JOB CREATION REMAINS THE ISSUE

The federal government set up last year a high-profile committee on job-creation. It is a good coincidence that the committee headed by industrialist Aliko Dangote has come up with its report at a time of rising expectations. As President Goodluck Jonathan takes oath of office for another tenure on May 29, it would not be out of place for the jobless to hope that they would be employed in the economy before the tenure ends.

It would be strange if the President’s speech on that day does not have some lines on poverty alleviation. At least 50% of the population is believed to be languishing below the poverty line. Now, you cannot be talking seriously about poverty reduction without confronting the menacing scourge of joblessness. Worse still, the socio-economic plague is ravaging mostly the youths.

 Officially, unemployment rate is put at 19.7%. However, to the victims of unemployment, such figures from the National Bureau of Statistics would appear to be a gross understatement. In fact, if you put the unemployment rate at 90% to a young man who has been jobless for five years after graduation; he would not perceive it as an exaggeration. The poor and jobless have no patience for technical finesse in discussing this serious problem.

The public perception of unemployment rate is somewhat reminiscent of an anecdote reported by a former Chairman of the United States Federal Reserve Bank, Alan Greenspan, in his memoirs entitled “The Age of Turbulence”. According to Greenspan, during the presidential campaigns in 1980, Ronald Reagan as the republican candidate accused the then incumbent democrat, Jimmy Carter, of mismanaging the American economy to the point of a “depression”.

Reagan’s economic experts were worried about the technical connotations of their candidate’s statement. Their professional colleagues on the other side would readily laugh at the seeming economic illiteracy of their candidate. So they took time to explain to Reagan that what American was experiencing then was only a “recession” and that a depression would be a more calamitous affair in the economic sphere. The experts were satisfied that the candidate had got a good grasp of the technical distinction between a recession and a depression.

However, when Reagan got the opportunity to show his mastery of the issue he did not fail to impress his audience. He simply put the matter like this: “A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. And a recovery is when Jimmy carter loses his”.  Reagan’s statement instantly became a one liner. Newspapers quoted him widely. Beyond wit, Reagan was attempting to humanise economic debates. What he did was actually a demystification of technicalities. Sometimes, experts become so engrossed with their fanciful play with statistics and graphs that they appear to forget that the issue is first about human beings.

So it is understandable if the official 19.7% unemployment rate does not sound believable to the millions of victims of joblessness out there. Yet, that does mean it is not scientifically computed.

It is interesting that the economics of job-creation is not confined to the conference of experts and policy makers. It is daily being discussed on the street by the people themselves. Now and then you watch television footages of self-employed artisans lamenting that the greatest threat to their businesses is poor supply of electricity. All that these people in the informal sector demand from government are policies that would make power supply stable.  They say with steady power supply their businesses would expand. In other words,   given the right business climate they can create jobs. They don’t require any expertise to see the linkage between the electricity issue and lack of jobs.

The report of the Dangote committee is replete with analyses which are easy to digest. The recommendations issuing from the analysis are coupled with the strategy of implementation. There are even suggested practical initiatives that could be taken by both the public and private sectors to achieve the goal of massive job creation. The initiatives are suggested for the in sectors of agriculture, entrepreneurship, education, health, entertainment, sports etc.

It is also noteworthy that the committee drew lessons from the examples of other countries that are at different levels of development. Some of the countries are South Africa, Chile, Indonesia, United States, Germany, China and Norway.

Instructively, the committee singles out Brazil as an example in the conclusion of the report. The committee puts the comparison like this : “We can be inspired by the economic transformation of Brazil especially as there are key similarities between Nigeria and Brazil namely oil and gas production, large tracts of arable land, a large population…”.

The turning point for Brazil came nine years ago with the election of former labour leader, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. By the time he handed over to his successor recently, there was a global acknowledgement, from left and right, that a qualitative improvement had been recorded in the lives of people who were poor and jobless before he won election. About 44 million people were moved above poverty line and a 29 million-strong middle class was created.

In fact, Lula was quoted in the report as having said that Brazil has recorded “one of the lowest unemployment rates in the history of humanity.” His economic management was focused on jobs, jobs and jobs. No doubt, the Brazilian example is inspiring.  Remember, however, that it required a Lula to bring about the transformation. Will Jonathan be our own Lula?  Maybe that question is beyond the scope of the report. But that is the challenge as the report is being discussed.

The report should be widely discussed beyond the circuit of policy makers.  Such informed discussions could help in nudging the Jonathan administration to take the implementation of acceptable recommendations seriously. State governments should also find useful recommendations in the report.

