Friday, 30 January 2015

U.S. wireless spectrum auction raises record $44.9 billion

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission raised a record $44.9 billion in the auction of so-called AWS-3 airwaves that closed on Thursday, marking the highest point yet in the wireless industry's appetite for more spectrum.

Wireless carriers Verizon Communications Inc, AT&T Inc and T-Mobile US Inc, satellite TV provider Dish Network Corp and others vied for new slices of airwaves to satisfy the growing consumer demand for streaming video and other data-guzzling applications.

Regulators will disclose the winners of the auctioned spectrum licenses in the coming days.

The auction presented the largest opportunity for companies to buy new wireless spectrum since 2008. But it shattered the expectations of analysts and the FCC, barreling past the reserve price of $10.1 billion in the first week of bidding and more than doubling the haul of the biggest previous auction.

"By their actions, wireless carriers have demonstrated the importance of new spectrum," FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler told reporters on Thursday as he received congratulations from lawmakers and industry executives.

The proceeds will pay for a new $7 billion public safety network and boost the Treasury's coffers. Wheeler cited one forecast that the new spectrum might boost U.S. GDP by billions and add tens of thousands of new jobs.

The auction will also be important to Dish, which already owns similar airwaves whose value will now be crystallized for the first time. Its shares had hit an all-time peak during the course of the auction and rose 3.1 percent to $73.75 on Thursday afternoon.

The FCC now looks to 2016, when it plans to hold its largest and most complex auction yet of the low-frequency airwaves which are highly coveted for their strength and reach. Sprint Corp, which sat out the AWS-3 auction, is expected to join other bidders in that planned auction.

Investors have worried that AT&T and Verizon may have overspent in the AWS-3 auction, but analysts argue that more spectrum will help carriers expand their network capacity as they tackle intense competition in the near saturated wireless market.

Based on their debt-raising patterns, AT&T may have purchased more than Verizon, said Jonathan Chaplin, an analyst at New Street Research. He expects AT&T to pay between $20 billion to $22 billion and Verizon to spend in the range of $14 billion to $16 billion in the auction.

Canada's government plans to auction off similar AWS-3 airwaves in March.

U.S. prosecutor to drop insider trading charges over IBM deal


U.S. prosecutors said on Thursday they will drop charges against five men accused of insider trading ahead of an IBM Corp acquisition after an appellate court ruling limited the ability of authorities to pursue such cases.

At a court hearing, prosecutors in the office of U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan said they would submit paperwork by Feb. 4 to drop the charges after U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter rejected their unusual request to dismiss the indictments.

A dismissal by the judge would have allowed Bharara's office to appeal Carter's ruling last week that the December appellate court decision applied to the case. The decision resulted in the guilty pleas of four of the men being thrown out.

Andrew Bauer, a prosecutor, said that as a result of the heightened legal standard, "we do not have the requisite evidence to establish one of the elements of the crime."

Defense lawyers welcomed the decision. "We're all thrilled," said Catherine Redlich, a lawyer for former Euro Pacific Capital Inc trader Thomas Conradt.

Prosecutors said they reserved the right to refile charges later.

The case was the latest setback for prosecutors following a ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that reversed the insider trading convictions of hedge fund managers Todd Newman and Anthony Chiasson.

The appellate court held that prosecutors must prove a trader knew that the source of a tip received a benefit in exchange for the information. It also narrowed what constitutes a benefit, saying it cannot be only friendship.

Prosecutors last Friday asked the appellate court to reconsider the ruling, which has resulted in six of the 86 insider trading convictions secured by Bharara to be set aside.

In the IBM case, prosecutors said a lawyer at IBM's law firm in 2009 told Trent Martin, an analyst at Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, about IBM's planned $1.2 billion acquisition of SPSS Inc.

While the lawyer expected his friend, Martin, not to tell anyone, the analyst bought SPSS stock and told his roommate, Conradt, who in turn told Euro Pacific colleagues, traders David Weishaus, Daryl Payton and Benjamin Durant, authorities said.

Carter last week cited the 2nd Circuit ruling in tossing the guilty pleas of Martin, Conradt, Weishaus and Payton ahead of a Feb. 23 trial for Durant.

Prosecutors had argued the appellate ruling should not apply since the information was misappropriated from the lawyer.

The case is U.S. v. Conradt, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-cr-00887.

Google fourth-quarter revenue misses Wall Street target


Google Inc's (GOOGL.O) (GOOG.O) revenue grew 15 percent in the fourth quarter but fell short of Wall Street's target on declining online ad prices and unfavorable foreign exchange rates.

Shares of Google edged up 0.1 percent to $510.66 in extended trading after an initial dip on the news.

Google's advertising revenue has come under pressure as more consumers access its online services on mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets, where ad rates are typically lower.

The growing popularity of mobile devices has made No. 1 social network Facebook Inc (FB.O) a greater threat in the battle for advertisers. Facebook reported on Wednesday that mobile ads on its network doubled year-over-year during the fourth quarter.

Google said on Thursday the average price of its online ads, or "cost per click," decreased 3 percent year-over-year in the fourth quarter, while the number of consumer clicks on its ads increased 14 percent.

Some analysts had hoped for gains in cost-per-click, said BGC Partners analyst Colin Gillis, adding that the company, which gets about half of its revenue overseas, also was hurt by the strong dollar.

"Business is slowing. The core is slowing. And what we're saying is, it's going to look on paper even worse as the dollar strengthens. And we are not at that point where mobile monetization is improving," he said. "The thesis that the landscape is changing and Google is missing out - I don't think it will hold to be true, but they haven't squelched it."

Consolidated revenue in the three months ended Dec. 31 totaled $18.10 billion, compared to $15.71 billion in the year-ago period. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S were looking for revenue of $18.46 billon.

Chief Financial Officer Patrick Pichette said in a statement that revenue grew "despite strong currency headwinds."

Net income rose to $4.76 billion, or $6.91 per share, from $3.38 billion, or $4.95 per share, a year earlier. Adjusted earnings per share of $6.88 missed analysts' expectations of $7.11.

Russia warns West support for Kiev could lead to 'catastrophe'


Russia's envoy to the European security watchdog OSCE urged the United States and Europe on Thursday to stop supporting the "party of war" in Ukraine and warned "catastrophe" could result, Interfax news agency reported.

"I would like to appeal to the states that have influence on Kiev's leadership, most of all to Washington. It's time to stop indulging Ukraine's party of war," said Russia's OSCE envoy, Andrei Kelin.

"Only a big catastrophe can result from such developments."

Russia has increasingly blamed the United States and NATO for the flare-up in violence in eastern Ukraine. The West accuses Moscow of feeding a pro-Russian insurgency with guns and soldiers.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said this week the Ukrainian army itself was a legion of NATO sent to geopolitically contain Russia.

"It's time to stop covering (Kiev's) inhuman actions, it is unacceptable to push (them) toward the continuation of war in eastern Ukraine," said Kelin.

Russia denies accusations it is sending money, arms or weapons to eastern Ukraine, where a pro-Russian uprising began months after Ukraine's Moscow-backed President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted by street protests.

Air Force picks Boeing 747-8 to replace Air Force One


The U.S. Air Force said on Wednesday it would use Boeing Co's (BA.N) commercial 747-8 airliner to replace its current fleet of two Air Force One presidential aircraft, one of the most visible symbols of the United States.

The decision comes a month after Boeing said it would slow production of the four-engine 747-8 aircraft to 1.3 a month from 1.5 a month because of declining orders.

"The Boeing 747-8 is the only aircraft manufactured in the United States (that) when fully missionized meets the necessary capabilities established to execute the presidential support mission," said Air Force Secretary Deborah James in a statement.

Boeing welcomed the Air Force's decision to skip a competition and opt for the 747-8, citing its 50-year history of building presidential aircraft.

The Air Force said it intended to award a sole source contract to Boeing, but they must still negotiate a contract and the modifications needed to adapt the jet for presidential use.

The Air Force now operates two VC-25s, specially configured Boeing 747-200Bs. Details about the new contract, including cost, were not released.

It said it planned to purchase enough of the technical baseline to permit competition for maintenance during the plane's planned 30-year life.

James said the Air Force One program would use proven technologies and commercially certified equipment to keep the program affordable.

The Air Force decision was widely expected since the only other suitable four-engine jet is the A380 built by Airbus (AIR.PA) in Toulouse, France.

The 747-8 is the only four-engine commercial jet Boeing makes, providing an extra margin of flight safety over the more standard twin-engine planes.

But the Air Force order for a few 747s might not extend the life of the 747 program, which has failed to capture much business in recent years.

Boeing was clearly trying to preserve production so it could fill the Air Force order, said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia.

Now that the firm order is there, he said, it might be an opportunity for the program to end.

The double-decker plane entered service in 1970, undergoing a major overhaul in 2012, with new engines and a longer fuselage.

But last year, Boeing did not get orders for 747s, despite booking a record 1,432 net orders for commercial aircraft. At the end of 2014, Boeing had 36 unfilled orders for the plane, which lists at about $370 million.

Delhi Uber passenger who alleges driver rape sues in U.S


A passenger who said she had been raped by an Uber driver in India's capital sued the online car service in U.S. federal court on Thursday, claiming the company failed to maintain basic safety procedures.

In the lawsuit, the woman, who resides in Delhi and was not named, called Uber the "modern day equivalent of electronic hitchhiking."

"Buyer beware - we all know how those horror movies end," the suit stated.

In a statement, Uber did not directly address the lawsuit but said it is cooperating fully with the authorities to ensure the perpetrator is brought to justice. "Our deepest sympathies remain with the victim of this horrific crime," the company said.

India is Uber's largest market outside the United States by the number of cities covered, and the country's radio taxi market is estimated to be worth $6 billion to $9 billion. The rape allegation triggered protests and reignited a debate about the safety of women in Asia's third-largest economy, especially in New Delhi, which has been dubbed India's rape capital.

India banned Uber in New Delhi last month following the allegations and arrest of the driver. But the company restarted services there last week and applied for a radio taxi license.

The San Francisco-based company said it would not take any commission from its drivers in New Delhi until uncertainty over how it can operate in the country's capital city is cleared up.

