New Page 2

‘Encircling’ Governments

Abdullah Musa

While reading either a management or marketing book, I came across a reference to a Japanese marketing strategy, when they wanted to launch their earth moving equipment (Komatsu), while Caterpillar was then the dominant world brand; they tagged their assault of the dominance as “encircling” Caterpillar. I believe they were symbolizing the encirclement of preys by predators, making sure it had no escape route.

In choosing this topic, I am more guided by the desire to make Governments to work for the governed, rather than an attempt to vanquish it, the Niger Delta style. Governments over the ages had been really powerful: from the tyranny of absolute monarchs to the absolutism of Communist regimes, and to the now terrorized citizenry in Western nations. In the West, it may be safe to opine that their Governments are tired of democracy, tired of citizens who have taken rights to extreme levels such that they no longer have any form of restraint. The war on terror and the perpetual terror-scare may be the set of weapons chosen to rein-in Western population gone ‘haywire’.

Our discourse is not however with what occupies the minds of the leaders of America and Britain. We are occupied with our own worries: what do you do with Governments: do you ignore them? Or do you simply do as they tell you? Should you or not, have any expectation from them? Are you tempted to compare your governments with those of others? Would an African be ready to go through the hellish experience of Western citizens when they were paying horrendous prices in order that technological existence is spurred?

These are questions which may be deemed un-necessary; for nobody is asking us to do that; for we are in most cases left to our own designs, in so far we are willing to leave the leaders to their own designs. The scenario of us being leaderless is something we would not want to comprehend. Whether Governments deliver or they don’t, they seem to be better than none. What I find frightening is the acceptance of the status quos: the status quos being that lapses must either remain unsolved, or even allowed to fester; to develop into something more horrible. And unfortunately, the human mind learns to accommodate that which seems unbeatable, even though the definition of it being undesirable remains firmly in the heart.

If as we had alluded earlier holds true: that government work is done without any prior target in mind, then classification of Ministries and departments may just be a waste of time. If a Ministry is created to harness water resources, for human and agricultural consumption, one would have wished there are set targets to be achieved; and that should form the basis for budgetary allocations; rewards or punishments.

If for thirty years you are still saddled with the problem of water supply, then the ministry and those who run it have not justified their existence. But that is just it: you cannot force a decision; about closure, punishment or even analysis. You continue to scratch your festering sore and live-on. You cannot do otherwise.

A Ministry does exist to take care of the educational needs of a given society. However for a student to move from secondary school to university he needs to pass examinations. You may find that in a given school, year-in year-out, the failure rate is say 70% and the success rate 30%. No analysis is called for. No censure. No rebuke. And of course you are mad if you suggest the closure of Ministry of education for poor performance: semi-literacy is better than illiteracy; untreated water is better than no water at all; and of course a road full of potholes is better than riding on a donkey for instance.

If we take it that you should not be so un-kind as to insist that a cripple should or must run one hundred meters in so and so seconds, we may then be expected to sympathize with our leaders, to accept and pamper their limitations; to give them laurels for poor performance, if that is the only performance they are capable of. Is this an insane deduction? Most likely. But this type of deduction is what we are expected by our conduct, when we are derided for wanting our leaders to aspire to higher standards. Why should it be that students keep failing, and as drop-outs resort to drugs and other unwholesome conduct? We are told not to expect answers. What is responsible for the failure? What can be done to raise the standards? Deafening silence of the status quos!

You set up a Ministry of Agriculture. Why do that? The answer may be to introduce society to modern farming methods. Fifty years later, the farmers still stoop to back-breaking chores; and you give him a bowl of modern fertilizer to ensure higher production! And this will go on as long as there are no people with ability to force the Governments to aspire to higher performance, higher standards. People have to identify the Ministries or Departments that have direct bearing on their lives, their professions or trade. Then they have to ‘encircle’ that Ministry. This they should do not as Hausa-Fulani encircle them for petty contracts; but to encircle them in order to ensure better, higher performance. We all need good and safe drinking water, but we are not able to force its delivery. We want our children to be educated from funds in the public treasury. We are unable to determine the quantum of financing necessary, nor the quality of delivery. We sit as beggars, and wait for the crumbs of the services which have petrified.

To repel my attacks, one may say that it is the leader who should extract from the public employees the best service possible: paying them well, motivating them, and punishing them severely where they tend to favor irresponsibility. If leaders are elected by people for the qualities that the electorate perceived in the candidate, or for the actions that would stem from such character, then a bad leader emerges because the electorates are not equipped to make the right choice. How can an illiterate person make a choice of leader who would provide the best education? We in Nigeria say that it is possible. Modern education came via the medium of English language. The past time in the North is to deride English language. This is good. It shows we have identity. But then; how do you learn the sciences and other forms of knowledge when you have not endeavored to domesticate such knowledge into your own vocabulary? You have no answer because nobody can compel you to answer; nobody has the right to order you to think and behave responsibly.

So if the masses groan, scream and whine for better governance, what do we tell them? Tell them flat out they cannot have it! What of this entire chest- beating about a kasa, a tsare, a raka? It is good by at least 10%. It is of no value to you to follow all the tortuous process to get the candidate to power, and then leave him to be an emperor when it comes to how he and his cronies handle your treasury. The masses are fed sentiments by one set of oppressors in order to dethrone or reject another set. Once successful, all oppressors have the same type of fangs; and insatiable lust for the public funds.

In the final analysis, amongst which group would I rather be? I would rather be amongst the indifferent: indifferent by choice, the choice to waste away; no any aspiration which I cannot spur on, nor any trust which must be betrayed.