Clueless and inept leadership of the past including mismanagement of resources, are responsible for the emergence of abject poverty in Nigeria. The high poverty margin is partly responsible for several security challenges we are facing as a nation.
Poverty is today endemic in our once buoyant Nigeria and generational in nature. In a more general sense, it is widespread, traversing the entire landscape but more prevalent in Northern region when measured by different statistical indicators of Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) and other measures of inequality like the Gini Coefficient (GC), Intensity of Poverty (IP) and Human Development Index (HDI), of the World Bank and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). This poverty disequilibrium manifests in different ways and reflects on many unusual, if not, abnormal social behaviors which present a challenge to our sociologists, psychologists and psychiatrists to diagnose and explain the root causes. Poverty is also generational to a large extent and socially hereditary, traversing from generation to generation.
The foregoing hypothesis holds firm by the current observable phenomenon that poverty begets violence and crime as manifested in the unceasing Boko Haram insurgence, banditry attacks, cattle-rustling, kidnapping, armed robbery, ethno-religious jingoism as championed by TY Danjuma (former Defence Minister) Nnamdi Kanu of IPOB and Sunday Igboho of Oduduwa Republic secessioni fame and other societal ills. Poverty is now the number one cause of the various societal problems bedeviling Nigeria; hence any investment in managing the phenomenon by government and the private sector is a well thought out idea. And, poverty is therefore a major challenge to all tiers of government and well meaning Nigerians today.
According to Governor Bala Muhammed of Bauchi state, and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) 2023 presidential hopeful, the consequences of poverty pervade the society: “It affects the lives of the poor and the rich. It is no respecter of tribe or religion, urban or rural, age, gender or region. It accounts for excessive greed in government and all the cases of malfeasances displayed in our public service amongst political appointees and technocrats, as well as people in the private sector”.
From the above quoted statement, one can understand that the unwholesome condition is a reaction to the background of the public and private sector managers who, because of their relatively deprived or poor background, want to amass wealth to take care of their future after disconnection from the source and those of their children and, even grand children.
The foregoing reminds me of John Maynard Keynes, the father of modern economic thought, who in his seminal book, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money” in 1935, taught the World how governments can manage economic disequilibrium in the society with strong fiscal policy measures embedded in strong employment generating programmes that can engage low income earners and the unemployed. Keynes thesis which was espoused in the General Theory took root by what the economics of Western Europe were experiencing after the First World War when the laissez faire economic philosophy ruled the world economic thought until 1929 when it crashed into the Great Depression that lingered till the Second World War. The war brought to the fore rampant poverty in Europe and to the Germans, led by Adolf Hitler, and, associated the phenomenon to the unwholesome business practices of the European Jews, which according to Hitler, demanded the extermination of over six million Jews and his desire to conquer the modern world, especially France, Great Britain, Russia, Portugal, Hungary and few others. And, when his ally, Japan, attacked the United States of America (USA), the USA, joined the Allied Forces to finally defeat Adolf Hitler in 1945.
Governor Bala added: “During the war period, scholars read and digested Keynes General Theory and learned how to solve economic problems of poverty and employment through good economic management. His key antidote to poverty and unemployment was through using fiscal policies, especially those dealing with massive public expenditure to create economic activities and employment. While Britain, Keynes home country tarried on his advice on economic management, the Americans bought his philosophy of “hook, line and sinker,” marshalling development and solving poverty and unemployment through massive fiscal policies, by expending large sums of money on building highways, rail lines, electricity grids, telephone lines, schools, health institutions and portable water supply systems. In Bauchi state, my government keyed into the hook, line and sinker philosophy just like the Americans did to salvage America from economic catastrophe. That is the philosophy we are presently implementing for the good of our people, a sustainable economy with a bright future and happy people”.
The American experience has since become a model for the world in fighting poverty and promoting development. And, for our general good, Nigeria has to take a cue from the American experience and learn from the experience of Governor Bala Muhammed on how best the policy is implemented for the good of all.