What makes the Brazilian example exceptional is that a good mix of policies in the eight years of Lula was the basis of the success story. There must be an efficient economic management for poverty to be reduced and jobs created as has been done in Brazil. This typology of economic management is yet to be embraced in Nigeria. The economy here has been managed to achieve jobless growth.  Officialdom is content with trumpeting growth indices.

 An economic management regime in which 80% if budgets goes into recurrent expenditure with little for capital projects is inimical to job-creation and poverty reduction. Expenditures on to infrastructure, for example, could help in job-creation.

Before the report of the Dangote committee, there was an earlier one put together by World Bank experts entitled “Putting Nigeria to Work: A Strategy for Employment and Growth”. Issues of productivity, skills, access to finance and infrastructure gap are also well discussed in the World Bank report. There are other studies on Nigeria by the International Labour Organisation and similar bodies. 

What makes the report of the Dangote committee particularly important is that it was the federal government itself that commissioned it. Like earlier reports, this one, again, has shown that job-creation remains a central issue of economic management.

Nigeria's woes;beyond free and fair elections

by Olufemi Leasu on Tuesday, May11, 2011 at 1:12am

The lamentation and exhortations about corruption, laziness and indiscipline only deal with the symptoms. It is like attempting to cure malaria by dealing only with high body temperature while ignoring the bacteria infection in the bloodstream.

A serious attempt at getting a cure would go for the bacteria in the bloodstream even if it attempts to lower the temperature by cooling the body. What is happening in Nigeria now is the refusal to even look at the bacteria in the bloodstream and only remain with eyes glued on the thermometer lamenting the rise in temperature.

Ignorance is not the same as illiteracy. Knowledge is not the same as literacy, or, even the same as the acquisition of educational certificates, or, academic ranks. Some of the most highly literate Nigerians, and the most highly educated, by virtue of their certificates and ranks, are some of the most ignorant over many crucial areas of natural and human existence and over our national life, like our geography, history, economy and politics. Democracy is built on the equality of citizens; the freedom of these citizens to associate with one another for the realization of their ideals and the defense and promotion of their interests; and the freedom of these citizens to choose between the different political platforms of various political parties and candidates, and see to the actualization of the platforms they have voted for, if their choices win. This is only possible if the citizens are well informed about their country, their governments, their circumstances and the various interests contending in the various parties. To put all this in a very simple way, this requires knowledge. Without knowledge, the association, the citizens enters into is one based on irrational, but no less powerful, instincts of fear, greed, envy, fascination, or, hatred. This is because the citizen entering into this association has no rational basis for assessing whether, or, not it serves his, or her, interest and promotes and defends his, or, her, ideals and principles. Without knowledge, the exercise of the democratic right to choose lacks a stable and rational basis and, therefore, does not enable the citizen making the choice to make the party and the candidates accountable. In short, credible elections and democratic politics is not possible when the citizens who constitute the electorate are ignorant about the basic elements of the country, its economy, its political system, and its position in world affairs.

Nigeria cannot start rebuilding democracy without a clear public understanding of, what actually is a free and fair election and the meaning and the basis of the electoral mandate derived from such an election. The campaign for what is called “change” has promoted the false impression that the freedom and fairness of an election is determined solely by what happens on the day of the election; and has nothing to do with the whole political process of party formation, party control, the nomination of candidates, the election campaign and the extent of the democratic space within which these are conducted. There are six aspects of an election which determine whether, or not, it is democratic, free and fair. . The first aspect has to do with the composition of the electorate. The second aspect has to do with the formation and control of the political parties putting up candidates for the election. The third aspect has to do with the nomination of the candidates. The fourth aspect has to do with the election campaign. The fifth aspect has to do with the polling, the counting and recording of votes and the announcement of results. The sixth aspect has to do with the operations of the judicial system in its handling of the election petitions.
The extent to which an election is free and fair, is determined by the freedom with which the adult citizens of a country can participate in it as voters. In an electoral system in which primaries are conducted by political parties for members of each party to elect their candidates, this freedom of participation has to include the freedom to form political parties which can contest elections and to vote for, or against, candidates in the party primaries. This freedom was denied to the citizens of Nigeria in all the parties’ primaries, from presidential to governorship, state assemblies, senate and House of Representatives flags which produced all the major presidential candidates and other flag bearers of their respective parties. The conventions and party primaries of the ruling PDP and all the so called opposition parties cannot by any democratic standards be regarded as free and fair. This is because the PDP itself ANPP and AD that gave birth to all the mushroom opposing parties were almost decreed into existence in 1999 by the Armed Forces Ruling Council in a jumbled manner. In fact, the formation of the parties originally, violated all universally acceptable democratic principles of party formation. TO BE CONTINUED.
Meanwhile Congratulations  Dr. Goodluck Ebele Johnathan(GCFR) C-in-C Federal Republic of Nigeria.