Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace


Re:Yar'Adua, Obasanjo and the labour strike 

I realize that Olusegun Adeniyi, President Yar'Adua's Special Assistant on Communication, has a job to do as spokesperson of a beleaguered and unsure presidency. It's difficult enough to be a paid defender of a government minted by a fraudulent election. This is why I read in disbelief Adeniyi's illogical and pedestrian defense of Yar'Adua's handling of the now called-off strike action by a coalition of labor and civil society groups (published in Sunday Trust, June 24, 2007).  Adeniyi seems to want to compound his boss's legitimacy crisis by insulting the very Nigerian public that is yet to connect with his troubled presidency. How else does one explain Adeniyi's regurgitation of the trite anti-people logic that his boss's predecessor routinely advanced to rationalize the frequent fuel price increases during his tenure?

{mosgoogle}Such a giddy, over-the-top defense of the fuzzy logic of fuel price increases invites a reasoned, detailed response.

Adeniyi started his piece with a nauseating piece of revisionist history, claiming that Obasanjo's so-called economic reforms were designed to remove inefficiencies from public institutions and to infuse into them "genuine and durable improvements." Coyly, but understandably, Adeniyi abstained from telling us whether this dual vision was achieved to any degree in eight years of the Obasanjo presidency. In fact, it is in the realm of the so-called economic reform that the chasm between Obasanjo's declared visions and his actions and their outcome was most vividly exposed. At no other time in Nigeria's postcolonial history have there been such a dissonance between governmental rhetoric and the actions of those who put themselves in charge of declared grand visions. Inefficiencies and waste have not only endured and multiplied in some cases, the savings purportedly realized from chaotically implemented policies like retrenchment and monetization have yet to be declared, let alone put to use to improve the lives of Nigerians. Let's not over-flog the ubiquitous criticism of the other aspects of Obasanjo's "reform" project, like the scandalously corrupt privatization program, in which the former president is deeply implicated.

Adeniyi also claims that in the pursuit of Obasanjo's reform agenda "some people [were] bound to get hurt." Yes, economic reforms, whether of the neo-liberal or radical socialist variety, often have losers and winners and often hurt some people. The reason why this logic does not apply to Obasanjo's so-called reform is that it didn't hurt "some people"; it hurt most people. And that is a crucial difference in vision between reformers who seek the greatest benefit for the greatest number of citizens and those like Obasanjo who are committed to awarding the greatest benefit to the smallest number of citizens. It is to the eternal shame of that much-vaunted reform program (which Adeniyi celebrates) that its only verifiable ‘achievement" is the creation, quite literally, of a greater number of politically invested billionaires
than any previous government had managed to do.

Adeniyi should learn to fight his boss's fight and not that of Obasanjo. He should pick his fights wisely, and even then he should not pick fights with the Nigerian people, whom his boss is still trying to convince about his problematic ascendance to power. Adeniyi pretends to spot a contradiction in Nigerians' simultaneous vilification of Obasanjo's government and their insistence on the 15 percent salary increase "promised" by him. This, he claims, is an unconscious admission that the ex-president formulated some good policies. If Adeniyi wasn't so eager to rehabilitate the image of a failed and hated ex-president, he would have noted two interrelated facts: that to make a promise and fail to uphold it is worse than not making one at all, and that the 15 percent salary increase was not a promise or "commitment" as alleged in the write-up but a demand made by organized labor in exchange for its reluctant acceptance of the previous government's retrenchment exercise. To put it another way, it was a deal between labor and Obasanjo that the latter failed to keep.

Adeniyi accuses critics of Yar'Adua's handling of the inherited unpopular decisions of Obasanjo's government of reductionism. The critics are, Adeniyi claims, guilty of reducing the present struggle over fuel price, VAT, and the sale of the refineries, to a simple matter of Yar'Adua either embracing or repudiating Obasanjo's universally despised legacy. But his write up invokes Obasanjo more than it tells of us about Yar'Adua's thoughts on the issues at stake. If anyone is guilty of using Obasanjo as a foil to frame the debate on the subject of the recent strike action, it is Adeniyi, who praised Obasanjo as a "great" and courageous leader who merely, like all mortals, made mistakes. Adeniyi is guilty of reducing Yar'Adua's presidential actions to the internal struggle within the administration to determine which of Obasanjo's actions to preserve and which to discard. If anything came loudly across from Adeniyi's write-up, it is the fact that Obasanjo's image still looms large in the Yar'Adua presidency, and that the ex-president's footprints continue to guide or shape Yar'Adua's actions. It is either Yar'Adua is acting against the counsel of Obasanjo's trusted economic advisers (like the PPPRA) or overruling them, as Adeniyi himself informed us. Either way, Obasanjo's image is still with us, validating the call for Yar'Adua to shake off his subservient sense of gratitude to the man who engineered his coming to power.