The woman, who reported being raped and beaten in early December after hailing a ride with the Uber driver, asks for an overhaul of Uber's safety practices, including localized 24-hour customer-support centers and in-car video cameras.

She is also seeking unspecified damages from the U.S.-based company. Her attorney, Douglas Wigdor, has represented high-profile plaintiffs, including a hotel maid who accused former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault.

Uber, valued at $40 billion last month, said last week it would introduce additional safety measures including more stringent driver checks and an in-app emergency button. The Delhi case is one of several around the world, including one earlier this month in Chicago, in which passengers have accused their drivers of assault.

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Doe vs. Uber Technologies Inc, 15-424.

Stop Sharing Button On IE Is Not Available Any More.

We use to get this button on IE when we share the screen.

StopSharinghowever now this button is no longer available.

Reason being it interfaces with the DWM (Glass effect of windows 7+).

DWM : Stands for Desktop Window Manager

We used to support Windows XP which had no Glass effect and thus it was not a problem. On windows 7 we used to switch the DWM off before starting the screen share. Window 8 onwards the DWM cannot be programmatically switched off and thus this button was causing problems. Many applications change the Glass area and IE is one of them. Others include Chrome, FireFox, Office etc. In case the applications change the Glass area then it’s a matter of timing to Display the button or the custom title bar the application draws.

This was actually a bug 2943337 due to which the button Intermittently disappears. The bug is only reproducible with the applications which have custom title bars. Ex. Real Player/Office Apps/Live messenger and media players. With the Office 2007 applications the title bar is custom drawn and thus it intermittently draws over the button and it disappears. This only happens with skinned title bars, Skinned apps try to redraw their title bars so button disappears until we redraw again.

The “Red Button” never worked for 64 bit processes. This will also not work for any apps which have skinned title bar as i said earlier. Moreover this feature will not work if the process in question is sandboxed (Acrobat for example).

Yes downgrading IE will help probably but it’s not something we can recommend in good faith as it will expose the users to all kinds of security bugs. (Not recommended)

o Windows 8 and onwards the button is not even an option as DWM can’t be switched off by programs programmatically and the button itself has issues when DWM is on

o As of today this button has been disabled permanently.

Hope this helps those users who are expecting the red buttons on their IE when sharing the Application or Windows and not desktop using Adobe Connect Meeting Room,

Thanks,

Alibaba quarterly revenue disappoints, shares fall

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd's (BABA.N) shares fell more than 10 percent early on Thursday, wiping more than $25 billion of market value after third quarter revenue at the Chinese internet giant fell short of analysts' expectations.

Revenue at the world's largest e-commerce company rose 40 percent to $4.22 billion in the December quarter, short of the average analyst estimate of $4.45 billion, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

Earnings per share (EPS), calculated to exclude one-off and extraordinary items, beat estimates of $0.75, coming in at $0.81.

But investors appeared to have other concerns, four months after the company's $25 billion IPO.

"Today's (stock price drop) is not about EPS, it's about the top line growth," said Tian Hou, a Beijing-based analyst with TH Capital.

"When Alibaba said they were expanding, investing, people's expectations were for top line growth and the bottom line would shrink. However they did the opposite, so that was contradictory to expectations."

Even strong numbers for mobile revenues and total value of goods sold on smartphones, closely watched metrics in the world's biggest smartphone market, weren't enough to stop the Wall Street-listed stock being hammered as trading began on the New York Stock Exchange.

Shares were down almost 10 percent at 10:28 a.m. ET at $88.75.

Alibaba did not address Tuesday's announcement that its second-biggest shareholder Yahoo Inc (YHOO.O) plans to spin off its 15 percent stake in the Chinese company.

But Alibaba's Executive Vice Chairman Joe Tsai did use the post-results conference call to take a shot at a Chinese regulator, after the watchdog called out the company in a report published on Wednesday for failing to do enough to stamp out illegal business on its platforms.

Tsai said the report was "flawed" and assured listeners that Alibaba had not seen the report before it was published, nor had it requested its publication to be delayed. The report by the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) sparked concern that Alibaba had failed to disclose risk factors to its investors prior to its bumper listing in September.

SLIPPING GROWTH

Revenue growth, at its lowest level since at least 2013, and margins slipped as sales through mobile devices, typically smaller-ticket items, accounted for a bigger slice of total sales than in the previous quarter.

Gross merchandise volume (GMV), or the sum of all Alibaba's online commerce transactions, rose 49 percent to $127 billion. Mobile GMV continued to grow, accounting for 42 percent of total GMV, up from 36 percent in the September quarter.

The number of mobile monthly active users nearly doubled from the same quarter the previous year to 265 million. Overall annual active buyers grew 45 percent to 334 million from 307 million in the September quarter - exceeding the population of the United States.

Amazon sales rise in holiday quarter, shares jump


Amazon.com Inc reported stronger than expected earnings on Thursday as North American sales surged during the crucial holiday quarter, sending its shares up 9 percent.

The online commerce giant, which gets about a third of its revenue from October to December, reported earnings of 45 cents a share, trouncing Wall Street's average prediction for 17 cents.

Revenue climbed 15 percent to $29.3 billion in the quarter, compared to an average analyst estimate of nearly $30 billion. However, revenue rose 18 percent if $895 million in an unfavorable impact from year-over-year changes in foreign exchange rates were excluded, executives said on a conference call.

The sharply higher profit was a welcome surprise for Wall Street, which has clamored for Amazon to come to grips with its growing investments in everything from Hollywood-style television productions, and cloud computing and consumer devices with mixed success.

In a conference call with reporters, Chief Financial Officer Tom Szkutak said Amazon is putting "a lot more energy around making sure we get great productivity around our various fixed and variable assets."

Even so, few analysts expect Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos will rein in his spending significantly this year, especially as Amazon beefs up its $99-a-year Prime membership program, which offers standard two-day shipping, streaming video and unlimited photo storage among other perks.

"I did see some signs of expense control but it was more or less driven by top line growth into the holiday season," S&P Capital IQ analyst Tuna Amobi said. They haven't indicated any kind of shift in terms of investments.

"It just seems like foreign exchange was not as much of a headwind as believed."

Worldwide, paying Prime membership rose 53 percent in 2014, and 50 percent in the U.S. market. In 2014, Amazon paid billions for Prime shipping and put $1.3 billion into its Prime video service, Bezos said in a statement.

Net sales leapt 22 percent in North America, compared to 3 percent for everywhere else. Overall operating expenses rose 14.6 percent in the quarter to $28.7 billion. Net shipping costs represented 4.6 percent of worldwide net sales, slightly lower than the previous four quarters.

Spotify expresses interest to raise $500 million: WSJ


Online music streaming service Spotify is working with Goldman Sachs for a new round of private fundraising which could potentially put off the initial public offering for another year, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The company has expressed interest to raise about $500 million in new financing and investors have heard talks that put the company valuation at more than $6 billion, the people said.

However, the amount to be raised and valuation are still to be settled, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Spotify is talking with investors who are known to buy into companies before a IPO, including mutual fund T. Rowe Price Group, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter.

The company has indicated its willingness to provide investors with a "ratchet" provision that will give them a guaranteed return in the event of an IPO, one person said.

Spotify said it does not comment on rumors.

The company was founded in 2006 by Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon. It provides free on-demand music or ad-free tunes for paying customers.

Spotify raised speculation of an IPO in August after it re-advertised a job for a regulatory filings expert.

Representatives at Goldman Sachs and T. Rowe Price declined to comment.

Spotify had 15 million subscribers and 60 million active users at the end of 2014.

AWS move, disclosure suggest Amazon yielding more to Wall Street


After years of giving investors the cold shoulder, Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) is starting to warm up to Wall Street.

The No. 1 U.S. online retailer was unusually forthcoming during its fourth-quarter earnings call on Thursday, saying it will break out results this year, for the first time, for its fast-growing cloud computing unit, Amazon Web Services.

The company also said it would focus on getting more out of its assets in 2015 and emphasized that it was already starting to reap benefits from investments in steaming video and logistics infrastructure.

"The team ... is putting even more energy around making sure we get great productivity around our various fixed and variable investments," Chief Financial Officer Tom Szkutak told reporters on a conference call.

This was a shift in tone for Amazon, which typically refuses to disclose more than the most basic details, including how many members belong to its $99-a-year Prime program or if its wide-ranging investments are paying off.

Chief Executive Jeff Bezos has deflected criticism of his spending by emphasizing that he takes a much longer view than most investors. Late last year, he boasted that he spends just six hours a year on investor relations.

But Amazon shares dropped by more than 20 percent last year as investors grew weary of its spending on film and television productions, grocery delivery and consumer devices. Amazon also has fallen short of estimates in five of the last eight quarters.

The additional information shared during Amazon's fourth-quarter results as well as its emphasis on becoming more efficient signaled a new willingness by Amazon executives to listen to investors as well.

"This quarter, Amazon flexed its muscles and said this is what we can do when we focus on profits," said Rob Plaza, senior equity analyst for Key Private Bank. "If they could deliver that upper teens, low 20s revenue growth and be able to deliver profits on top of that, the stock is going to respond."

The change is unlikely to be dramatic. When asked whether this quarter marked a permanent shift in Amazon’s relationship with Wall Street, Plaza laughed: "I wouldn't be chasing the stock here based on that."

Still, the shift is a good sign for investors, who have been clamoring for Amazon to disclose more about its fastest-growing and likely most profitable division that some analysts say accounts for 4 percent of total sales.

The change seemed unlikely until AWS made up 10 percent of Amazon's net sales, the threshold at which U.S. securities regulators require disclosure.

Szkutak also added that a large portion of Amazon's capital expenditure will go toward AWS, which has stepped up its efforts to win over lucrative contracts with large, corporate clients.

"You should expect that we'll be spending more in terms of CapEx to support our web services business, which is growing very fast," he said on a separate call with analysts. "You should expect us to add fulfillment capacity."

In a statement, Bezos also revealed that Prime memberships grew 53 percent worldwide in 2014, with international markets outpacing U.S. growth - the first time the company shared such figures. Amazon spent $1.3 billion on its video operation and billions on Prime shipping, Bezos said.

Customers who tested Prime for streaming video were more likely to subscribe and stay longer than those who joined through other channels, Szkutak said.

