Restructuring: The earlier, the better

THE debate on the topical issue of restructuring Nigeria has been attracting contributions in diverse forms from diverse sources.   It is hoped that at the end of the day, there will be the necessary winnowing to separate the grain from the chaff and determine the course of action that will take Nigeria to the promised land.  Some have taken positions as individuals and some others as representatives of ethnic nationalities.  The arguments being advanced by some to justify their positions are predicated on their knowledge of Nigeria’s history and concern about its future.  Since restructuring entails alteration of the status quo, some are worried about how the change will affect their individual, group or ethnic interests.

What has provided a solid peg on which the protagonists of restructuring have hung their arguments is that Nigeria of today is a country in distress in which virtually nothing works. That Nigeria has been steadily and rapidly retrogressing in the last few decades is an incontrovertible statement.  That the tension manifesting in various forms – militancy, insurrection, kidnapping, cultism and other social vices are symptoms of a deep-seated malaise is difficult to dispute.  That the problems facing Nigeria are a direct consequence of bad leadership, bad management and a defective political and economic structure is an unchallengeable fact.  The critical questions that therefore arise are: Should Nigeria continue in this precarious situation?  How far can the country go if it chooses to trudge on in this unenviable state?  How safe is it to ignore glaring challenges and carry on as if nothing is amiss?  How rational is it to perform acrobatic feats on a precipitous cliff?  Nigeria must take heed of the aphorism that whatever does not bend will break.

One interesting feature of the on-going debate is that the stand taken by some prominent Nigerians has not been in harmony with the prevalent position in their geographical areas.  Former military President Ibrahim Babangida and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar – both from the North – have both weighed in in support of restructuring.  Conversely, former President Olusegun Obasanjo and the Governor of Imo State, Rochas Okorocha – both from the South – have clearly stated their opposition to the entire idea.

Obasano holds the view that there is nothing wrong with Nigeria to warrant the clamour for it to be restructured.  His argument is that what needs to be restructured is the mindset and mentality of Nigerians. He has virtually equated the agitation for restructuring with a demand for the dismemberment of the country.  Although he does not see the need for restructuring, he has not said that Nigeria as it is today is working.

Okorocha , in his own view, insists that what Nigeria needs is repackaging and not restructuring.  He believes that once Nigeria is projected to the outside world in a positive light it will be able to attract investors.  Apart from having a wrong notion of what structure and package represent, the governor sees Nigeria’s problems solely from the perspective of investment opportunities.  While structure  deals with the way parts are connected together, packaging deals solely with external appearance.  The governor cannot be unaware that an attractive package will not sell a bad product more than once.  It cannot be unknown to him that Nigeria’s stolen funds are mostly in the vaults of foreign banks while the exquisite mansions acquired with proceeds of corruption are  in the major cities of the western world. The truth is that foreigners have more information on Nigeria than Nigerians.  They assist Nigeria with information on the financial atrocities of its own citizens.  What Nigeria needs is not a superficial treatment that cannot stand the test of time but a fundamental change that will take cognizance of the interests of the present and future generations.

One major issue which has been the kernel of the agitation for restructuring is the devolution of powers from the centre to the constituent units.  It is seen  as the critical requirement in the quest for return to true federalism.  To the consternation of those who had expected something different, the National Assembly has voted to reject the proposal that would have relieved the Federal Government of a substantial part of its enormous powers.

The primary consideration that determines where some stand on the issue is the assortment of benefits they enjoy under the present arrangement.  The oil money that flows in freely  on monthly basis is seen as a great opportunity that should not slip through their fingers.  It is lost on them that in spite of the oil money, Nigeria has been steadily retrogressing in Human Development Index because its political and economic structure is defective.  The fact that Nigeria, amajor oil producer,  has been importing virtually everything, including petroleum products, provides sufficient evidence that the present arrangement has failed, and woefully too.

The party in power at the  centre – the All Progressives Congress (APC) – has set up a committee to articulate its position on restructuring.  The governors of the 19 northern states have not only constituted a committee to come up with suggestions on what their position should be, they have also held a meeting with traditional rulers in the region on the issue.  As a long-standing critical national necessity, restructuring has not just refused to go away, it has remained on the front burner.  Another sharp drop in the price of  oil will bring about the worst in the history of Nigeria.  The various structures – economic, social, political – will collapse one after the other. For a country in Nigeria’s position, restructuring is imperative.  The earlier the better.

• Olatoye, a veteran journalist, lives in Ibadan