WILL BAMANGA TUKUR’S MAGIC HELP TO RE-FOCUS THE P.D.P.?

By Gabriel Omonhinmin A person, who makes the difference either for good or bad in any society, is often said to possess the attributes of vision, discipline and passion. These attributes experts argue, result in an effective leadership when properly directed. We are, however, told that there is a huge difference between leadership that works and leadership that endures. If this is the case, why is it that fifty-two years after Nigeria’s independence, there is nothing to show for it; that the leadership is working, and there is no sign that the country’s leadership will ever survive the reckless political manoeuvring presently the order of the day. Sometimes in April 1983, some few days before the passage to the great beyond of Mallam Aminu Kano, the then People’s Redemption Party (PRP) leader, rhetorically asked during an interview with the Nigeria Television Authority (NTA) the following questions: - What is the purpose of political power, why do people seek political office. Why do people want to rule? Twenty-nine years after his death, the answers to these questions have not yet been found by the Nigerian political class. I am compelled to draw our minds to these questions; once again, because the country’s political elites seem not to have learnt any lesson all these years. The question that comes to mind now that the Bamanga Tukur’s led National Exco has effectively taken control of affairs at the PDP’s Headquarters in Abuja, is, will Bamanga’s Exco through its leadership style make any attempt to answer Mallan Aminu Kano’s questions. Will Bamanga as a person be able to navigate his ways through the shark infested waters of the PDP, Will PDP under his leadership be in a position to provide the much desired direction that will make Nigeria an enduring country? As Nigerians await negative or positive judgement of history on the Bamanga’s tenure as P.D.P. chairman, one thing is clear for all to see, in every department of our national life, we are performing below our potential, and this can no longer be allowed to continue. The reason(s) why this is so, is not farfetched. The Nigerian populace for a very long time now, constitutes one huge, helpless electoral dupe in the hands of our political elite or more appropriate our political victimisers. If Nigeria as a country must make progress this situation must change for the better. Bamanga Tukur for those who know him closely is said to be a man of conscience. One who can be able to do something drastic to help change the ugly political and economic situation in the country, if given the chance. The above reason they argue is responsible for his immense success and breakthroughs in the business world. He is said to have been fair, to those who encountered him in the course of business. An attestation to this fact is the unguided disgust expressed by one of his business associates, on the 17th of April, 2012, in his residence in Abuja. The man in question strolled into Bamanga’s expansive residence in Abuja and met a large army of politicians waiting outside as well as in the inner reception of the house to see their national chairman. The man could not hold back his surprise. He therefore asked Bamanga’s Personal Secretary, who was too busy to pay any particular attention to him these questions. “You mean the old man is going to see all these people tonight!, by the time he finished seeing everyone here, what time will be left for him to sleep and to attend to other businesses?” “He continued, “Not bothered about the feelings of the politicians around him at that time, “I am still very surprised, why Dr. Tukur should chose to leave the quiet and more organised business world for politics, where anything goes. I honestly wish him luck.” He lamented. When conscience governs vision, discipline and passion, leadership endures and changes the world for good. In order words, moral authority makes formal authority work. Moral authority is what I think, Dr. Bamanga Tukur, brought to the Peoples Democratic Party as National Chairman’s office. Hence, one hopes that in spite of all odds, he might be able to make the much required difference in changing the ruling party for good. Presently, the PDP and other political parties in the country, have an embarrassing odour, which most decent people in our country cannot stand. One only hopes that, Dr. Tukur will help clean up Nigeria’s political system, so as to make politics attractive to reasonable men and women. As a matter of fact, qualities that represent leadership that works are not in short supply in Nigeria. If this is the case, why is Nigeria still under developed, people may ask? A known fact is that one of the commonest manifestations of under-development is a tendency among the ruling elite to live in a world of make-believe and unrealistic expectations. Surprisingly, last two weeks, the Nigerian President, Dr Goodluck Jonathan, decided to make a clean break from the past, and resolve to tell his party leadership nothing but the home truth. The President, speaking at a dinner in honour of the National Working Committee of the Peoples Democratic Party in Abuja, created an avenue for Dr. Bamanga Tukur, to make the ruling party take its place in our national history. The president who said “he does not want to be admonished like a schoolchild, told the PDP executives that despite being