Amazon's spending on packing and shipping orders rose just 17.3 percent, nearly half the increase in the 2013 fourth quarter. Having more warehouses has helped lower transportation costs and Amazon is relying more on third-party sellers, which Plaza said generate three times the margin of direct Amazon sales.

There was little discussion of consumer devices, like the Fire smartphone Amazon debuted last year to lackluster reviews. In the fourth quarter, Amazon worked through some of the $80 million in excess phone inventory it had at the end of September, Szkutak said.

FrameMaker 12 Update released (12.0.4)

Hello Framers,

First of all, Wish you a very happy new year 2015! Today, I am pleased to announce that we have released an important update to the Technical Communication line of products which includes FrameMaker 12, FrameMaker XML Author 12 and RoboHelp 11. In this update, we have made several enhancements as well as addressed many issues, reported by our customers and partners. In this post, I will be covering the enhancements and bug fixes for FrameMaker 12 and FrameMaker XML Author 12 only. To know more about the RoboHelp 11 update, please read another blog post.

Here are some of the enhancements we have made to FrameMaker 12/FrameMaker XML Author 12.

Several dialogs (e.g. TOC, DITA) are re-sizable now. You have more area to work with, especially useful when you are working with long lists
Color Definition dialog has been enhanced
New “smart” filter capability added in the designers which lets you filter the list as you type (just like “Smart Catalogs” feature)
Active pod is highlighted with a colored boundary, so that is easier to locate
Conditional text checkbox behavior has been enhanced to easily apply/remove conditions
You have control over images from reference pages whether it goes in the published output
You can choose whether to retain the SVG output of images in the Responsive HTML5 output


In addition, there several bug fixes and many more. For a complete list of enhancements and issues fixed, please refer to the readme for this update.

FrameMaker 12.0.4 update is now available through Adobe Update Manager (AUM). You can also check for updates through Help>Update menu in FrameMaker 12. Lastly, it will also be available shortly for download from FrameMaker Support Center. I encourage all the FrameMaker 12 / FM XML Author 12 users to install this update.

I hope that you will find many of these enhancements useful. I do want to say thank you to all of those who submitted these ideas and bug reports. Keep your feedback coming!
Sincerely,

Kapil Verma

Sr. Product Manager – Adobe Technical Communication Products

Will nanotechnology soon allow you to 'swallow the doctor'?

Imagine a swarm of microscopic robots, so tiny that a teaspoon can hold billions of them.

They are ready to be injected into the most delicate areas of a human body -- the heart and the brain -- to deliver drugs with extreme precision or work like an army of nano surgeons, operating from within.

If it all sounds like science fiction, that's because it is: the plot of the 1966 sci-fi classic Fantastic Voyage revolves largely around this concept.

In the film, four people board a miniaturized submarine to enter the bloodstream of an American scientist, left comatose by the Russians as a result of a Cold War quarrel over the technology. They only have an hour to remove a life-threatening blood clot before they return to full size. The crew manage to escape the body in the nick of time via a teardrop.

But reality has a way of catching up with our fantasies, and nanotechnology is yet another field of science that bears that promise.

At the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, mechanical engineer Brad Nelson and his team have worked on nanobots for a decade, and are now ready to think big: "We're making microscopic robots that are guided by externally generated magnetic fields for use in the human body," he told CNN.

A little knife
The first to suggest that you could one day "swallow the surgeon" was beloved physicist and Nobel Prize winner Richard Feynman. He coined the idea in the provocative 1959 talk "There's plenty of room at the bottom", which is widely considered the first conceptual argument for nanotechnology.

"You put the mechanical surgeon inside the blood vessel and it goes into the heart and 'looks' around," Feynman said, "It finds out which valve is the faulty one and takes a little knife and slices it out."

Nelson's microrobots might not yet have a little knife, but they sure have something special: their shape is inspired by the common E.coli bacteria, which is propelled by a rotating "tail" called the flagellum.

"Bacteria have a rotary motor," he explains, "Now, we can't make that motor, we don't have the technology for that, but we can use magnetism to move these things, so we actually take these flagella and we magnetize them, which allows them to swim."

The nanobots have already been tested "in vivo" in an extremely delicate environment, the eye. They can swim through the vitreous humor -- the clear gel that fills the eyeball -- and deliver drugs in the retinal area to treat age-related diseases such as macular degeneration, which can cause blindness.

At the heart of the matter
The robots are made in a "clean room" environment to keep them sterile, much in the same way as computer chips.

Nelson says that the test done with eyes have inspired other potential applications, such as the treatment of heart conditions. In this case the nanobots would be guided through a catheter - 2 to 3 millimeters in diameter - to reach the specific part of tissue that needs to be treated.

The catheter technique could also be used to reach the brain, and other target area include the smaller intestine and the urinary track. All difficult to reach areas where precision is a must. For that very reason, nanotechnology has long been touted as our best future weapon against cancer.

But how would surgeons operate with nanobots?

"They would need training to learn how to use them," says Nelson, "but it's kind of an intuitive interface, and the nanobots would be guided with a joystick."

The technology is ready for the first clinical tests on human patients, which will begin to take place this year, according to Nelson.

Beyond medicine
"More recently people in the field have been looking at other applications like water treatment or environmental cleanup, where you might be able to operate hundreds, thousands, millions of these devices and have them swim through polluted water, catalyze pollutants, and then collect them back," he says.

This could be applied for example to oil spills: "There have been some recent publications that have shown how they can actually attach to oil droplets and move them to other locations."

But the most outlandish prediction on the use of nanotechnology comes from MIT's digital guru Nicholas Negroponte, who believes that in the future we will receive information and knowledge directly from nanobots that will swim up to our brain from within our bloodstream.

We'd love to hear what Richard Feynman would have had to say about "swallowing the teacher."

Sharp displays become round

The display-maker Sharp has unveiled devices which use circular and freeform-shaped displays as opposed to regular rectangular ones.
The Japanese electronics maker envisages them having a number of applications, from consumer tablets to in-car dashboards.
It has also released a prototype of a transparent screen, which is almost entirely see-through until an image is displayed.
The BBC's North America Technology correspondent casts his eye over the innovations at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this month.

Retrofitted tech turns cars to self-driving vehicles

Volvo, Audi and Google are among the companies in the race to create self-driving cars for the general public.
But startup Cruise Automation is developing technology that can be retrofitted to cars with an automatic gearbox.
A computer at the rear of the vehicle processes sensor data from the roof mounted pod and sends it to actuators which control the steering, acceleration and braking.

Sunday, 25 January 2015

Buhari vs Jonathan: Beyond the Election, by Charles Soludo

I need to preface this article with a few clarifications. I have taken a long sabbatical leave from partisan politics, and it is real fun watching the drama from the balcony. Having had my own share of public service (I do not need a job from government), I now devote my time and energy in pursuit of other passions, especially abroad. A few days ago, I read an article in Thisday entitled “Where is Charles Soludo?”, and my answer is that I am still there, only that I have been too busy with extensive international travels to participate in or comment on our national politics and economy. But I occasionally follow events at home. Since the survival and prosperity of Nigeria are at stake, the least some of us (albeit, non-partisan) must do is to engage in public debate. As the elections approach, I owe a duty to share some of my concerns.
In September 2010, I wrote a piece entitled “2011 Elections: Let the Real Debate Begin” and published by Thisday. I understand the Federal Executive Council discussed it, and the Minister of Information rained personal attacks on me during the press briefing. I noted more than six newspaper editorials in support of the issues we raised. Beside other issues we raised, our main thesis was that the macro economy was dangerously adrift, with little self-insurance mechanisms (and a prediction that if oil prices fell below $40, many state governments would not be able to pay salaries). I gave a subtle hint at easy money and exchange rate depreciations because I did not want to panic the market with a strong statement. Sadly, on the eve of the next elections, literally everything we hinted at has happened. Part of my motivation for this article is that five years after, the real debate is still not happening.
The presidential election next month will be won by either Buhari or Jonathan. For either, it is likely to be a pyrrhic victory. None of them will be able to deliver on the fantastic promises being made on the economy, and if oil prices remain below $60, I see very difficult months ahead, with possible heady collisions with labour, civil society, and indeed the citizenry. To be sure, the presidential election will not be decided by the quality of ‘issues’ or promises canvassed by the candidates. The debates won’t also change much (except if there is a major gaffe by either candidate like Tofa did in the debate with Abiola). My take is that more than 95% of the likely voters have pretty much made up their minds based largely on other considerations. A few of us remain undecided. During my brief visit to Nigeria, I watched some of the campaign rallies on television. The tragedy of the current electioneering campaigns is that both parties are missing the golden opportunity to sensitize the citizenry about the enormous challenges ahead and hence mobilize them for the inevitable sacrifices they would be called upon to make soon. Each is promising an El-Dorado.
Let me admit that the two main parties talk around the major development challenges—corruption, insecurity, economy (unemployment/poverty, power, infrastructure, etc) health, education, etc. However, it is my considered view that none of them has any credible agenda to deal with the issues, especially within the context of the evolving global economy and Nigeria’s broken public finance. The UK Conservative Party’s manifesto for the last election proudly announced that all its programmes were fully costed and were therefore implementable. Neither APC nor PDP can make a similar claim. A plan without the dollar or Naira signs to it is nothing but a wish-list. They are not telling us how much each of their promises will cost and where they will get the money. None talks about the broken or near bankrupt public finance and the strategy to fix it.
In response to the question of where the money will come from, I heard one of the politicians say that the problem of Nigeria was not money but the management of resources. This is half-truth. The problem is both. No matter how efficient a father (with a monthly salary of N50,000) is at managing the family resources, I cannot see how he could deliver on a promise to buy a brand new Peugeot 406 for each of his three children in a year. Even with all the loopholes and waste closed, with increased efficiency per dollar spent, there is still a binding budget constraint. To deliver an efficient national transport infrastructure alone will still cost tens of billions of dollars per annum even by corruption-free, cost-effective means. Did I hear that APC promises a welfare system that will pay between N5,000 and N10,000 per month to the poorest 25 million Nigerians? Just this programme alone will cost between N1.5 and N3 trillion per annum. Add to this the cost of free primary education plus free meal (to be funded by the federal budget or would it force non-APC state governments to implement the same?), plus some millions of public housing, etc.
I have tried to cost some of the promises by both the APC and the PDP, given alternative scenarios for public finance and the numbers don’t add up. Nigerians would be glad to know how both parties would fund their programmes. Do they intend to accentuate the huge public debt, or raise taxes on the soon to-be-beleaguered private businesses, or massively devalue the naira to rake in baskets of naira from the dwindling oil revenue, or embark on huge fiscal retrenchment with the sack of labour and abandonment of projects, and which areas of waste do they intend to close and how much do they estimate to rake in from them, etc? I remember that Chief Obafemi Awolowo was asked similar questions in 1978 and 1979 about his promises of free education and free medical services. Even as a teenager, I was impressed by how he reeled out figures about the amounts he would save from various ‘waste’ including the tea/coffee served in government offices. The point is that at least he did his homework and had his numbers and I give credit to his team. Some 36 years later, the quality of political debate and discourse seems to border on the pedestrian. From the quality of its team, I did not expect much from the current government, but I must confess that I expected APC as a party aspiring to take over from PDP to come up with a knock-out punch. Evidently, from what we have read from the various versions of its manifesto as well as the depth of promises being made, it does not seem that it has a better offer.