Yar'Adua is a man beholden to, and dogged by the legacy of Obasanjo. An honest conversation about VAT, fuel price increase, sale of refinery, etc, should therefore begin from an acknowledgement of this fact, from this troubling premise. Curiously, although Adeniyi's write-up oozes this acknowledgement, perhaps in a Freudian slippage, he insists on two claims: that Yar'Adua's critics are the ones reducing our current challenges to Obasanjo's controversial last minute actions and that Yar'Adua is his own courageous man, respectful of the former president but independently handling the lingering problems of state.

But one claim in Adeniyi's piece vitiates the claim of Yar'Adua's independence and courage. Adeniyi wants us to be grateful for Obasanjo's show of courage in relieving Yar'Adua of the flak that was bound to trail the fuel price hike. In Adeniyi's logic, Obasanjo courageously chose to be Yar'Adua's fall guy; he decided to take the fall for an unpopular decision instead of transferring the blowback of an "inevitable" fuel price increase to Yar'Adua's new government. This claim is revealing on several levels. First, doesn't this mean that Yar'Adua knew about the increase and allowed (perhaps pleaded with) Obasanjo to relieve him of its burden? If this is true, doesn't it put a lie to the claim by Adeniyi and other members of Yar'Adua's government that Yar'Adua inherited the problem and should therefore be given credit for confronting a problem he didn't create? More crucially, this claim by Adeniyi suggests that Yar'Adua is, far from being a courageous independent, a cowardly, unsure president, who needed his political mentor to announce for his incoming government a set of policies that he deemed necessary but was afraid to publicly associate with. Finally, is this not the greatest, most irrefutable evidence yet that Yar'Adua is not his own man? If he needed Obasanjo to help him announce and bear the criticisms of the policies under discussion, one wonders what else the ex-president is helping him with. So much for presidential courage and independence!

The only insight Adeniyi offered into the crisis management capacity of Yar'Adua, already widely perceived as a fatalistic, aloof president, is his claim that the president sought and got representations from the PPPRA, the NNPC, the Inland Revenue Service, and legal experts on the legal and financial propriety of a VAT and fuel price increase. We were not told why he did not seek the views of organized labor or civil society groups, the two organizational constituencies most representative of the Nigerian people. This casual negligence conflicts with Yar'Adua's posturing as a listening, compassionate servant-leader. The important question to pose is: should an astute, compassionate president only be concerned with the fiscal and legal costs of his actions? How about the social costs of such actions? Government, it should be stressed, exists for the people and their needs, not for abstract pursuits of legality and fiscal equilibrium.

A common thread than run through Adeniyi's write-up is that of shunning populism for the long view. Yar'Adua, he claims, appreciates the long-term benefits of the fuel price increase despite its unpopularity. This vision, we are told, has defines his approach to the agitation for reversion of the pump price to N65. No one has a problem with presidents and political leaders thinking strategically and shunning convenient populism for more profound, thoughtful, and far-reaching policies. The problem is that the logic of the PPPRA and the Bretton Woods institutions that it parrots, not to mention that of the fuel importers' lobby, upon which Obasanjo's and now Yar'Adua's long view depends, has long been discredited in theory and practice.

The idea that all subsidies are bad or that it is wrong, regardless of the product or sector involved, for government to maintain a subsidy, is economically passé. Perceptive and humble economists, some of them Nobel winners, have acknowledged that limited, strategically targeted, and carefully policed subsidies on strategic products and industries are not only necessary for the growth of young economies, they are compatible with the nurturing of a capitalist economy. Similarly, countries that have defied the Bretton Woods institutions and initiated or preserved sector-specific subsidies have done well economically, even recovering from crisis brought on by the fanatical application of free market orthodoxy. Malaysia's recovery from the Asian economic crisis is a good example. More relevant to our situation is the fact that Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, and other major oil producers heavily subsidize petroleum products for their citizens and not only have they done well economically, they cannot by any stretch of the imagination be described as socialist, non-capitalist economies, the label that our approval-seeking reformers shun like a plague.