president, he was not above the party”. President Jonathan went further to say equivocally, “that other members of the Executive arm of government as well as the legislature were ready to respect party supremacy”. My interpretation of this statement is that the much desired leadership and discipline could be achieved if the Peoples Democratic Party executive members are ready to provide leadership. Hopeless as it may seem today, Nigeria is not beyond redemption. And to pull her back and turn the fortune around is clearly beyond the contrivance of mediocre leadership. It calls for greatness. The track records of Dr. Tukur show that he has what it takes to reverse the poor leadership that has bedevilled the PDP for some time now. One point that must not be lost, is that Nigerians are what they are only because their leaders are not what they should be. The challenge the Bamanga Tukur led exco must take on from now, is the basic element of ensuring that intellectual rigour is brought back into political party thought. These were the qualities our founding fathers were known for. The poverty of thought exhibited by present day political leaders must not be allowed to continue, if Nigeria must make any meaningful progress as a country. Governance should not be left alone to Mr. President and other elected party officials. The political party under which they rose to power must be seen to provide formidable support, as their successes or government policies will rob off on the party. This is the only way a party can be respected. The problem with Nigeria presently is failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with our country. According to Achebe, a renowned novelist, “Nigeria’s problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility and to the challenges of personal example, which are the hallmarks of true leadership”. Nigeria is not yet beyond change and it will certainly change for better, if its present day discovered leaders have the will, the ability and the vision. Such people are rare in any time or place. It is the duty of a formidable political party such as the PDP to find these people in the course of nation building. The party again has a duty to enlighten the citizens and to lead the way in their discovery and to create an atmosphere conducive to their emergence. If conscious efforts are not made, good leaders, like good money, will be driven out by the bad. Mr. Chairman, Nigeria has many thoughtful men and women of conscience, a large number of talented people. You may ask, what is the likely reason(s) why these patriots have refused to make the impact expected of them, in our national lives? The simple answer is that they are prevented from making any meaningful impact, due to the selfishness, corruption, socio-injustice and gross inequities exhibited by those in power. The lack of organisational ability on the part of political parties in the country is another contributory factor to this national dilemma. Let us consider just a few notable leaders from modern history, who made the expected change in the lives of their countries. Julius Nyerere of Tanzania in the early 60s had the vision of building a new nation, united and free from foreign interference. He disciplined himself to learn how to recruit, supply and keep people from deserting the Tanzania Revolution. Under his Presidency, Tanzania slipped from being the largest exporter of food in Africa to the biggest importer of food. However, he made no attempt to cling to power or to influence his successors, who restored capitalism. Nyerere, had wanted to make Tanzania self-reliant, free from indebtedness to former colonial powers or to the West. Like other leaders of former colonies, he saw colonialism and capitalism as responsible for the subjugation of their people. He never enriches himself at his nation's expense. One shining example Nyerere brought to bear on the Revolution, was the selfless leadership at the top, such as unambiguous refusal to be corrupt or tolerate corruption at the fountain of authority. This, expectedly, radiated powerfully and sensationally through the length and breadth of Tanzania. The first example was when news filtered around, (not from government organs) but from street gossip’s that President Nyerere after paying his children’s school fees had begged his bank to give him a few months’ grace on the repayment of the mortgage on his personal house. The other occasion was when President Nyerere, insisted that anyone in his cabinet or party hierarchy who had any kind of business interests must either relinquish them or leave his official or party position. Ex-President Nyerere, who made sure, his directives were not regarded as mere technicality of putting the business interest in escrow but giving it up entirely, made sure that powerful Ministers alongside formidable leaders of his political party, TANU, and Women, left his cabinet. Mohandas K. Gandhi was instrumental in establishing India as an independent state, though he never held an elected or appointed office. He had no formal position from which to lead people. Gandhi’s moral authority created such strong social and cultural norms that it ultimately shaped political will. He governed his life by an awareness of a universal conscience that resided within the people, the international community. Margaret Thatcher was the first female leader of a major industrialised