Let me digress a bit to refresh our memory on where we are, and thus provide the context in which to evaluate the promises being made to us. Recall that the key word of the 2015 budget is ‘austerity’. Austerity? This is just within a few months of the fall in oil prices. History repeats itself in a very cruel way, as this was exactly what happened under the Shehu Shagari administration. Under the Shagari government, oil price reached its highest in 1980/81. During the same period, Nigeria ratcheted up its consumption and all tiers of government were in competition as to which would out-borrow the other. Huge public debt was the consequence. When oil prices crashed in early 1982, the National Assembly then passed the Economic Stabilization (Austerity Measures) Act in one day— going through the first, second, and third readings the same day. The austerity measures included the rationing of ‘essential commodities’ and most states owed salary arrears. Corruption was said to be pervasive, and as Sani Abacha said in that famous coup speech, ‘unemployment has reached unacceptable proportions and our hospitals have become mere consulting clinics’. General Muhammadu Buhari/Tunde Idiagbon regime made the fight against corruption and restoration of discipline the cardinal point of their administration which lasted for 20 months. I am not sure they had a credible plan to get the economy out of the doldrums (although it must be admitted that poverty incidence in Nigeria as of 1985 when they left office was a just46%— according to the Federal Office of Statistics).
We have come full circle. If the experience under Shagari could be excused as an unexpected shock, what Nigeria is going through now is a consequence of our deliberate wrong choices. We have always known that the unprecedented oil boom (in both price and quantity—despite oil theft) of the last six years is temporary but the government chose to treat it as a permanent shock. The parallels with the Shagari regime are troubling. First, at the time of oil boom, Nigeria again went on a consumption spree such that the budgets of the last five years can best be described as ‘consumption budgets’, with new borrowing by the federal government exceeding the actual expenditure on critical infrastructure. Second, not one penny was added to the stock of foreign reserves at a period Nigeria earned hundreds of billions from oil. For comparisons, President Obasanjo met about $5 billion in foreign reserves, and the average monthly oil price for the 72 months he was in office was $38, and yet he left $43 billion in foreign reserves after paying $12 billion to write-off Nigeria’s external debt. In the last five years, the average monthly oil price has been over $100, and the quantity also higher but our foreign reserves have been declining and exchange rate depreciating.
I note that when I assumed office as Governor of CBN, the stock of foreign reserves was $10 billion. The average monthly oil price during my 60 months in office was $59, but foreign reserve reached the all-time peak of $62 billion (and despite paying $12 billion for external debt, and losing over $15 billion during the unprecedented global financial and economic crisis) I left behind $45 billion. Recall also that our exchange rate continuously appreciated during this period and was at N117 to the dollar before the global crisis and we deliberately allowed it to depreciate in order to preserve our reserves. My calculation is that if the economy was better managed, our foreign reserves should have been between $102 –$118 billion and exchange rate around N112 before the fall in oil prices. As of now, the reserves should be around $90 billion and exchange rate no higher than N125 per dollar.
Third, the rate of public debt accumulation at a time of unprecedented boom had no parallel in the world. While the Obasanjo administration bought and enlarged the policy space for Nigeria, the current government has sold and constricted it. What debt relief did for Nigeria was to liberate Nigerian policymakers from the intrusive conditionalities of the creditors and thereby truly allowing Nigeria independence in its public policy. How have we used the independence? Through our own choices, we have yet again tied the hands of future policymakers. This time, the debt is not necessarily to foreign creditor institutions/governments which are organized under the Paris club but largely to private agents which is even more volatile. We call it domestic debt. But if one carefully unpacks the bond portfolio, what percentage of it is held by foreign private agents? And I understand the Government had removed the speed bumps we kept to slow the speed of capital flight, and someone is sweating to explain the gyrations in foreign reserves. I am just smiling!
In sum, the mismanagement of our economy has brought us once more to the brink. Government officials rely on the artificial construct of debt to GDP ratio to tell us we can borrow as much as we want. That is nonsense, especially for an economy with a mono but highly volatile source of revenue and forex earnings. The chicken will soon come home to roost. Today, the combined domestic and external debt of the Federal Government is in excess of $40 billion. Add to this the fact that abandoned capital projects littered all over the country amount to over $50 billion. No word yet on other huge contingent liabilities. If oil prices continue to fall, I bet that Nigeria will soon have a heavy debt burden even with low debt to GDP ratio. Furthermore, given the current and capital account regime, it is evident that Nigeria does not have enough foreign reserves to adequately cover for imports plus short term liabilities. In essence, we are approaching the classic of what the Shagari government faced, and no wonder the hasty introduction of ‘austerity measures’ again.
Fourth, poverty incidence and unemployment are also simultaneously at all-time high levels. According to the NBS, poverty incidence grew to 69% in 2010 and projected to be 71% in 2011, with unemployment at 24%. This is the worst record in Nigeria’s history, and the paradox is that this happened during the unprecedented oil boom.
One theme I picked up listening to the campaign rallies as well as to some of the propagandists is the confusion about measuring government “performance”. Most people seem to confuse ‘inputs’, or ‘processes’ with output. Earlier this month, I had a dinner with a group of friends (14 of us) and we were chit-chatting about Nigeria. One of us, an associate of President Jonathan veered off to repeat a propaganda mantra that Jonathan had outperformed his predecessors. He also reminded us that Jonathan re-based the GDP and that Nigeria is now the biggest economy in Africa; etc. It was fun listening to the response by others. In sum, the group agreed that the President had ‘outperformed’ his predecessors except that it is in reverse order. First, my friend was educated that re-basing the GDP is no achievement: it is a routine statistical exercise, and depending on the base year that you choose, you get a different GDP figure. Re-basing the GDP has nothing to do with government policy. Besides, as naira-dollar exchange rate continues to depreciate, the GDP in current dollars will also shrink considerably soon.
We were reminded of Jonathan’s agricultural ‘revolution’. But someone cut in and noted that for all the propaganda, the growth rate of the agricultural sector in the last five years still remains far below the performance under Obasanjo. One of us reminded him that no other president had presided over the slaughter of about 15,000 people by insurgents in a peacetime; no other president earned up to 50% of the amount of resources the current government earned from oil and yet with very little outcomes; no other president had the rate of borrowing; none had significant forex earnings and yet did not add one penny to foreign reserves but losing international reserves at a time of boom; no other president had a depreciating exchange rate at a time of export boom; at no time in Nigeria’s history has poverty reached 71% (even under Abacha, it was 67 -70%); and under no other president did unemployment reach 24%. Surely, these are unprecedented records and he surely ‘outperformed’ his predecessors! What a satire!
One of those present took the satire to some level by comparing Jonathan to the ‘performance’ of the former Governor of Anambra, Peter Obi. He noted that while Obi gloated about ‘savings’, there is no signature project to remember his regime except that his regime took the first position among all states in Nigeria in the democratization of poverty—- mass impoverishment of the people of Anambra. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, poverty rose under his watch in Anambra from 20% in 2004 (lowest in Nigeria then) to 68% in 2010 (a 238% deterioration!). Our friend likened it to a father who had no idea of what to do with his resources and was celebrating his fat bank account while his children were dying of kwashiorkor. He pointed out that since it is the likes of Peter Obi who are the advisers to Jonathan on how to manage the economy (thereby confusing micromanagement which you do as a trader with macro governance) it is little wonder that poverty is fast becoming another name for Nigeria. It was a very hilarious evening.
My advice to President Jonathan and his handlers is to stop wasting their time trying to campaign on his job record. Those who have decided to vote for him will not do so because he has taken Nigeria to the moon. His record on the economy is a clear ‘F’ grade. As one reviews the laundry list of micro interventions the government calls its achievements, one wonders whether such list is all that the government could deliver with an unprecedented oil boom and an unprecedented public debt accumulation. I can clearly see why reasonable people are worried. Everywhere else in the world, government performance on the economy is measured by some outcome variables such as: income (GDP growth rate), stability of prices (inflation and exchange rate), unemployment rate, poverty rate, etc. On all these scores, this government has performed worse than its immediate predecessor— Obasanjo regime. If we appropriately adjust for oil income and debt, then this government is the worst in our history on the economy. All statistics are from the National Bureau of Statistics.
Despite presiding over the biggest oil boom in our history, it has not added one percentage point to the growth rate of GDP compared to the Obasanjo regime especially the 2003- 07 period. Obasanjo met GDP growth rate at 2% but averaged 7% within 2003- 07. The current government has been stuck at 6% despite an unprecedented oil boom. Income (GDP) growth has actually performed worse, and poverty escalated. This is the only government in our history where rapidly increasing government expenditure was associated with increasing poverty. The director general of NBS stated in his written press conference address in 2011 that about 112 million Nigerians were living in poverty. Is this the record to defend? Obama had a tough time in his re-election in 2012 because unemployment reached 8%. Here, unemployment is at a record 24% and poverty at an all-time 71% but people are prancing around, gloating about ‘performance’. As I write, the Naira exchange rate to the dollar is $210 at the parallel market. What a historic performance! Please save your breathe and save us the embarrassment. The President promised Nigeria nothing in the last election and we did not get value for money. He should this time around present us with his plan for the future, and focus on how he would redeem himself in the second term—if he wins!
Sadly the government’s economic team is very weak, dominated by self-interested and self-conflicted group of traders and businessmen, and so-called economic team meetings have been nothing but showbiz time. The very people government exists to regulate have seized the levers of government as policymakers and most government institutions have largely been “privatized” to them. Mention any major government department or agency and someone will tell you whom it has been ‘allocated’ to, and the person subsequently nominates his minion to occupy the seat. What do you then expect? The economy seems to be on auto pilot, with confusion as to who is in charge, and government largely as a constraint. There are no big ideas, and it is difficult to see where economic policy is headed to. My thesis is that the Nigerian economy, if properly managed, should have been growing at an annual rate of about 12% given the oil boom, and poverty and unemployment should have fallen dramatically over the last five years. This is topic for another day.
So far, the Government’s response to the self-inflicted crisis is, at best, laughable. They blame external shocks as if we did not expect them and say nothing about the terrible policy choices they made. The National Assembly had described the 2015 budget as unrealistic. The fiscal adjustments proposed in the 2015 budget simply play to the gallery and just to pander to our emotions. For a $540 billion economy, the so-called luxury tax amounts to zero per cent of GDP. If the current trend continues, private businesses will come under a heavy crunch soon. Having put economics on its head during the boom time, the Government now proposes to increase taxes during a prospective downturn and impose austerity measures. Unbelievable!
Fortuitously, just as he succeeded Shagari when Nigeria faced similar situations, Buhari is once more seeking to lead Nigeria. But times have changed, and Nigeria is largely different. First, this is a democracy and dealing with corruption must happen within the ambit of the rule of law and due process. Getting things done in a democracy requires complicated bargaining, especially where the legislature, labour, the media, and civil society have become strong and entrenched. Second, the size, structure and institutions of the economy have fundamentally altered. The market economy, especially the capital market and foreign exchange market, impose binding constraints and discipline on any regime. Third, dealing with most of the other issues— insecurity, unemployment/poverty, infrastructure, health, education, etc, require increased, smarter, and more efficient spending. Increased spending when the economy is on the reverse gear?
