A speech on the Appropriation Bill given in the House of Representatives, Lagos, on 7th April, 1960.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is impossible not to find areas of agreement even between his strongest opponents and the minister of finance on certain aspects of his very long speech. Equally, it is impossible not to find areas of disagreement, even between the government and its most contemptible sycophants.
For instance, there is one passage on which the minister of finance and myself are in perfect accord and agreement. The minister says that it is the honest intention of this government that foreign capital should be as safe here as in any other country in the world. The members of the Opposition are very keen that foreign capital and investment should be attracted into this country to participate with indigenous capital, provided either by the private sector or by the government for the rapid economic development of this great country.
As r said before, the only difference between us and the government is a question of emphasis. We believe that the economy of this country should be reared on a foundation laid by indigenous capital and not on a foundation laid by foreign capital.
There are various points of disagreement which I do not need to enumerate but to which I will refer as I go along. But there is one observation I want to make before I proceed further. It is common for the members of the government bench to speak of constructive criticism. They have accused the
Opposition on a number of occasions of failing to be constructive in their criticism of the government. I take it, Mr, Speaker, that the idea of the government of what is constructive criticism is entirely different not only from that of the opposition but from what is generally accepted as constructive criticism.
I think that the government’s idea of constructive criticism is that people should come here and sing the praise of the government all the time; but our idea of constructive criticism is that we should point to those flaws and defects in the government’s policies and then proceed further, and not just stop there, to make suggestions as to how these flaws and defects could be removed and ameliorated. And in this connection there is an injunction of Dionysius which runs thus: ‘Let your speech be better than silence, or be silent’. In other words, if what the opposition is expected to do in this house is to sing the praise of the government and pour encomiums upon them then their speeches will not be better than their silence. They had better be silent and in this case silence would be taken for consent. But they are here to represent the people of this country, to act as their watch-dog and also to check the government so that they do not indulge in excesses.
Now the first approach, Mr. Speaker, to the rapid economic development of this country, and in any under-developed country for that matter, in our view, is this. We must first of all ascertain, and ascertain as accurately as humanly possible, what are those problems which call for urgent solution. The second approach, Mr. Speaker, is for the government of the day to formulate principles by which they and all of us will be guided in finding solutions to these problems. And the third approach is this; the government must then proceed to work out concrete and practicable plans and programmes in accordance with the principles already laid down by which they intend to be guided or to bring about the desired solutions and results.
The paradox of our great country Nigeria is that it is a rich and a poor country. Rich in the sense that it has tremendous economic potentialities but poor in the sense, if I am permitted to say so, that it is poor. In this regard I would like to make a brief reference to our gross national income. The gross national income of Nigeria per head is £25 and at that figure Nigeria is in the company of three other very poor countries, namely, Tanganyika, Uganda and India. But then we have a country like Ceylon which has £50 per head gross national income; Ghana with £60 per head and even a place like Trinidad with about £140 per head. That is the measure of our poverty Mr. Speaker, but that is even putting it mildly when we refer only to figures. You only have to go about this country, and you will be confronted by the appalling spectacles, particularly in the Northern part of this country, of poverty, ignorance and disease which beggar description.
The rural life in the country, Mr Speaker, is becoming most intolerable. The reasons are very obvious to any casual observer. The peasants of this country work as hard as anyone and indeed work harder than those who call themselves Hon. members in this House, and the rewards which they get for their labours are very, very poor indeed. There is a lack of amenities in these rural areas and the effect of this is that there is a drift on the part of the rural population into the towns. There are no figures available anywhere in this country which one can rely upon but I am sure that it is generally agreed that there is temporary and seasonal unemployment in the country.
From time to time, the so-called daily-paid workers are laid off if a particular job has been completed, and of course, workers who serve some agricultural people are also laid off during certain periods of the year. But on top of all that, we have permanent unemployment which is mounting every day, first of all due to this drift from these rural populations into the towns and due to the fact that quite a large number of young men and girls who leave schools cannot get jobs.