nation. She served three terms as Prime Minister of Great Britain, the longest continuous premiership in the twentieth century. Her critics are not few, but she was passionate about urging people to assume the discipline of personal responsibility and to build-reliance, and she was passionate about bolstering free enterprise in her country. During her tenure in British politics, she helped lift Britain out of economic recession. For President Jonathan’s economic transformation agenda to be successful, PDP as a party in government needs to be disciplined. The party also needs men and women of goodwill, not men or women who pretend to be “nationalists” when it suited them only to retreat into tribe to check their more successful rivals from other parts of the country. Once this is done, the PDP will once again be re-focused politically and will be result oriented. Mr. Omonhinmin is a Media Consultant based in Lagos.

WILL BAMAGA TUKUR’S MAGIC, HELP RE-FORCUS THE P.D.P.?

By Gabriel Omonhinmin It is a known fact, that a person, who makes the different either for good or ill in any society, are peoples who possesses the attributes of vision, discipline and passion. These attribute results in an effective leadership when properly directed. There is, however, a huge difference between leadership that works and leadership that endures. The question that comes to mind epecially now that the Bamaga Tukur led nationa Exco seem to have taken control of affairs at the P.D.P.’s Headquarters in Abuja, is, will this Exco be able to make the much required difference in P.D.P., or more appropriate will Bamaga be able to navigate his ways through the shark infested waters of the P.D.P. Will P.D.P. under the leadership of Bamaga Tukur be in a position to provide political leadership that will endure in Nigeria? These are questions begging for answer. But as Nigerians await negative or positive judgement of history on the led Tukur’s tenure, past records have, however, shown that Bamaga is a man with conscience. He has not only made a huge success out of his adventure into business, he is also known to be fair to all those who encountered him in the course of business. An attestation to this fact is the unguided disgust expressed by one of Bamaga’s business associated, on the 17th of April, 2012 in Bamaga’s residence in Abuja. The man in question strolled into Bamaga’s house in Abuja and met a large army of politicians waiting at the inner reception to see him. He could not hold back his surprise. The man in question asked Bamaga’s Personal Secretary who was too busy to pay any particular attention to him “you mean the old man is going to see all these people to night, by the time he finishes seen everyone here, what time will he have to left to sleep and to attend to other businesses?” “He continued, “I am still very surprise, why Dr. Tukur choose to leave the quiet and more organised business world for politic, where anything goes. I honestly wish him luck.” He lamented. When conscience governs vision, discipline and passion, leadership endures and changes the world for good. In order words, moral authority makes formal authority work. Moral authority is what I think, Dr. Bamaga Tukur brought to the Peoples Democratic Party as National Chairman. Hence, one expects that in spite of all odds, he might be able to make the much required difference in changing the ruling party for good. Presently, the P.D.P. and other political parties in the country, have an embarrassing odour, which most decent people in our society cannot stand. One only hope, Dr. Tukur will help clean up the country’s political system, so as to make politics attractive to reasonable men and women. As a matter of fact, qualities that represent leadership that works are not in short supply in Nigeria. If this is the case, why is Nigeria still under developed, people may ask? A known fact is that one of the commonest manifestations of under-development is a tendency among the ruling elite to live in a world of make-believe and unrealistic expectation. Surprisingly, the Nigeria President Goodluck Jonathan, last week, decided to make a clean break from the past, and resolve to tell his party leadership nothing but the home truth. The President, speaking at a dinner in honour of the National Working Committee of the Peoples Democratic Party in Abuja, created an avenue for Dr. Bamaga Tukur, to make the ruling party take its place in our national history. The president who said “he does not want to be admonished like a schoolchild, told the PDP executives despite being president he was not above the party”. President Jonathan went further to say, “that other members of the Executive arm of government as well as the legislature were ready to respect party supremacy”. My interpretation of this statement is that the much desired leadership and discipline could be achieved if the Peoples Democratic Party executive members are ready to provide leadership. Hopeless as she may seem today, Nigeria is not beyond redemption. And to pull her back and turn her around is clearly beyond the contrivance of mediocre leadership. It calls for greatness. The track records of Dr. Tukur shows, that he has what it takes to reserve the poor leadership that has bedevilled the P.D.P. for some time now. One point that must not be lost on us, is that Nigerians are what they are only because their leaders are not what