If oil prices remain between 40- 60 dollars over the next two years, the current policy regime guarantees that foreign reserves will continue the precipitous depletion with the attendant exchange rate depreciation, as well as a probable unsustainable escalation in debt accumulation, fiscal retrenchment or taxing the private sector with vengeance. The scenario does not look pretty. The poor choices made by the current government have mortgaged the future, and the next government would have little room to manoeuvre and would inevitably undertake drastic but painful structural adjustments. Nigerians loathe the term ‘structural adjustment’. With falling real wages and depreciating currency, I can see any belated attempt by the government to deal with the bloated public sector pitching it against a feisty labour. I worry about regime stability in the coming months, and I do not envy the next team.
The seeming crisis is not destiny; it is self-imposed. However, we must see it as an opportunity to be seized to fundamentally restructure Nigeria’s political economy, including its fiscal federalism and mineral rights. The current system guarantees cycles of consumption loop and I cannot see sustainable long term prosperity without major systemic overhaul. The proposals at the national conference merely tinker at the margins. In totality, the outcome of the national conference is to do more of the same, with minor amendments on the system of sharing and consumption rather than a fundamental overhaul of the system for productivity and prosperity. President Jonathan promises to implement the report of the national conference if he wins. I commend him for at least offering ‘something’, albeit, marginal in my view. I have not heard anything from the APC or Buhari regarding the national conference report or what kind of federalism they envisage for Nigeria.
In Nigeria’s recent history, two examples under the military and civilian governments demonstrate that where the political will exists, Nigeria has the capacity to overcome severe challenges. The first was under President Babangida. Not many Nigerians appreciate that given the near bankrupt state of Nigeria’s finances and requirements for debt resolution under the Paris Club, the country had little choice but to undertake the painful structural adjustment programme (SAP). I want to state for the record that the foundation for the current market economy we operate in Nigeria was laid by that regime (liberalization of markets including market determined exchange rate, private sector-led economy including licensing of private banks and insurance, de-regulation, privatization of public enterprises under TCPC, etc). Just abolishing the import licensing regime was a fundamental policy revolution. Despite the criticisms, these policy thrusts have remained the pillars of our deepening market economy, and the economy recovered from almost negative growth rate to average 5.5% during the regime and poverty incidence at 42% in 1992.
Under our democratic experience, President Obasanjo inherited a bankrupt economy (with the lost decade of the 1990’s GDP growth rate of 2.2% and hence zero per capita income growth for the decade). His regime consolidated and deepened the market economy structures (consolidation of the banking system which is powering the emergence of a new but truly private sector-led economy and simultaneously led to a new awareness and boom in the capital market; telecommunications revolution; new pension regime; debt relief which won for Nigeria policy independence from the World Bank and Paris Club; deepening of de-regulation and privatization including the unbundling of NEPA under PHCN for privatization; agricultural revolution that saw yearly growth rate of over 6% and remains unsurpassed ever since; sound monetary and fiscal policy and growing foreign reserves that gave confidence to investors; establishment of the Africa Finance Corporation which is leading infrastructure finance in Africa; backward integration policy that saw the establishment and growth of Dangote cement and others; established ICPC and EFCC to fight corruption, etc). The economy roared to average yearly growth of 7% between 2003 and 2007 (although average monthly oil price under his regime was $38), and poverty dropped from estimated 70% in1999 to 54% in 2004. Obasanjo was his own coordinating minister of the economy and chairman of the economic management team— which he chaired for 90 minutes every week. I met with him daily. In other words, he did not outsource economic management.
We expected that the next government after Obasanjo would take the economy to the next level. So far, we have had two great slogans: the 7-point agenda and currently, the transformation agenda. They remain empty slogans without content or direction.
Let me suggest that the fundamental challenge for the next government on the economy can be framed around the goal of creating twelve million jobs over the next four years to have a dent on unemployment and poverty. The challenge is to craft a development agenda to deliver this within the context of broken public finance, and an economy in which painful structural adjustments will be inevitable if current trends in oil prices continue. Most other programmes on corruption, security, power, infrastructure, etc, are expected to be instruments to achieve this objective.
So far, neither the APC nor the PDP has a credible programme for employment and poverty reduction. The APC promises to create 20,000 jobs per state in the first year, totalling a mere 720,000 jobs. This sounds like a quota system and for a country where the new entrants into the labour market per annum exceed two million. If it was intended as a joke, APC must please get serious. On the other hand, President Jonathan targets two million jobs per annum but his strategy for doing so is a Job Board— another committee of sort. Sorry, Mr. President, a Job Board is not a strategy. The principal job Nigerians hired you to do for them is to create jobs for them too. You cannot outsource that job, Sir. Creating 3 million jobs per annum under the unfolding crisis would task our creativity and audacity to the limits.
I heard one politician argue that once we fix power, private sector would create jobs. Not necessarily! Well, this government claims to have added 1,700MW to the national grid and yet unemployment soars. Ask Greece, Spain, etc with power and infrastructure and yet with high unemployment. Structural dislocations play a key role. For example, currently in Nigeria, it is estimated that more than 60% of graduates of our educational system are unemployable. You can understand why many of us are amused when the government celebrates that it has established twelve more glorified secondary schools as universities. I thought they would have told us how many Nigerian universities made it in the league of the best 200 universities in the world. That would have been an achievement. Surely, creating millions of jobs in this economy would, among other things, require ‘new money’ and extraordinary system of coordination among the three tiers of government plus the private sector. Unfortunately, from what I read, the CBN is largely likely to be asleep at this time the country needs the most revolutionary finance. This is a topic for another day. Only the President can lead this effort. Moreover, we are waiting for the two parties/candidates to spell out HOW they will create jobs, whether it is the 20,000 jobs per state by APC or 2 million per annum by President Jonathan. Let us know how you arrived at the figures. Whichever of the two that is declared winner will have his job cut out for him, and I expect him to declare a national emergency on job creation.
Surprisingly, none of the parties/candidates has any grand vision about African economic integration, led by Nigeria. There is no programme on how to make the naira the de facto currency of ECOWAS or the international financial centre that can attract more than $100 billion per annum. Where is the strategy for orchestrating the revolutionary finance to power the economy during this downturn? For President Jonathan, I find it shocking that the most important initiative of his government to secure the future of the economy by Nigeria refusing to sign the ruinous Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union is not even being mentioned. President Obasanjo saved Nigeria from the potential ruin of an ECOWAS single currency while to his credit Jonathan safeguarded our industrial sector/economy by refusing to sign the EPA. Or does the government not understand the import of that? It will be interesting to know the APC’s strategy for exploiting strategic alliances within Africa, China, and the world for Nigeria’s prosperity.
If Buhari wins, he will ride on the populist wind for “change”. Most people I have spoken to who have decided to vote for Buhari do not necessarily know the specifics of what he would offer or how Nigeria would be different under him. I asked my driver, Usman, whom he would vote for President. He responded: “If they no rig the election, na Buhari everybody go vote for”. I asked him why, and his next response sums it: “The man dey honest. In short, people just want to see another face for that villa”. But if he wins, the honeymoon will be brief and the pressure will be immense to magically deliver a ‘new Nigeria’ with no corruption, no boko haram or insecurity, jobs for everyone, no poverty, infrastructure and power in abundance, etc. As a first point, Buhari and his team must realize that they do not yet have a coherent, credible agenda that is consistent with the fundamentals of the economy currently. The APC manifesto contains some good principles and wish-lists, but as a blue print for Nigeria’s security and prosperity, it is largely hollow. The numbers do not add up. Thus, his first job is to present a credible development agenda to Nigerians.
The second key challenge for Buhari and his team will be to transit and transform from a group of what I largely refer to as aggrieved people’s congregation to build a true political party with a soul from the patchwork of political associations. It is surely easier to oppose than to govern. This should not worry us much. After all, even the PDP which has been in power for 16 years is still an assembly of people held together by what I refer to as dining table politics. I am not sure how many members can tell you what their party stands for or its mission and vision for Nigeria. The third but more difficult agenda is cobbling together a truly ‘progressive team’ that will begin to pick the pieces. The lesson of history is that the best leaders have been the ones who went beyond their narrow provincial enclaves to recruit talents and mobilize capacities for national transformation. In Nigeria’s history, the two presidents who made the most fundamental transformation of the economy, Babangida and Obasanjo, were exceptional in the quality of the teams they put together. I therefore pray that Buhari will be magnanimous in victory – if he wins—to put together a ‘team Nigeria’ for the rescue mission.
If Jonathan wins, then God must have been magnanimous to give him a second chance to redeem himself. Most people I know who support Jonathan do so either out of self-interest or fear of the unknown. As a friend summed it: the devil you know is better than the angel you do not know. One person assured me that we would see a ‘different Jonathan’ if he wins as he has been rattled by the harsh judgment of history on his presidency so far. I just pray that he is right. In that case, I would just draw the President’s attention to two issues:
First, beside the coterie of clowns who literally make a living with the sing-song of transformation agenda, President Jonathan must know that it remains an empty slogan. His greatest challenge is how to save himself from the stranglehold of his largely provincial palace jesters who tell him he has done better than God, and seek out ‘enemies’ and friends who can help him write his name in history. Propaganda won’t do it.
Second, Jonathan must claw back his powers as President of Nigeria. He largely outsourced them, and must now roll his sleeves for a new beginning. I take liberty to tell you this brutal truth: if you are not re-elected, there is little to remember your regime after the next few years. On 7th January 2004, I made a special presentation to an expanded economic management team to set agenda for the new year (as chief economic adviser). The focus of my presentation was for us to identify seven iroko trees that would be the flagship markers for the administration as well as how to finance them. I use the same framework to evaluate your administration. What I say to you, Mr. President, is that your record of performance so far is like a farmland filled with grasses. Yes, they are many but there is no tree, let alone any iroko tree, that stands out. Think about this. The beginning of wisdom for every President in his second term is to admit that he is racing against time to cement his legacy. So far, your report card is not looking great. You need a team of big and bold thinkers, as well as with excellent execution capacity. So far, it is not working!
Under the executive presidential system, Nigerians elected you to manage their economy. You cannot outsource that job. Our constitution envisages a federal coordination of the economy, and that function is performed by the National Economic Council (NEC) with Vice-President as chairman. Indeed, the constitution and other laws of Nigeria envisage the office of the VP as the coordinator on the economy. All major economic institutions of the federal government are, by law, chaired by the Vice-President including the national planning (see functions of the national planning commission as coordinator of federal government economic and development programmes), debt management office, National Council on Privatization, etc. As chairman of National Planning (with Ministers of Finance, Agriculture, CBN governor, etc as members), the VP oversees the federal planning and coordination. Then the Constitution mandates the VP as representative of the federal government to chair the NEC, with only CBN governor and state governors as members—to coordinate national economy between federal and states. No minister is a member of NEC. Many people do not understand the logic of the design of our constitution and the role of the VP. Of course, the buck stops on the desk of Mr. President. Only the President and VP have our mandate to govern us. Every other person is an adviser/assistant. I bet that you will only appreciate this article AFTER you leave office. Now that you are in power, truth will only hurt! Be assured that those of us who are prepared to die for Nigeria will never spare you or anyone else this bitter truth.
Nigeria must survive and prosper beyond Buhari or Jonathan!
Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, was former CBN Governor.