These are only a few, Mr. Speaker, of the problems which confront us in this country. In my considered opinion, there are three fundamental principles which we must keep constantly before ourselves in finding solutions to these grave problems, these urgent problems. First, the government must as a matter of urgency devise ways and means of fostering the maximum exploitation of our natural resources. Secondly, it must accelerate the development of and mobilise our manpower for this end, and thirdly, it must ensure – and this is very important, and it was completely omitted from the speech of the minister of finance – the equitable distribution of the resultant wealth among all the citizens of this great country, In working out plans and programmes you must have regard to these principles and also to other priorities.
In determining the order of priorities, or in proposing the order of priorities, I would like to call the attention of this Hon. House to certain figures for our gross national and net national income. At the moment we can only rely on those figures revised by various people, the International Bank Mission and others. But the position today, Mr. Speaker, or as far back as 1955-56 is that our gross national income is £806.8 million. Out of this, £501.4 million is provided, or derived from agricultural and allied sources; agriculture, livestock, and fishery. In other words, at the very moment, and for a long time to come, the base of our wealth is agriculture. In my view, therefore, the first priority should be the bold and rapid development of agricultural economy in this country. The sooner the people in this House realize that I am not here to represent the Western Region but to represent the country as a whole, the better for them and for all concerned.
Now that is the first priority, Mr. Speaker, and what do we find? The Government is either bold with embellishments and expressions of which the Primer Minister is very full, or the Government is very ignorant. The Government is very ignorant, and blissfully so, that agriculture should form the first priority in our schemes for economic development in this country. It is either that or the Government just could not care less!
A brief reference to the Capital Budget Estimates, and to the Estimate itself would indicate that what the Government is prepared to spend on agriculture is of the order of £400,000 this year. I am fully aware that agriculture and allied subjects are matters within Regional competence. It is also within the province of the Federal Government to stimulate and foster the accelerated development of these particular fields of our activities. It is not the duty of the Federal Government to sit down and fold its arms and think that its only concern is foreign affairs, to deal with the Police, to deal with the Army, and such-like. The sources of our revenue are from the land, and if the Government wants to have as much money as possible in its hands to spend on the development of this country, then it must do everything in its power to stimulate the development of agriculture and other natural resources. For instance, there is nothing to stop the Federal Government from engaging in industry and in agricultural ventures – there is nothing to stop them from establishing large-scale ranches in the Northern Region. There is nothing to stop them from providing refrigerated vans and refrigerated trains to transport slaughtered cattle from certain parts of the Northern Region. The advantages of this, both to producers and to consumers, are obvious. The producers will be able to get more for their cattle than they do now, and the consumers will be able to get really good meat to’ eat, particularly those who live here in Lagos.
Now the second priority, in my view, is education and health. There are many people who are ignorant of economic operations and they think education and health are not to be considered in planning for economic development. I say, Mr. Speaker, that the education and health of the citizens are indispensable factors to productivity in any economic venture. There is also the political aspect of this business of education and health, particularly education, political and economic forces overlap from time to time.
Now, today the gap between the North and the South in the matter of education is dangerously wide. In the Eastern Region 1¼ million pupils are attending primary school in a population of 7 million. In the Western Region 1.2 million are attending school. In the Northern Region only a quarter of a million are attending school today. That is a very very dangerous gap, and the Federal Government must take steps to close that gap in the interests of harmony and mutual confidence between the people of the North and the people of the South, apart from the fact that the education of the citizen of the North will also help their productivity.