From the foregoing, the correct approach to solving unemployment and poverty related problems is massive fiscal expenditure on infrastructure not distribution of second hand automobiles, motor cycles, tricycles, grinding and sewing machines as is the case with most of our political office holders and snoring national lawmakers that can hardly differentiate good representation with economic development and empowering the people for sustainable economic self-reliance.
Another conventional approach to dealing with poverty is educating the generality of the people in the society. In Nigeria, the Northern region under the first premier of the region, Sir Ahmadu Bello Rabah (Sardaunan Sokoto), tried to keep future poverty in the region in check through the aggressive pursuit of free and qualitative education programme spiced with religious education in the early 1960s. Unfortunately, before the policy started bearing the desired fruits, the regional government was toppled. If it had continued as planned, the outcome of the programme could have manifested in later years as the region to embark on the best multidimensional poverty index and other poverty measurements amongst all the regions of the country. But it was robbed the benefits of the policy, and forced back to the drawing table in the midst of uncertainties and nonsensical leadership laced with ethno-religious sentiments and a fractured unity.
Therefore, it is safe to conclude that “Education begets Economic Opportunities and Employment”, not distribution of second hand vehicles, tricycles, motor cycles etc as periodic palliatives that come handy when election period approaches.
To complement the pursuit of education and invest massively on infrastructure, poverty consequences are mitigated through various Social Protection Programmes (SPPs) as in the Scandinavian countries as well as Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany, Portugal and so on. Similarly, the United States of America started its SPP in 1935 aiming at the aged, unemployed, disaster survivors and those with disabilities. In pure economic terms, SPP improves income equality by smoothened income distribution through moving incomes from high income earners to poor households.
From research conducted, presently, there are various forms of federal and some state SPPs that are pursuit of increased income equality and welfare in the country but are largely uncoordinated and not data driven. A more organized and synchronized system is said to be under consideration by the federal government under the National Social Protection Programme (NSPP).
One of the major problems that trailed previous and current social protection programmes like other laudable programmes in Nigeria is sustainability and the opportunity allowed to be hijacked by national lawmakers that make politics out of the good programme to divert attention and shield their lapses and poor legislation.
And NSPP must therefore plan against this to succeed. To sustain the evolving programme, government must ensure the inclusion of all the poor and vulnerable persons and also exclude those that are outside the class but claim a need for support under NSPP. Therefore, the programme must be designed with the collection and management of “reliable data” on the poor and the vulnerable; a virile funding arrangement and an enabling law against cases of stealing, other corrupt practices and hijack for performance deceit by empty national lawmakers.
For NSPP to have a second footing, an innovative and well researched fiscal space must evolve with minimal reliance on the private sector and international donors for grants.
Such a fiscal space must also be outside the prime eyes of government’s budgetary process because the budget depends on earnings of the federal government that are susceptible to the unpredictable crude oil and other earnings.
Therefore, in addition to re-engineering the fiscal financial space by government, future sources of funds for the NSPP should be guided by universality, that is, everybody should contribute one way or another from the formal and informal sectors of the economy as well as from the private and public organizations since a well-developed NSPP will benefit all actors in the economy.
The programme should not be created through legislation for fear of hijack and infestation by nepotism and corruption but through an Executive Order duly protected by law against filtration.
With this in mind, the tentative suggestions are (I) a manageable additional levy to companies should be introduced like the Education Tax that funds the Education Trust Fund (ETF); (ii) a token levy on all Personal Incomes of all employees, political office holders and pensioners in federal and state service. (iii) small percentage charge on all telephone calls; (iv) a token levy values on all imports into Nigeria; (v) a token levy on all cargoes discharged in our ports; (vi) a token levy on all earnings from the Sovereign Wealth Funds and (vii), relocation of funds for subsidies on oil, fertilizers etc to a Social Protection Fund (SPF). The rationale here is to “rob” the rich and wealthy Paul to “pay” the poor wretched Peter to restore confidence in government and reduce the rate of crime in the country created by poverty and unemployment. Local governments must be involved directly in the programme to save public funds from diversion, cases of malfeasance and channeled to inconsequential bogus projects that have no bearing on the lives and comfort of the majority.
Muhammad is a commentator on national issues