Buhari vs Jonathan: Beyond the Election, by Charles Soludo

I need to preface this article with a few clarifications. I have taken a long sabbatical leave from partisan politics, and it is real fun watching the drama from the balcony. Having had my own share of public service (I do not need a job from government), I now devote my time and energy in pursuit of other passions, especially abroad. A few days ago, I read an article in Thisday entitled “Where is Charles Soludo?”, and my answer is that I am still there, only that I have been too busy with extensive international travels to participate in or comment on our national politics and economy. But I occasionally follow events at home. Since the survival and prosperity of Nigeria are at stake, the least some of us (albeit, non-partisan) must do is to engage in public debate. As the elections approach, I owe a duty to share some of my concerns.
In September 2010, I wrote a piece entitled “2011 Elections: Let the Real Debate Begin” and published by Thisday. I understand the Federal Executive Council discussed it, and the Minister of Information rained personal attacks on me during the press briefing. I noted more than six newspaper editorials in support of the issues we raised. Beside other issues we raised, our main thesis was that the macro economy was dangerously adrift, with little self-insurance mechanisms (and a prediction that if oil prices fell below $40, many state governments would not be able to pay salaries). I gave a subtle hint at easy money and exchange rate depreciations because I did not want to panic the market with a strong statement. Sadly, on the eve of the next elections, literally everything we hinted at has happened. Part of my motivation for this article is that five years after, the real debate is still not happening.
The presidential election next month will be won by either Buhari or Jonathan. For either, it is likely to be a pyrrhic victory. None of them will be able to deliver on the fantastic promises being made on the economy, and if oil prices remain below $60, I see very difficult months ahead, with possible heady collisions with labour, civil society, and indeed the citizenry. To be sure, the presidential election will not be decided by the quality of ‘issues’ or promises canvassed by the candidates. The debates won’t also change much (except if there is a major gaffe by either candidate like Tofa did in the debate with Abiola). My take is that more than 95% of the likely voters have pretty much made up their minds based largely on other considerations. A few of us remain undecided. During my brief visit to Nigeria, I watched some of the campaign rallies on television. The tragedy of the current electioneering campaigns is that both parties are missing the golden opportunity to sensitize the citizenry about the enormous challenges ahead and hence mobilize them for the inevitable sacrifices they would be called upon to make soon. Each is promising an El-Dorado.
Let me admit that the two main parties talk around the major development challenges—corruption, insecurity, economy (unemployment/poverty, power, infrastructure, etc) health, education, etc. However, it is my considered view that none of them has any credible agenda to deal with the issues, especially within the context of the evolving global economy and Nigeria’s broken public finance. The UK Conservative Party’s manifesto for the last election proudly announced that all its programmes were fully costed and were therefore implementable. Neither APC nor PDP can make a similar claim. A plan without the dollar or Naira signs to it is nothing but a wish-list. They are not telling us how much each of their promises will cost and where they will get the money. None talks about the broken or near bankrupt public finance and the strategy to fix it.
In response to the question of where the money will come from, I heard one of the politicians say that the problem of Nigeria was not money but the management of resources. This is half-truth. The problem is both. No matter how efficient a father (with a monthly salary of N50,000) is at managing the family resources, I cannot see how he could deliver on a promise to buy a brand new Peugeot 406 for each of his three children in a year. Even with all the loopholes and waste closed, with increased efficiency per dollar spent, there is still a binding budget constraint. To deliver an efficient national transport infrastructure alone will still cost tens of billions of dollars per annum even by corruption-free, cost-effective means. Did I hear that APC promises a welfare system that will pay between N5,000 and N10,000 per month to the poorest 25 million Nigerians? Just this programme alone will cost between N1.5 and N3 trillion per annum. Add to this the cost of free primary education plus free meal (to be funded by the federal budget or would it force non-APC state governments to implement the same?), plus some millions of public housing, etc.
I have tried to cost some of the promises by both the APC and the PDP, given alternative scenarios for public finance and the numbers don’t add up. Nigerians would be glad to know how both parties would fund their programmes. Do they intend to accentuate the huge public debt, or raise taxes on the soon to-be-beleaguered private businesses, or massively devalue the naira to rake in baskets of naira from the dwindling oil revenue, or embark on huge fiscal retrenchment with the sack of labour and abandonment of projects, and which areas of waste do they intend to close and how much do they estimate to rake in from them, etc? I remember that Chief Obafemi Awolowo was asked similar questions in 1978 and 1979 about his promises of free education and free medical services. Even as a teenager, I was impressed by how he reeled out figures about the amounts he would save from various ‘waste’ including the tea/coffee served in government offices. The point is that at least he did his homework and had his numbers and I give credit to his team. Some 36 years later, the quality of political debate and discourse seems to border on the pedestrian. From the quality of its team, I did not expect much from the current government, but I must confess that I expected APC as a party aspiring to take over from PDP to come up with a knock-out punch. Evidently, from what we have read from the various versions of its manifesto as well as the depth of promises being made, it does not seem that it has a better offer.