Adeniyi claims that Yar'Adua had, through his consultations prior to the strike action, decided to revert to the 5 percent VAT, to reduce the pump price of petrol by N5 and to pay the 15 percent salary increase to civil servants. The implication is that the strike action was unnecessary since all these decisions had been taken. My question to Adeniyi is: if Yar'Adua had already decided on what would later be advertised as "government's offer," why were these same decisions advanced by government's negotiators and spokespersons as "concessions" to labor? There is, it seems, a clever attempt here by Adeniyi and other government people to control both sides of the debate. The "concessions" cannot be prior decisions, and the "decisions" cannot be repackaged as concessions. One explanation has to give.

Adeniyi's logic was at its most hollow in his defense of the sale of the Kaduna and Port-Hacourt refineries.  He claims that the BPE's explanation of the sale is incontrovertible. Thankfully, he is the president's spokesman, not BPE's, so we can ignore his shabby attempt to usurp the role of whoever speaks for the BPE.

Adeniyi should know that most Nigerians do not quarrel with the sale of inefficient and failed government corporations that no longer fulfill the role for which they were set up and/or have become a drain on the public purse. That debate has long been settled. Nigerians object to the lack of transparency that has characterized the entire privatization process, especially the corruption and politics that have defined the sales. The refinery sales are the latest in a long line of fraudulent sale of government enterprises without the constitutionally required scrutiny, oversight, and bidding process. Some people argue rightly that the Pentascope/Nitel deal, and the subsequent sale of Nicon Hilton, Nitel, Ajaokuta Steel Complex, Alscon, and other state assets sold or negotiated away to politically connected allies of Obasanjo and Yar'Adua's PDP at below-market prices emboldened Obasanjo to authorize the sale of the two refineries without relevant approvals and consultations.

The other reason why the sale of our national assets to politically invested investors is controversial is because Nigerians have no idea how the funds accruing from the sales are being utilized, especially since there has been no improvement in the electricity situation; major roads are in terrible condition; security is as poor as ever, and unemployment and poverty continue to soar to new heights.

Nigerians are distrustful of their government, for good reason. But they are not unreasonable critics of government. There is a method and reason to our madness at the Yar'Adua government's refusal to define its identity by fighting over its own policies rather than those of the previous government. Adeniyi's haughty pontifications on the presidential wisdom of Yar'Adua's unsatisfactory handling of the unpopular decisions of his predecessor are insulting to Nigeria's suffering people.

The strike has come and gone, and government has essentially won a N5 increase in the price of petrol, never mind all the talk about "concession" and "reduction." Nigerians are once again the victims of a nightmarish economic regime that has outlived their legendary patience. There is only one privilege that comes with victimhood: the victim can at least suffer in peace, without further insult or injury. I beg Adeniyi and his employer to at least concede to us this privilege.

 Moses Ebe Ochonu

Kaduna, Nigeria
 



1 2 3 4
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Nf5kmw1 posted on 06-24-2007, 16:10:53 PM
Strike is over!!!!

And the only way to stop and even reverse fuel prices is to change strategy. Talking about
price will not change the situation on the ground. Labour needs to take a proactive
stands on energy strategy... I will like to see a demonstration for building refineries
than waiting for the government to increase prices and having strikes....this is getting
old!!!!



For most of the people who are \"privatization supporters\", the believe that private
companies only will solve our oil needs at point in time is being unrealistic. After 8
years, 240% increase in price (N11 to N65), 17 licenses granted, zero refineries working
and total dependent import. We must say that the Energy policy has been a failure. In
most places the people responsible for this failures and continuing to push this failed
approach would have been fired at year 2.



This could be a headline!!! if Nigerians as a whole, the President and labour help change
the strategy....


"President Yar 'adua Reduces Fuel To N7 Per litre, Nigeria's Economy Grows by 12%?