In the time at my disposal, Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is impossible to enumerate all those priorities that I have in mind. In any case, for my present purpose it is enough to mention only these two – agriculture and allied occupations – and education and health. The scant attention given to these two important items and the inadequate provisions made for them in the Estimate are evidence that the Government attaches little or no importance to these, the very bed-rock of our economic growth. I said before that the country is poor. Our gross national income, to which I have made reference, shows it. Our Budget also shows it. But a little bit of prudence on the part of Government in the management of our finances, and a display of courage and vision in tackling our problems, could alter the situation considerably. In the present circumstances it would appear that there is nothing we can do but to go a-borrowing, and go a-borrowing, and go a-borrowing! This year alone, Mr. Speaker, Sir, we are borrowing as much as £25 million in order to fulfil our capital budget of £44 or £45 million, and by the 31st March, 1962, we will have borrowed, if we are to fulfil our programme at that time, as much as £38 million. These figures are from the Capital Budget Estimates, and also the speech of the Hon. the Minister of Finance. Surely we cannot go on for ever living on loans and credit. Any individual who does that will soon find himself in prison, in debtors’ prison.
What do we do then to avoid this borrowing spree to various countries? I have eight points which I would submit for the serious consideration of the Government. The first point is that the insurance business in this country should be completely nationalised. This is a very lucrative venture and I think that it should be possible for the Government to realise substantial profit from this source. The second suggestion I wish to submit for the consideration of the Government is that the Nigerian Shipping Company should be expanded to the extent that it would carry either 100 per cent of all the goods originating from this country or 85 per cent of these goods. This would help in dealing with the balance of payments which is constantly moving against this country. The third suggestion is that the duty on cigarettes be it Bicycle, Pirate, et cetera, which was imposed last year, should be reduced.
And may I call the attention of the Government to certain significant facts and figures. When the Government imposed this duty, it expected to realize substantial sums of money but that expectation has completely failed. In 1956-57, 1957-58, 1958-59 the Government realised roughly four million pounds from excise duty on manufactured tobacco. For the year 1959-60 the revised estimate is 4.2 million pounds and we are now providing for only 4.2 million pounds. Did it not occur to the Government that if this duty is reduced, that is the price of a stick of cigarette is 1 d instead of 1½d, a chap who at the moment will not buy more than a stick may proceed to buy three sticks? In any case, the position cannot be worse than it was in 1956-57, 1957-58, and 1958-59. It must also be borne in mind that there is a good deal of money in circulation at the moment. Salaries have just been increased and quite a number of chaps who could have gone in for more smoking have been retarded from doing so because of this increase in duty; and I think it would be in the interest of this country if this duty is abandoned.
There is another advantage in abandoning this duty. It will enable the masses of the people to indulge in a little bit of luxury which they have been denied because of the extra duty on cigarettes. I also suggest that the recent duty imposed on mineral waters should be abandoned before it is too late. I am surprised to hear that mineral waters are described as a luxury. Mineral waters are not luxuries, they are meant for the ordinary man in the street. They are the only comfort in which the ordinary man in the street can indulge. They cannot afford to buy beer, gin or whisky.
Government should also consider the advisability of raising the duty on non-commercial vehicles. I am sure that even a 20 per cent increase on non-commercial vehicles would yield the same amount of money which Government now expects from the recent increased duty now imposed on mineral waters. I also suggest that a trade mission should be dispatched to Japan, India and to Hong Kong so that trade treaty agreements may be entered into with these countries and so that they may take more of our goods than they do now. At the moment we import from these countries goods to the value of £30,000,000 a year and they only take from us goods to the value of £1.7m a year. The Government should take steps to rectify this position to reduce the adverse balance of payments against us.
My seventh suggestion is that a revenue commission should be appointed by this Government. The Government does not require advice on spending and borrowing. I believe they are already experts in these aspects of our public finance, but I think they require advice on revenue raising.
The last suggestion, Mr. Speaker, is that a high-powered and permanent economic planning commission should be appointed by this Government to produce a five-year plan which this House can consider and approve. It is important that we should know well ahead what we are in for. This business of taking one step a time in the dark will not do for Nigeria.
CONTINUES NEXT WEEK.
READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNEÂ
and then