Let me digress a bit to refresh our memory on where we are, and thus provide the context in which to evaluate the promises being made to us. Recall that the key word of the 2015 budget is ‘austerity’. Austerity? This is just within a few months of the fall in oil prices. History repeats itself in a very cruel way, as this was exactly what happened under the Shehu Shagari administration. Under the Shagari government, oil price reached its highest in 1980/81. During the same period, Nigeria ratcheted up its consumption and all tiers of government were in competition as to which would out-borrow the other. Huge public debt was the consequence. When oil prices crashed in early 1982, the National Assembly then passed the Economic Stabilization (Austerity Measures) Act in one day— going through the first, second, and third readings the same day. The austerity measures included the rationing of ‘essential commodities’ and most states owed salary arrears. Corruption was said to be pervasive, and as Sani Abacha said in that famous coup speech, ‘unemployment has reached unacceptable proportions and our hospitals have become mere consulting clinics’. General Muhammadu Buhari/Tunde Idiagbon regime made the fight against corruption and restoration of discipline the cardinal point of their administration which lasted for 20 months. I am not sure they had a credible plan to get the economy out of the doldrums (although it must be admitted that poverty incidence in Nigeria as of 1985 when they left office was a just46%— according to the Federal Office of Statistics).
We have come full circle. If the experience under Shagari could be excused as an unexpected shock, what Nigeria is going through now is a consequence of our deliberate wrong choices. We have always known that the unprecedented oil boom (in both price and quantity—despite oil theft) of the last six years is temporary but the government chose to treat it as a permanent shock. The parallels with the Shagari regime are troubling. First, at the time of oil boom, Nigeria again went on a consumption spree such that the budgets of the last five years can best be described as ‘consumption budgets’, with new borrowing by the federal government exceeding the actual expenditure on critical infrastructure. Second, not one penny was added to the stock of foreign reserves at a period Nigeria earned hundreds of billions from oil. For comparisons, President Obasanjo met about $5 billion in foreign reserves, and the average monthly oil price for the 72 months he was in office was $38, and yet he left $43 billion in foreign reserves after paying $12 billion to write-off Nigeria’s external debt. In the last five years, the average monthly oil price has been over $100, and the quantity also higher but our foreign reserves have been declining and exchange rate depreciating.
I note that when I assumed office as Governor of CBN, the stock of foreign reserves was $10 billion. The average monthly oil price during my 60 months in office was $59, but foreign reserve reached the all-time peak of $62 billion (and despite paying $12 billion for external debt, and losing over $15 billion during the unprecedented global financial and economic crisis) I left behind $45 billion. Recall also that our exchange rate continuously appreciated during this period and was at N117 to the dollar before the global crisis and we deliberately allowed it to depreciate in order to preserve our reserves. My calculation is that if the economy was better managed, our foreign reserves should have been between $102 –$118 billion and exchange rate around N112 before the fall in oil prices. As of now, the reserves should be around $90 billion and exchange rate no higher than N125 per dollar.
Third, the rate of public debt accumulation at a time of unprecedented boom had no parallel in the world. While the Obasanjo administration bought and enlarged the policy space for Nigeria, the current government has sold and constricted it. What debt relief did for Nigeria was to liberate Nigerian policymakers from the intrusive conditionalities of the creditors and thereby truly allowing Nigeria independence in its public policy. How have we used the independence? Through our own choices, we have yet again tied the hands of future policymakers. This time, the debt is not necessarily to foreign creditor institutions/governments which are organized under the Paris club but largely to private agents which is even more volatile. We call it domestic debt. But if one carefully unpacks the bond portfolio, what percentage of it is held by foreign private agents? And I understand the Government had removed the speed bumps we kept to slow the speed of capital flight, and someone is sweating to explain the gyrations in foreign reserves. I am just smiling!
In sum, the mismanagement of our economy has brought us once more to the brink. Government officials rely on the artificial construct of debt to GDP ratio to tell us we can borrow as much as we want. That is nonsense, especially for an economy with a mono but highly volatile source of revenue and forex earnings. The chicken will soon come home to roost. Today, the combined domestic and external debt of the Federal Government is in excess of $40 billion. Add to this the fact that abandoned capital projects littered all over the country amount to over $50 billion. No word yet on other huge contingent liabilities. If oil prices continue to fall, I bet that Nigeria will soon have a heavy debt burden even with low debt to GDP ratio. Furthermore, given the current and capital account regime, it is evident that Nigeria does not have enough foreign reserves to adequately cover for imports plus short term liabilities. In essence, we are approaching the classic of what the Shagari government faced, and no wonder the hasty introduction of ‘austerity measures’ again.
Fourth, poverty incidence and unemployment are also simultaneously at all-time high levels. According to the NBS, poverty incidence grew to 69% in 2010 and projected to be 71% in 2011, with unemployment at 24%. This is the worst record in Nigeria’s history, and the paradox is that this happened during the unprecedented oil boom.
One theme I picked up listening to the campaign rallies as well as to some of the propagandists is the confusion about measuring government “performance”. Most people seem to confuse ‘inputs’, or ‘processes’ with output. Earlier this month, I had a dinner with a group of friends (14 of us) and we were chit-chatting about Nigeria. One of us, an associate of President Jonathan veered off to repeat a propaganda mantra that Jonathan had outperformed his predecessors. He also reminded us that Jonathan re-based the GDP and that Nigeria is now the biggest economy in Africa; etc. It was fun listening to the response by others. In sum, the group agreed that the President had ‘outperformed’ his predecessors except that it is in reverse order. First, my friend was educated that re-basing the GDP is no achievement: it is a routine statistical exercise, and depending on the base year that you choose, you get a different GDP figure. Re-basing the GDP has nothing to do with government policy. Besides, as naira-dollar exchange rate continues to depreciate, the GDP in current dollars will also shrink considerably soon.
We were reminded of Jonathan’s agricultural ‘revolution’. But someone cut in and noted that for all the propaganda, the growth rate of the agricultural sector in the last five years still remains far below the performance under Obasanjo. One of us reminded him that no other president had presided over the slaughter of about 15,000 people by insurgents in a peacetime; no other president earned up to 50% of the amount of resources the current government earned from oil and yet with very little outcomes; no other president had the rate of borrowing; none had significant forex earnings and yet did not add one penny to foreign reserves but losing international reserves at a time of boom; no other president had a depreciating exchange rate at a time of export boom; at no time in Nigeria’s history has poverty reached 71% (even under Abacha, it was 67 -70%); and under no other president did unemployment reach 24%. Surely, these are unprecedented records and he surely ‘outperformed’ his predecessors! What a satire!
One of those present took the satire to some level by comparing Jonathan to the ‘performance’ of the former Governor of Anambra, Peter Obi. He noted that while Obi gloated about ‘savings’, there is no signature project to remember his regime except that his regime took the first position among all states in Nigeria in the democratization of poverty—- mass impoverishment of the people of Anambra. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, poverty rose under his watch in Anambra from 20% in 2004 (lowest in Nigeria then) to 68% in 2010 (a 238% deterioration!). Our friend likened it to a father who had no idea of what to do with his resources and was celebrating his fat bank account while his children were dying of kwashiorkor. He pointed out that since it is the likes of Peter Obi who are the advisers to Jonathan on how to manage the economy (thereby confusing micromanagement which you do as a trader with macro governance) it is little wonder that poverty is fast becoming another name for Nigeria. It was a very hilarious evening.
My advice to President Jonathan and his handlers is to stop wasting their time trying to campaign on his job record. Those who have decided to vote for him will not do so because he has taken Nigeria to the moon. His record on the economy is a clear ‘F’ grade. As one reviews the laundry list of micro interventions the government calls its achievements, one wonders whether such list is all that the government could deliver with an unprecedented oil boom and an unprecedented public debt accumulation. I can clearly see why reasonable people are worried. Everywhere else in the world, government performance on the economy is measured by some outcome variables such as: income (GDP growth rate), stability of prices (inflation and exchange rate), unemployment rate, poverty rate, etc. On all these scores, this government has performed worse than its immediate predecessor— Obasanjo regime. If we appropriately adjust for oil income and debt, then this government is the worst in our history on the economy. All statistics are from the National Bureau of Statistics.
Despite presiding over the biggest oil boom in our history, it has not added one percentage point to the growth rate of GDP compared to the Obasanjo regime especially the 2003- 07 period. Obasanjo met GDP growth rate at 2% but averaged 7% within 2003- 07. The current government has been stuck at 6% despite an unprecedented oil boom. Income (GDP) growth has actually performed worse, and poverty escalated. This is the only government in our history where rapidly increasing government expenditure was associated with increasing poverty. The director general of NBS stated in his written press conference address in 2011 that about 112 million Nigerians were living in poverty. Is this the record to defend? Obama had a tough time in his re-election in 2012 because unemployment reached 8%. Here, unemployment is at a record 24% and poverty at an all-time 71% but people are prancing around, gloating about ‘performance’. As I write, the Naira exchange rate to the dollar is $210 at the parallel market. What a historic performance! Please save your breathe and save us the embarrassment. The President promised Nigeria nothing in the last election and we did not get value for money. He should this time around present us with his plan for the future, and focus on how he would redeem himself in the second term—if he wins!
Sadly the government’s economic team is very weak, dominated by self-interested and self-conflicted group of traders and businessmen, and so-called economic team meetings have been nothing but showbiz time. The very people government exists to regulate have seized the levers of government as policymakers and most government institutions have largely been “privatized” to them. Mention any major government department or agency and someone will tell you whom it has been ‘allocated’ to, and the person subsequently nominates his minion to occupy the seat. What do you then expect? The economy seems to be on auto pilot, with confusion as to who is in charge, and government largely as a constraint. There are no big ideas, and it is difficult to see where economic policy is headed to. My thesis is that the Nigerian economy, if properly managed, should have been growing at an annual rate of about 12% given the oil boom, and poverty and unemployment should have fallen dramatically over the last five years. This is topic for another day.
So far, the Government’s response to the self-inflicted crisis is, at best, laughable. They blame external shocks as if we did not expect them and say nothing about the terrible policy choices they made. The National Assembly had described the 2015 budget as unrealistic. The fiscal adjustments proposed in the 2015 budget simply play to the gallery and just to pander to our emotions. For a $540 billion economy, the so-called luxury tax amounts to zero per cent of GDP. If the current trend continues, private businesses will come under a heavy crunch soon. Having put economics on its head during the boom time, the Government now proposes to increase taxes during a prospective downturn and impose austerity measures. Unbelievable!
Fortuitously, just as he succeeded Shagari when Nigeria faced similar situations, Buhari is once more seeking to lead Nigeria. But times have changed, and Nigeria is largely different. First, this is a democracy and dealing with corruption must happen within the ambit of the rule of law and due process. Getting things done in a democracy requires complicated bargaining, especially where the legislature, labour, the media, and civil society have become strong and entrenched. Second, the size, structure and institutions of the economy have fundamentally altered. The market economy, especially the capital market and foreign exchange market, impose binding constraints and discipline on any regime. Third, dealing with most of the other issues— insecurity, unemployment/poverty, infrastructure, health, education, etc, require increased, smarter, and more efficient spending. Increased spending when the economy is on the reverse gear?
