The Note of April 11, 2007 on “Business and politics” included a commentary on that incident. The relevant extract from that Note is reproduced below. It is followed by a few observations on PDP’s recent fundraising.

Business and Politics (extract from April 11, 2007 Note)
“In the face of unfolding events, it has become critical for us, Private Sector Supporters for Good and Transparent Governance, to lend our voice to the debate on tenure extension. Our opinion is an affirmative yes to continuity of the present dispensation.

That’s because the government of the day has set in motion the crucial machinery for industrial growth, business development and the ultimate emergence of Nigeria as a leading economic power”.

These are the opening sentences of the notorious “wrap-around” advertisement that a private sector group used to campaign for support of the infamous Third Term or Tenure Elongation agenda - as published by one of the newspapers that carried it on April 23rd 2006.

Although the private sector operators described themselves as “supporters of good and transparent governance”, they chose not to reveal their names and institutional affiliations. This lack of transparency suggests that corporate governance in their respective institutions would leave much to be desired.

Furthermore, their decision to support tenure extension, which was exposed as unconstitutional and an example of bad governance by the National Assembly that killed it, also means that their understanding of what constitutes good governance in the public sector is defective.

Was this involvement of private sector operators in partisan political debate an aberration? Or, is it typical of what has been the pattern of the relationship between business and politics in the country since 1999?

The Economic Summit Group (NESG) that was launched in 1996 provided an umbrella organization within which private sector organizations interact and dialogue with governments. The key role played by the group in the production of “Vision 2010” under the Abacha administration is, perhaps, its greatest claim to fame. 

However, the dumping of Vision 2010 by Obasanjo's administration for the National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS) demonstrates the limits of NESG’s influence.

More revealing is the critical reference that a former economic adviser to the president made to the “self-centred and individualistic proposals by private sector operators (to government)” at the 12th NESG summit in June 2006.

In other words, individual businessmen and women seek to obtain from government functionaries advantages for themselves and their companies rather than seek to influence government policies for the collective benefit of the private sector or sub-sectors thereof (for example, manufacturing, oil and gas, banking and finance and so on).

This tension between group initiatives and individualistic self-promotion is also evident in how the business community leaders relate to political parties.

While Dr. Ndi Okereke -Onyuike is loudly routing for the PDP gubernatorial candidate in Anambra State, two other business moguls, Femi Otedola and Aliko Dangote, were at the airport to welcome the PDP presidential candidate on his return from alleged “treatment” in Germany in early March.

These blatant partisan political positions appear inspired by expectations of future personal advantages. This behavioural pattern contrasts with the practice in other countries where it is business associations that endorse political parties and candidates that espouse business-friendly policies. Of course, as elsewhere, individual businessmen and women in Nigeria are free to embrace politics as a vocation.

Once they choose this path, the same critical evaluation that applies to other political actors will also apply to them.

Observations on PDP’s recent fundraising

1. The blatant partisanship of our business magnates highlighted in the above extract was again manifest at the PDP’s recent fundraising aimed at mobilizing N10bn to meet the costs of erecting the party’s national secretariat in Abuja. Of the N6bn declared at the end of the event, one business mogul alone (Nigeria’s one and only billionaire) accounted for 50 per cent.

The total from business types combined would be close to 70 per cent of the N6bn raised at the event. Only an ignoramus would miss the implicit quid pro quo: the business moguls are “investing” to ensure that their parasitic and exploitative “economic” activities will be protected by the ruling party.

2. The contributions from PDP governors and other office holders are almost certainly from state and local government coffers.

Most of these political office holders who lived modestly, at best, before their new positions would need all their earnings to secure graduation from their previous social conditions.

In the circumstances, the substantial amounts they were required to contribute must have been at the expense of the citizens in the different states and local government areas. The denials of short-change by PDP leaders are unconvincing.

3. There is a sense in which the PDP secretariat project is a sign of delusion of grandeur: the leaders of the so-called largest party in Africa would like it to have the most imposing secretariat on the continent.

Don’t they know that the hood does not make the monk?   

4. Drawing attention to the widespread unemployment and poverty in the land, the Catholic Archbishop of Lagos, Cardinal Okogie, wondered why PDP is not mobilizing resources to fight these scourges. He described the fundraising event as scandalous.
 
Commentary: A Press Ombudsman

The decision of the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association of Nigeria (NPAN) to establish a Press Ombudsman is commendable.

According to the communiqué issued at the end of the Association’s Annual General Meeting held on November 13, 2008, the Ombudsman will be saddled with the responsibility of investigating and making recommendations on complaints by members of the public against the press.

This is good practice, consistent with what prevails in countries with a press that attaches importance to its fairness and credibility.

When established, it will be necessary for NPAN to ensure that the Press Ombudsman is a man/woman of high ability and integrity. It would also be necessary for the Office of the Ombudsman to be well-resourced in staffing, finance, equipment and supplies.

Finally, NPAN would need to demonstrate from the early years that the recommendations of the Press Ombudsman are given serious consideration, including wide publicity for the remedies provided to well-founded complaints.

You can also send reactions to: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it OR SMS only to: 08052202352.

Write Comment
Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Title:
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Be the first to comment on this article