THE THIRDTERM BID

As the Nigerian National assembly begins a new legislative section, all eyes are on the honourable members to see how they will handle the most debated proposal of the constitutional amendment committee, which is the elongation of the tenure of presedent Obasanjo to enable him have another shot at the presidency of Nigeria. president Obasanjo’s tenure runs out in May 2007, at which time he must have served 2 terms of 4 years each. It is alleged that the president is interested in remaining in power beyond 2007.

The amendment will elongate the tenure of the president and governors from the present 2 terms of 4 years each to 3 terms of 4 years each. This is now popularly known in Nigeria as the third term bid. For some people there is nothing wrong with the third term bid. For such people the thrdterm bid will only give president Obasanjo 1 more term of 4 years, implying that he will be in power for the next 5 years. However, it must be said that an elongation of the tenure of the president to 3 terms of 4 years each will give Obasanjo the green light to be in power for the next 13 years and not 5 years as Nigerians are made to believe.

There is nothing wrong with the thirdterm bid if that is what Nigerians want. However, with the allegations of bribery of $37,000 to every member of the constitutional review committee and $1 million to every member of the senate and house of representatives that support the amendment, one may be tempted to ask whether the opinion of Nigerians will even count on this issue. The thirdterm bid is wrong if the law is broken in order to achieve it. The thirdterm bid is wrong if money that should be used for the development of Nigeria is used to bribe the honourable members of the national and state assemblies in order to achieve it. The thirdterm bid is wrong if it leads to the destruction of lives and property in Nigeria.

Proponents of the thirdterm point at what they call “good governance” which they say will continue if the tenure of the president is elongated. They also claim that president Obasanjo is the most suitable candidate of all those who have declared there interest in the presidency of Nigeria.This to me is nonsense, an Atiku, an IBB, a Rochas or even a pastor Chris can do much better. Nigeria needs a proactive leader at this stage of her development and Gen Obasanjo is not just proactive. This completely disqualifies him as my candidate for 2007.

A lot have been said about the debt relief recently granted to Nigeria by the Paris club. Infact this is one of the main points used by the proponents of the thirdterm bid. However, it must be said that the debt relief took too long in coming. Why did it take more than 6 years for the government, led by Gen. Obansanjo, to reach an agreement with the Paris club. As far as I am concerned getting debt relief for Nigeria is very simple.

All the preseident needed to do was to show the members of the paris club, that Nigeria is a country of about a 140 million people, of which about 60% of them are living on less than a dollar a day. That Nigeria has decaying health, energy, education and transportation infrastructure. That Nigeria borrowed little ,paid so much and is still owing so much. Most importantly the president should have appointed the right people who would have introduce “good governance” and transparency as early as 1999. This would have given the Paris club confidence that the money saved, if the debt is cancelled, would be well spent on projects that will impact on Nigerians.

Nigeria would have gotten debt relief as early as 2002 if the president was more proactive in handling the issue. It must be said that the cost on Nigeria, due to the delay in securing the deal, may have been well over $6 billion.This figure includes the about $1 billion per year used for debt servicing between year 2002 to 2005 and accruing interest on debt stock. $ 6 billion would have greatly improved the decaying infrastructure in Nigeria. This is the price Nigerians have to pay for electing a leader who is slow in response to national issues.

Another area were president Obasanjo administration has failed is in the power sector. In 1999, when Obasanjo administration came into power, Nigeria had 2000Mw electricity generation capacity. Today, more than 7 years later, Nigeria boasts of about 3500Mw. This is an increase of only 1500Mw in 7 years. It must be added that no new electricity generation capacity was added before 2004. Why did it take so long for this administration to discover that the problem of the power sector has more to do with electricity generating capacity than any other factor? Why did it take up to 4 years before any action was taken on the issue. These and more are questions for the Obasanjo administration.

The delay in providing electricity generating capacity has led to epileptic power supply in Nigeria. Most businesses in Nigeria, today runs on generators, which increases the cost of running businesses in Nigeria. The high cost of running business in Nigeria has also led to the loss of foreign investment, as investors will prefer to invest in other countries with low cost of entry like Egypt, Ghana, China, India and more. The cost of low generating capacity on Nigeria cannot be quantified. This is the cost of not having a proactive leader as president. The cost will even increase if the thirdterm bid succeeds.

The response of president obasanjo on the problems of the aviation industry, that led to 3 plane crashes, which took the lives of over 150 people in 2005, supports my claim that the president is not proactive. Despite the numerous publications on national dailies on what is popularly known as the disaster waiting to happen” and the near air mishaps no action was taken by the Nigerian government in response to the incidents. Even when the first plane crashed no positive steps were taken by government to prevent further crashes. Infact it took three plane crashes in about 2 month before any action was taken by the government. I must also add that the death of the late first lady of Nigeria, Chief Mrs. Stella Obasanjo must have contributed in any action being taken. The loss may have made president Obasanjo to realize what it means to lose a loved one.

Listening to the president make a speech is a very boring experience, although I must confess that his presentation skills have improved over the years. President Obasanjo takes all the time in the world to make his presentation, like if time is of no essence to him. A presentation that will take president Gorge W. Bush of the United States or prime minister Tony Blair of Britain 15 minutes will take president Obasanjo of Nigeria over an hour to make. The president reads and speaks slowly and this seems to be part of his character. President Obasanjo is slow that explains why he is asking for 3 more terms in office so that he can take all the time in the world to turn around Nigeria.

Nigeria needs a smart, proactive, charismatic articulatetive, and pragmatic leader, who will move this nation forward. Nigeria requires a leader who will identify problems before they occur and solve them. Nigeria needs a leader who will uphold and institutionalize democracy rather than uphold and institutionalize himself. These are the qualities president Obansanjo will never have even if he wants to.

Nigeria requires a leader that will continue with the one good legacy that I believe the president Obasanjo administration has given Nigeria. This legacy is that with the right people appointed to head ministries and parastatals ‘good governance’ can be achieved. This legacy is the secret of the marginal success of president Obasanjo in his secondterm in office. I believe that any proactive and charismatic leader that follows this example will achieve much more in 4 years.