If oil prices remain between 40- 60 dollars over the next two years, the current policy regime guarantees that foreign reserves will continue the precipitous depletion with the attendant exchange rate depreciation, as well as a probable unsustainable escalation in debt accumulation, fiscal retrenchment or taxing the private sector with vengeance. The scenario does not look pretty. The poor choices made by the current government have mortgaged the future, and the next government would have little room to manoeuvre and would inevitably undertake drastic but painful structural adjustments. Nigerians loathe the term ‘structural adjustment’. With falling real wages and depreciating currency, I can see any belated attempt by the government to deal with the bloated public sector pitching it against a feisty labour. I worry about regime stability in the coming months, and I do not envy the next team.
The seeming crisis is not destiny; it is self-imposed. However, we must see it as an opportunity to be seized to fundamentally restructure Nigeria’s political economy, including its fiscal federalism and mineral rights. The current system guarantees cycles of consumption loop and I cannot see sustainable long term prosperity without major systemic overhaul. The proposals at the national conference merely tinker at the margins. In totality, the outcome of the national conference is to do more of the same, with minor amendments on the system of sharing and consumption rather than a fundamental overhaul of the system for productivity and prosperity. President Jonathan promises to implement the report of the national conference if he wins. I commend him for at least offering ‘something’, albeit, marginal in my view. I have not heard anything from the APC or Buhari regarding the national conference report or what kind of federalism they envisage for Nigeria.
In Nigeria’s recent history, two examples under the military and civilian governments demonstrate that where the political will exists, Nigeria has the capacity to overcome severe challenges. The first was under President Babangida. Not many Nigerians appreciate that given the near bankrupt state of Nigeria’s finances and requirements for debt resolution under the Paris Club, the country had little choice but to undertake the painful structural adjustment programme (SAP). I want to state for the record that the foundation for the current market economy we operate in Nigeria was laid by that regime (liberalization of markets including market determined exchange rate, private sector-led economy including licensing of private banks and insurance, de-regulation, privatization of public enterprises under TCPC, etc). Just abolishing the import licensing regime was a fundamental policy revolution. Despite the criticisms, these policy thrusts have remained the pillars of our deepening market economy, and the economy recovered from almost negative growth rate to average 5.5% during the regime and poverty incidence at 42% in 1992.
Under our democratic experience, President Obasanjo inherited a bankrupt economy (with the lost decade of the 1990’s GDP growth rate of 2.2% and hence zero per capita income growth for the decade). His regime consolidated and deepened the market economy structures (consolidation of the banking system which is powering the emergence of a new but truly private sector-led economy and simultaneously led to a new awareness and boom in the capital market; telecommunications revolution; new pension regime; debt relief which won for Nigeria policy independence from the World Bank and Paris Club; deepening of de-regulation and privatization including the unbundling of NEPA under PHCN for privatization; agricultural revolution that saw yearly growth rate of over 6% and remains unsurpassed ever since; sound monetary and fiscal policy and growing foreign reserves that gave confidence to investors; establishment of the Africa Finance Corporation which is leading infrastructure finance in Africa; backward integration policy that saw the establishment and growth of Dangote cement and others; established ICPC and EFCC to fight corruption, etc). The economy roared to average yearly growth of 7% between 2003 and 2007 (although average monthly oil price under his regime was $38), and poverty dropped from estimated 70% in1999 to 54% in 2004. Obasanjo was his own coordinating minister of the economy and chairman of the economic management team— which he chaired for 90 minutes every week. I met with him daily. In other words, he did not outsource economic management.
We expected that the next government after Obasanjo would take the economy to the next level. So far, we have had two great slogans: the 7-point agenda and currently, the transformation agenda. They remain empty slogans without content or direction.
Let me suggest that the fundamental challenge for the next government on the economy can be framed around the goal of creating twelve million jobs over the next four years to have a dent on unemployment and poverty. The challenge is to craft a development agenda to deliver this within the context of broken public finance, and an economy in which painful structural adjustments will be inevitable if current trends in oil prices continue. Most other programmes on corruption, security, power, infrastructure, etc, are expected to be instruments to achieve this objective.
So far, neither the APC nor the PDP has a credible programme for employment and poverty reduction. The APC promises to create 20,000 jobs per state in the first year, totalling a mere 720,000 jobs. This sounds like a quota system and for a country where the new entrants into the labour market per annum exceed two million. If it was intended as a joke, APC must please get serious. On the other hand, President Jonathan targets two million jobs per annum but his strategy for doing so is a Job Board— another committee of sort. Sorry, Mr. President, a Job Board is not a strategy. The principal job Nigerians hired you to do for them is to create jobs for them too. You cannot outsource that job, Sir. Creating 3 million jobs per annum under the unfolding crisis would task our creativity and audacity to the limits.
I heard one politician argue that once we fix power, private sector would create jobs. Not necessarily! Well, this government claims to have added 1,700MW to the national grid and yet unemployment soars. Ask Greece, Spain, etc with power and infrastructure and yet with high unemployment. Structural dislocations play a key role. For example, currently in Nigeria, it is estimated that more than 60% of graduates of our educational system are unemployable. You can understand why many of us are amused when the government celebrates that it has established twelve more glorified secondary schools as universities. I thought they would have told us how many Nigerian universities made it in the league of the best 200 universities in the world. That would have been an achievement. Surely, creating millions of jobs in this economy would, among other things, require ‘new money’ and extraordinary system of coordination among the three tiers of government plus the private sector. Unfortunately, from what I read, the CBN is largely likely to be asleep at this time the country needs the most revolutionary finance. This is a topic for another day. Only the President can lead this effort. Moreover, we are waiting for the two parties/candidates to spell out HOW they will create jobs, whether it is the 20,000 jobs per state by APC or 2 million per annum by President Jonathan. Let us know how you arrived at the figures. Whichever of the two that is declared winner will have his job cut out for him, and I expect him to declare a national emergency on job creation.
Surprisingly, none of the parties/candidates has any grand vision about African economic integration, led by Nigeria. There is no programme on how to make the naira the de facto currency of ECOWAS or the international financial centre that can attract more than $100 billion per annum. Where is the strategy for orchestrating the revolutionary finance to power the economy during this downturn? For President Jonathan, I find it shocking that the most important initiative of his government to secure the future of the economy by Nigeria refusing to sign the ruinous Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union is not even being mentioned. President Obasanjo saved Nigeria from the potential ruin of an ECOWAS single currency while to his credit Jonathan safeguarded our industrial sector/economy by refusing to sign the EPA. Or does the government not understand the import of that? It will be interesting to know the APC’s strategy for exploiting strategic alliances within Africa, China, and the world for Nigeria’s prosperity.
If Buhari wins, he will ride on the populist wind for “change”. Most people I have spoken to who have decided to vote for Buhari do not necessarily know the specifics of what he would offer or how Nigeria would be different under him. I asked my driver, Usman, whom he would vote for President. He responded: “If they no rig the election, na Buhari everybody go vote for”. I asked him why, and his next response sums it: “The man dey honest. In short, people just want to see another face for that villa”. But if he wins, the honeymoon will be brief and the pressure will be immense to magically deliver a ‘new Nigeria’ with no corruption, no boko haram or insecurity, jobs for everyone, no poverty, infrastructure and power in abundance, etc. As a first point, Buhari and his team must realize that they do not yet have a coherent, credible agenda that is consistent with the fundamentals of the economy currently. The APC manifesto contains some good principles and wish-lists, but as a blue print for Nigeria’s security and prosperity, it is largely hollow. The numbers do not add up. Thus, his first job is to present a credible development agenda to Nigerians.
The second key challenge for Buhari and his team will be to transit and transform from a group of what I largely refer to as aggrieved people’s congregation to build a true political party with a soul from the patchwork of political associations. It is surely easier to oppose than to govern. This should not worry us much. After all, even the PDP which has been in power for 16 years is still an assembly of people held together by what I refer to as dining table politics. I am not sure how many members can tell you what their party stands for or its mission and vision for Nigeria. The third but more difficult agenda is cobbling together a truly ‘progressive team’ that will begin to pick the pieces. The lesson of history is that the best leaders have been the ones who went beyond their narrow provincial enclaves to recruit talents and mobilize capacities for national transformation. In Nigeria’s history, the two presidents who made the most fundamental transformation of the economy, Babangida and Obasanjo, were exceptional in the quality of the teams they put together. I therefore pray that Buhari will be magnanimous in victory – if he wins—to put together a ‘team Nigeria’ for the rescue mission.
If Jonathan wins, then God must have been magnanimous to give him a second chance to redeem himself. Most people I know who support Jonathan do so either out of self-interest or fear of the unknown. As a friend summed it: the devil you know is better than the angel you do not know. One person assured me that we would see a ‘different Jonathan’ if he wins as he has been rattled by the harsh judgment of history on his presidency so far. I just pray that he is right. In that case, I would just draw the President’s attention to two issues:
First, beside the coterie of clowns who literally make a living with the sing-song of transformation agenda, President Jonathan must know that it remains an empty slogan. His greatest challenge is how to save himself from the stranglehold of his largely provincial palace jesters who tell him he has done better than God, and seek out ‘enemies’ and friends who can help him write his name in history. Propaganda won’t do it.
Second, Jonathan must claw back his powers as President of Nigeria. He largely outsourced them, and must now roll his sleeves for a new beginning. I take liberty to tell you this brutal truth: if you are not re-elected, there is little to remember your regime after the next few years. On 7th January 2004, I made a special presentation to an expanded economic management team to set agenda for the new year (as chief economic adviser). The focus of my presentation was for us to identify seven iroko trees that would be the flagship markers for the administration as well as how to finance them. I use the same framework to evaluate your administration. What I say to you, Mr. President, is that your record of performance so far is like a farmland filled with grasses. Yes, they are many but there is no tree, let alone any iroko tree, that stands out. Think about this. The beginning of wisdom for every President in his second term is to admit that he is racing against time to cement his legacy. So far, your report card is not looking great. You need a team of big and bold thinkers, as well as with excellent execution capacity. So far, it is not working!
Under the executive presidential system, Nigerians elected you to manage their economy. You cannot outsource that job. Our constitution envisages a federal coordination of the economy, and that function is performed by the National Economic Council (NEC) with Vice-President as chairman. Indeed, the constitution and other laws of Nigeria envisage the office of the VP as the coordinator on the economy. All major economic institutions of the federal government are, by law, chaired by the Vice-President including the national planning (see functions of the national planning commission as coordinator of federal government economic and development programmes), debt management office, National Council on Privatization, etc. As chairman of National Planning (with Ministers of Finance, Agriculture, CBN governor, etc as members), the VP oversees the federal planning and coordination. Then the Constitution mandates the VP as representative of the federal government to chair the NEC, with only CBN governor and state governors as members—to coordinate national economy between federal and states. No minister is a member of NEC. Many people do not understand the logic of the design of our constitution and the role of the VP. Of course, the buck stops on the desk of Mr. President. Only the President and VP have our mandate to govern us. Every other person is an adviser/assistant. I bet that you will only appreciate this article AFTER you leave office. Now that you are in power, truth will only hurt! Be assured that those of us who are prepared to die for Nigeria will never spare you or anyone else this bitter truth.
Nigeria must survive and prosper beyond Buhari or Jonathan!
Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, was former CBN Governor.