they should be. The challenge the Bamaga Tukur lead execo must take on now, is the basic element of ensuring that intellectual rigour is brought back into political party thought. These were the qualities our founding fathers were known for. The poverty of thought exhibited by present day political leaders must not be allowed to continue, if Nigeria must make any meaningful progress as a country. Governance should not be left alone to Mr. President and other elected party officials. The political party under which they rose to power must be seen to provide formidable support, as their successes or government policies will rob off, the party. This is the only way a party can be respected. The problem with Nigeria presently is failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with our country. According to Achebe, “Nigeria problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility and to the challenges of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership”. Nigeria is not yet beyond change, Nigeria will certainly change for the better, if it today discovers leaders who have the will, the ability and the vision. Such people are rare in any time or place. It is the duty of a formidable political party such as the P.D.P. to find these people in the course of nation building. The party again has a duty to enlighten the citizenry and to lead the way in their discovery and to create an atmosphere conducive to their emergence. If conscious efforts are not made, good leaders, like good money, will be driven out by bad. Mr. Chairman, Nigeria has many thoughtful men and women of conscience, a large number of talented people. You may ask, what is the likely reason(s) why these patriots have refused to make the impact expected of them, in our national lives? The simple answer is that they are prevented from making any meaningful impact, due to the selfishness, corruption, and gross inequities exhibited by those in power. The lack of organisational ability on the part of political parties in the country is another contributory factor to this national dilemma. Let us consider just a few notable leaders from modern history, who made the expected change in the lives of their countries. Julius Nyerere of Tanzania in the early 60s had the vision of building a new nation, united and free from foreign interference. He disciplined himself to learn how to recruit, supply and keep people from deserting the Tanzania Revolution. Under his Presidency, Tanzania slipped from being the largest exporter of food in Africa to the biggest importer of food. However, he made no attempt to cling to power or to influence his successors, who restored capitalism. Nyerere had wanted to make Tanzania self-reliant, free from indebtedness to former colonial powers or to the West. Like other leaders of former colonies, he saw colonialism and capitalism as responsible for the subjugation of their people. He never enriches himself at his nation's expense. One shining example Nyerere brought to bear on the Revolution, was the selfless leadership at the top, such as unambiguous refusal to be corrupt or tolerate corruption at the fountain of authority. This expectedly, radiated powerfully and sensationally through the length and breadth of Tanzania. The first example was when news filtered around, (not from government organs) but from street gossip’s that President Nyerere after paying his children’s school fees had begged his bank to give him a few months’ grace on the repayment of the mortgage on his personal house. The other occasion was when he President Nyerere, insisted that anyone in his cabinet or party hierarchy who had any kind of business interests must either relinquish them or leave his official or party position. Ex-President Nyerere, who made sure, his directives were not regarded as mere technicality of putting the business interest in escrow but giving it up entirely, made sure powerful Ministers alongside formidable leaders of his political party TANU Women left his cabinet. Mohandas K. Gandhi was instrumental in establishing India as an independent stat though he never held an elected or appointed office. He had no formal position from which to lead people. Gandhi’s moral authority created such strong social and cultural norms that it ultimately shaped political will. He governed his life by an awareness of a universal conscience that resided within the people, the international community. Margaret Thatcher was the first female leader of a major industrial nation. She served three terms as prime minister of Great Britain, the longest continuous premiership in the twentieth century. Her critics are not few, but she was passionate about urging people to assume the discipline of personal responsibility and to build-reliance, and she was passionate about bolstering free enterprise in her country. During her tenure in British politics, she helped lift Britain out of economic recession. For President Jonathan’s economic transformation agenda to be successful, P.D.P. as a party in government needs to be discipline. The party also needs men and women of goodwill, not men and women who pretend to be “nationalists” when it suited them only to retreat into tribe to check their more successful rivals from other parts of the country. Once this is done, the P.D.P. will once again be re-focused politically. Mr. Omonhinmin is a Media Consultant based in Lagos.

