supply vis-à -vis the demand for it. The only thing that I know could conduce to the stabilization of rent, and of prices of foodstuffs is building more houses and producing more food.
For some time now, the government of this region has been considering a housing scheme and hopes to have something definite to say about it before long. With regard to the production of food and the organization of its marketing, I have made abundantly clear government’s activities in this direction.
But it would be ridiculous to suggest that rents and prices of food would necessarily fall when more houses are built and more foodstuffs are produced. We can only, at best, succeed in preventing them from rising. The peasant farmers deserve to get decent returns for their labour; and in any event the population of non-farmers is increasing every day. Furthermore, rents and prices of foodstuffs have risen. considerably since wages were increased in 1952, and I have already cast serious doubt on the adequacy of the wages fixed in the basic year.
It follows, therefore, that the needs of workers called for urgent satisfaction and we have not hesitated to respond. It was Bacon who said: ‘Rebellions are caused by two things: much poverty and much discontent. Rebellion of the stomach is the worst.’ In the sixth and last place, our minimum wage has been derided on the grounds (i) that it benefits only a handful of workers—some 500 in all; and (ii) that we did not compel other employers of labour in the region to adopt the minimum in respect of their daily paid workers.
In regard to the first point, no fewer than 14,500 workers employed by the Western Region Government are receiving a 5/- minimum wage. Besides, the Western Region Production Development Board has voluntarily applied this minimum to about 3,000 of its employees.
Concerning the second point, there are various reasons for not compelling other employers to adopt the minimum wage. Firstly, if we did so, many employers might resort to large-scale retrenchment in order to sustain the minimum wage. We could compel employers to pay a given number of workers. Employment with a little wage is undoubtedly better than no employment and no wage at all. An employer who voluntarily adopts the government’s wage policy would have counted the cost, and would not, therefore, be likely to retrench some of his workers. Secondly, it would be an act without precedent to compel employers to adopt a wage rate paid by this Government. Thirdly, it would be unwise to compel Local Government Bodies to adopt the minimum wage as has been suggested in some quarters. Local Governments are, financially and in respect of the labour employed by them, autonomous. What they pay their workers depends very much on the size of their respective purses. The Government does not think that it is right that they should be coerced into doing something which their financial capacity might not be able to bear, and which might lead to retrenchments and increase in tax. But we do hope, however, that other employers of labour in the Region would take another look at the matter and follow the example of this Government.
One matter of interest and importance remains to be mentioned before I close this speech. It is the declared policy of this government to encourage and help indigenous banking institutions so that they in turn may give financial aid to those of our businessmen (like importers and exporters for instance) who require and deserve such aid but who are not qualified for loans from the Loans Board. In pursuance of this policy the government has placed a proportion of its banking work in the hands of the National Bank of Nigeria Limited. The terms on which the National Bank performs banking services for the Regional Government are the same as the terms on which the Dank ‘of British West Africa carries out the remainder of the Government’s business.
‘The glory of a King: says Amenhothep IV, ‘is the welfare of his people.’ Since its accession to power in 1952, this government has constantly and consistently, with due regard for the unity of the Nigerian Federation, placed the interests and welfare of the people of this region above all other considerations. Its policy and programme have been designed to benefit and have in fact benefited rich and poor alike, sinner and saint, the peasantry, and the working class.
and then