How did he do it? He listened to a different approach because the approach of the last 8
years was a failure!!!
They say imitation is a form of flattery. If so, Nigeria needs to look to Venezuela to
reform its fuel sector. Due to the policies of Venezuelan oil company PDVSA, the
Venezuela are able to enjoy $0.19 per gallon or N6.12. Venezuela also gives fuel to poor
people in USA and other Latin American countries. The Venezuelan oil company, PDVSA,
had decided that it was not the the crude oil export business but in the global petroleum
and chemical business. So they invested in refining and retail business in Venezuela and
almost all their export markets. These market include Europe, Caribbean, South America,
Caribbean, Canada and United States. "PDVSA is among the leading corporations in the
refining business, with a petroleum processing capacity of 3,285,000 barrels a day
(1,285,000 barrels a day in Venezuela and 2 million barrels a day outside the country)
through 24 refineries: six complexes in Venezuela, one in the Caribbean, eight in the
United States and nine in Europe.
I would advice the New President to seek counsel of the architects of PDVSA and also look
to what Mr. Putin in Russia is doing to the oil industry."

I would recommend three strategic steps to revolutionize our oil sector.
1.NNPC should be come a government/public firm with part of it shares allocated for
Nigerians. This will provide the company with a new direction and ownership need for the
global challenges. By the way we have the money in form of excess funds.

2.NNPC should go on a buying spree with the aid of government funds to buy (outright or
major) shares in refineries in Africa, China and United States. This will provide us with
immediate source of refined products, opportunities to train our people and hard
currency. Best of all this does not need the 18 to 24 months to build a refinery. This
will also provide us a stop gag measure until we build more refineries. It is all about
add value and we need to start doing that.

3.Start building 4 refineries and retail outlets to take care of the local demand as
estimated for 2010. This will help put to rest the fuel challenges that we face as a
Nation.

Background and answers
For most of the people who are "privatization supporters", the believe that private
companies only will solve our oil needs at point in time is being unrealistic. After 8
years, 240% increase in price (N11 to N65), 17 licenses granted, zero refineries working
and total dependent import. We must say that the Energy policy has been a failure. In
most places the people responsible for this failures and continuing to push this failed
approach would have been fired at year 2.
Why did they fail? I will give you some reasons.

1.Lack of a Nigerian centric approach. Simply put lack of vision.

2.Corruption and not state owned inefficiencies are responsible for our ills. Most of the
companies that are interested in Nigerian assets are government owned companies. Which
means that state own or controlled companies are profitable and efficient. PDSVA in
Venezuela is an example that currently owns 24 refineries worldwide and sells petrol at
N7 per litre.

3.It takes lots of money to play and tonnes to compete in a global oil and gas industry.
To illustrate this point the market value of Exxon Mobil is $474.12 billion, while the
Chairman, NSP Refineries and Energy Services, Prof. Anya .O. Anya one of the companies
granted license was not able to put together a mere $200million financing for a refinery.

.
[I]And for those who want to charge western prices for petrol they should be willing to pay
western market salaries. So we can afford to buy the petrol.
[/I]

The argument of paying for subsides is a non starter, because the multiplier effect on
the economy when cost of energy is low is tremendous. Energy is like no other commodity.
It accounts for a large part of cost of goods and therefore gives local companies the
ability to compete with global companies. This will lead to a reduction in imports of
different products while increasing exports for our products. This double ?barrel effect?
will more than compensate for the so called ?opportunity cost?. And we should remember
when we establish refineries at home and aboard we will not only eliminate need for hard
currency but will gain more foreign currency. For all those who keep on hoping on
?opportunity cost? they should stop listening to some foreign interest that are not
interested in our well being. If they were these same countries and institutions will
first stop stronger nations subsidies before attacking the poorer nations subsides. They
keep calling for us to stop subsidizes continue subsidize their own people. Lots of
countries provide subsides on several products. USA for example spent $20 billion in farm
subsides in 2006 making it difficult for us to sell farm products to them. USA spent $6
billion on oil and gas subsides.
Also we must remember that most of these countries subsides are actually go to affecting
the cost of goods like wheat because the cost of wheat is high. Unlike petrol where the
cost of extraction and refinery has not change a lot since crude oil was $17.48 per
barrel therefore the real subside would have not change if the government had fix and
built more refineries in Nigeria in the last 8 years. The so called subsiding is not the
same. We are not subsiding cost of product but the high price of crude(and mismanagement
of our energy policies zero refineries compared to Venezuela's 24) which today is around
$59.25 or 238% from 1999. Last but not the least, the oil that we consume local are also
not part of our OPEC quotas so we do not have any "opportunity cost".
I believe that there is need for the government to step into this issue because this is a
matter of national security. A country that cannot provide fuel for its society, with the
abundant supply of crude oil, will never improve We need to wake up and take take of
ourselves.