AN EMPHATIC NO, TO GOVERNMENT PLANNED RE-MERGE OF VON WITH FRCN

BY GABRIEL OMONHINMIN I’m a huge champion of penny-pinching, but there are times when being miserly can be penny wise and pound foolish – as in stupid and destructive. I can’t help but point out that because it concerns me; I have no option but to join in the on-going debate, whether or not, it is proper for VON to be re-merged with FRCN, twenty-two years after it was excised from the then Nigerian Broadcasting Corporation, NBC. By virtue of the fact, that I worked as a senior member of the News Directorate of VON for fourteen years and interacted extensively with very many staff of the FRCN, both senior and junior, I am in a position to know so much about the workings in both organisations. Much as I welcomed the venerable Stephen Oronsanye panel’s recommendations, it is just and proper to point out areas of mistakes, so that these areas could be ratified before grave harm is done. That is the essence of this essay. For the benefit of the general public, it is appropriate to clarify the mandate of both stations. The FRCN main focus is to feed its Nigerian audience with local news development whereas Voice of Nigeria’s mandate is to broadcast the country’s view points to the rest of the world. The role of VON in the country’s foreign policy direction cannot be over emphasised. I am therefore compelled to give few instances when VON broadcast was helpful to the country’s foreign policy initiative. I was one of the correspondents that covered the Liberian civil war, at the heat of that country’s devastating crises, where Nigeria expended huge resources and men, the only source to accurately gauge Nigeria’s foreign policy drive outside the country then, was through Voice of Nigeria News broadcast. Nigerian Generals commanding troops in that country made it a point of duty daily to monitor Voice of Nigeria’s news broadcast. This to a large extent gave them a clear picture of the country’s foreign policy direction. As a matter of fact, I knew some soldiers, who made it a point of duty to monitor VON, especially Hausa, Fulfulde and Arabic news translation daily, as this was a kind of tonic required to boost their moral. Voice of Nigeria news was also the only source the Liberian elites at that time relied on, as they never completely trusted what were being dished out from other international news media, who obviously took sides in the crises. All the neighbouring countries to Liberia, made up of the MANU River region which Charles Taylor was working hard to destabilise, were daily looking forward to Voice of Nigeria news, to get information on where their helper would come from. I am, however, not saying that this function could no longer be carried out by VON if the organisation is eventually re-merged with FRCN. But one thing is certain; the station will never again be as effective in its primary assignment as it is now. Knowing the make-up of FRCN and VON, high level of intrigues, manipulation and fight for supremacy will be the other of the day. This will never in any way help neither stations nor the country. As a matter of fact, marked differences do exist between the diplomacy of old and the diplomacy of today. The only one way of settling international differences and the most persuasive method at government disposal is the word of honest men and women in any society. These men and women abound in Nigeria; they are people like Professors Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe and Emeka Anyaokwu just to mention a few. Presently, these national icons are not willing to speak to Voice of Nigeria, because of the way and manner the station is presently managed. For this situation to be reversed, and for the station to gain the respect of noble men and women in our society, the station needs to be properly structured. Nigeria, as a major player in present day international politics requires a reliable medium to air its views. This is where VON is needed most. Much as I have absolute respect for the person of Mr. Steve Oronsaye and I believe in some of his panel’s recommendations, His panel’s position that VON be re-merged with FRCN no doubt miss the point, the re-merger of both stations will not help the country as presently being envisage. Another point worth mentioning, is the fact that Nigeria, has not being lucky enough to appoint a man or woman, who actually knows what it takes to manage, the external image of a country like Nigeria. Without any iota of disrespect, people who have been at the helm of affairs in the country’s External Affairs Ministry had shown some degree of incompetence. Or better put, the country’s policy executors especially staffs of the External Affairs Ministry. They have been naive to recognize and take adequate advantage of the service of Voice of Nigeria in the country’s foreign police drive. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) for instance is attached to that country’s Home Office. In this regard, the British government hardly initiates any foreign policy without first, fully briefing the BBC or requesting for the station’s contribution. This is not the case with the Nigerian government. Instead of Voice of Nigeria being supervised by the External Affairs Ministry, the organisation is presently placed under the Ministry of Information. One is therefore not surprised, that the Information Ministry treats VON matters as they do to any other local station under their supervision. This attitude no doubt, hinders the performance of VON as an international broadcasting station. The way things are now, it is absolutely impossible for VON to compete effectively with other international radio stations, such as BBC, RFI and Dutchweller radio, Germany. To push further the importance other governments attach to their external broadcasting stations, the French government had ensured, for some years now, that Radio France International (RFI) set up a full fledge Hausa Service Station in Nigeria; because of the station’s large listening Hausa audience in Nigeria, this sub-station is presently operating from the premises of VON in Lagos. At the height of the crises resulting from the hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his Ogoni compatriots’ Nigeria’s External Affairs Minister then was Chief Tom Ikimi. When it became obvious that Nigeria was going to be sanctioned by the international community, the Voice of Nigeria, sought and got in touch with Chief Ikimi, who was already outside the country to attend the meeting where Nigeria was to be penalised. The Voice of Nigeria wanted to know from the Minister how he intends to manage the ugly development. Surprisingly, the Nigerian Minister of External Affairs, refused to speak with Voice of Nigeria. A few minutes after this encounter, the BBC correspondent then in Nigeria, rushed into VON office requesting for Chief Ikimi’s contact, and I obliged the correspondent. We could not believe our ears, when in the next hour, the Nigerian Minister for External Affairs was on BBC ranting, stating the position he had earlier refused to give to VON. Voice of Nigeria’s former Director of News then, Mohammed Okorejior, was so depressed that he could not hold back his emotions and the man wept. From the above picture, it is obvious that the Nigerian Foreign Affairs managers are largely to be blamed for the present lacklustre performance of Voice of Nigeria and the station inability to discharge its primary functions effectively. To be simply put, the re-merger of VON with FRCN will further compound these problems. Finally, I submit, that the purpose of diplomacy is neither the invention nor the pastime of some particular political system; it is an essential element in any reasonable relation between man on one hand and between nation and nation. An example is the recent modifications in diplomatic methods, with special reference to the problem of “open” and “secret” diplomacy and the difficulty of combining efficient diplomacy with democratic control. The role of a medium like the Voice of Nigeria is very vital if the country wants to be taken seriously in this new order. An effective VON will enable the whips to gauge the opinion of the country’s foreign policy direction in out and outside Nigeria. What is presently required is for VON to be immediately moved into the Ministry of External Affairs, and for the organisation to be further strengthened to carry out its function, as the country’s authentic voice. The station’s re-merger with FRCN will never help Nigeria. It will no doubt do more harm than good. Mr. Omonhinmin writes from Lagos.