What The Papers Say
Ghana Free Press, May 10, 1985
Defining ministerial responsibilities
Whenever it comes to evaluating the performance of any government, there can be no doubt that the calibre of Ministers of State becomes an important variable for consideration. Ministers as key personalities in any government, are the moving force who provide the very impetus and leadership for government work. The whole cabinet team thus becomes as it were the focal point around which government business moves or slows down.Accordingly, it is always imperative that only men of accomplishment, drive and level-headedness are appointed as Ministers of State.
Today's complex world of politics and economics requires that a country should have as Ministers men and women of imagination and vision, men who think big.
What Ministers normally are expected to do is to set the broad framework of politics and programmes and leave the actual detailed implementation to subordinates to civil servants who are trained to see to the implementation of government policies.
It is tempting for some Ministers to let their enthusiasm and general over-exuberance and devotion to their ministerial responsibilities carry them into territories of responsibilities which are better left to technocrats and their subordinates.
We have seen in many instances where Ministers of State have gone on record as punishing late-comers or ordering ad-hoc measures that normally fall within the purview of subordinate officers.
One can appreciate and sympathise with Ministers of State whose visions are clearly frustrated by the inertia of civil servants who refuse to do their part of the division of labour and thus compel Ministers to go outside their territory, but we still believe that ministerial responsibility is best executed when Secretaries succeed in ensuring that all respect and fulfil their schedules.
It should not under any circumstance take the Minister of Agriculture to see to the successful storage of food crops, because invariably other technocrats are responsible for that aspect of the government's agricultural policy.
What is required of the Minister of Agriculture is the setting of broad policy framework that will compel others to move towards the implementation of policy. We must move towards the creation of a society in which the principle of division of labour will be respected to the letter.
If we could also create a system in which policies are discussed and debated fully, then all and sundry will feel committed to the implementation of such policies and not sit down for others to constantly remind them about their tasks.
That means that when the government has set broad policies for the nation as a whole, each and every one charged with implementing any aspect of that programme must do his bit.
The government's much heralded Economic Recovery Programme can only succeed if and when bureaucrats play their role.
Then we can expect our Secretaries of State to limit them- selves to the initiation of ideas that will galvanise us all into action.
The Times, London, May 17, 1985
Dictators in khaki
When Nigeria's generals seized power nearly 18 months ago, the streets were full of Nigerians celebrating the downfall of Shehu Shagari's corrupt civilian administration and looking forward to a period of efficient army rule which, they believed, would restore the country's fortunes. The cheering has long since stopped. One civilian group after another has fallen foul of the army's measures. Few Nigerians now are willing to put in a good word for military rule. Today General Buhari's regime stands virtually on its own, and once again the omens for Nigeria are full of foreboding.One cause of the increasing tension in the country can be traced to Buhari's determination to impose austerity after years of waste and corruption. The government's measures, implemented with unprecedented vigour, have led to soaring unemployment, higher inflation, rising food prices and consumer shortages. Hundreds of thousands of workers have lost their jobs. Industry has been hard hit by import restrictions. No respite is in sight. Buhari has warned Nigerians that all they can expect is some "very tough" years ahead.
Much of this is, perhaps, inevitable. What is more disquieting is the army's growing tendency to act in a harsh and authoritarian manner regardless of the political consequences. Buhari's handling of civilian groups has become increasingly arbitrary. The Press - once the most outspoken in black Africa - have been effectively muzzled. Repressive action has been taken against students, academics, journalists and professional organisations. Politics have been driven underground. All this has helped to create a dangerous groundswell of resentment against the military. The Nigerian Labour Congress, normally noted for its caution, felt obliged to speak out on May Day against the Army's methods, warning that it was opening the door "to despotism and dictatorship". Lawyers have expressed their concern. Even more striking has been the public reaction to the military's decision to execute drug offenders; one civilian group after another has condemned the action as barbaric.
As successive governments in Lagos have found, Nigeria, beset by regional social and religious tensions, is an immensely difficult country to govern. Its history, more than most, has been marked by governments ill-fated in their handling of national affairs. Despite a promising start, General Buhari's regime is in danger of following the same tradition.
His government has no answers to the country's economic difficulties. Austerity in itself, however much it may be needed, provides no solution. Nor does the mass expulsion of illegal African immigrants which the military ordered last month. And meanwhile the government continues to reject IMF proposals which would provide Nigeria with massive credits, relieve shortages of consumer goods and industrial inputs and open the way for the restructuring of its trade debts.
Nor does the government have any sense of political direction. All that Nigerians have been promised is a continuation of military rule for the foreseeable future, and that, clearly, is a disagreeable prospect for an increasing number. General Buhari would do well to heed the appeals from his own countrymen for a more responsive government before repression becomes the only way by which he can stay in control.