We have been bless with natural and human resources and it is time to use them.

God Bless Nigeria!!!!!!!!!
Joseph Inyang
joe@nigeriansfor50000mw.com
http://nigeriansfor50000mw.com/
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
SBI posted on 06-24-2007, 16:43:08 PM
Well done Uncle Mo, whacked the charlatan for six.
And for good measure you should have poked why it took him till the strike was called off to respond to the crisis, so much for media adviser.
The way things are going this Presidency might just turn out to be more theatrical entertainment than Nigerians expect.

SBI
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Tonsoyo posted on 06-24-2007, 16:57:30 PM
The only thing that is conspicous from all this lengthy write-up, is anti-Obasanjo sentiments on display.
Even after Obasanjo has done his own piece good or bad and retired to his farm in Otta.

Some people don't listen to themselves when they talk. All he wrote here is about the relationship between Obasanjo and Yaradua and yet he thinks that for Yaradua to be his own man, just like his fellow writer Abati, he has to forget that Obasanjo ruled Nigeria for 8 solid years like it never existed.

Even the burden of Abacha had Obasanjo jetting around the world for most of his first trem to bring us back from a pariah nation into the comity of nations for which he was highly criticized.

The burden and the shadow of an immediate past administration will always be a visible part of all incoming government.

Yaradua will certainly need more than two weeks into his own government to define himself.
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Ezyvic posted on 06-24-2007, 18:57:02 PM
I really dont know this Adeniyi, but, I bet you, he sure got the attention he sought. Femi Fani Kayode started off the same way and ended up as a minister. Not a bad pay back for loyalty. The entire oil sector needs urgent over-hauling, and a severe auditing. The corrupt practises in which the sector was enmeshed has led to several deaths, ranging from pipeline vandalization, to lack of political will to allow the refineries work. I sincerely do not envy Yar'dua, as his ex-boss has sold off most of the oil blocks as compensation to his allies.

The promise from Yar'dua's government to stop further price-hike can only lead to scarcity, as he virtually cannot have control of that sector in 1 year. The sector is import friendly right now, as the refineries have been paralysed intentionally to ensure dependence on import. I wonder how much sabotage remains to be seen at the expense of the majority. Nigeria can set up refineries to meet the requirement of the West African sub-region. The hoarding of fuel will resume now, aimed at causing artificial scarcity, invariably the Nigerian populace will end up on queues only to buy the product at a higher price. So, what is the way forward? Well, I suggest a simple sincerity of purpose. The government should not sell the refineries, rather, put the right people there, via consultancy services if necessary. States have failed to see beyond their noses, as it really would be fun to see states set up their independent refineries, to meet the demand of their people, and possibly sell to neighboring countries. It is time to stand up and start thinking. The ex-governors, which comprised of highly branded rouges, would never think inline with making life easier for the populace, rather, they were busy siphoning money in place of fuel.

Livi Ajuonuma and Funso Kupkolokun succeeded in no small measure, thanks to the increased hardship passed on Nigerians implementing dehumanizing policies of the last government. I really dread technocrats who make themselves available for politicians who wish to manipulate the masses, but lack the needed training and knowledge. Yar'dua needs to clean out most, if not all of these 'oppressor tools' before He can start making promises. I agree that governance is a continuum, but I wonder why a co-villager would encourage the continuation of a failed government reform, based on 'illegality' and fraud. A sincere leader would never impose reforms and promise to 'protect those reforms with his life', simply because they have acquired most of the States' infrastructures under the auspices of liberalization and privatization.

The agencies responsible fighting corruption seem not to be winning the war, at least not from reports available. Meaning, the fate of Nigerians is in their own hands. God help us all.
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Ebasain posted on 06-24-2007, 20:34:18 PM
Ebe,
Thank you for reminding us about Adeniyi's pathetic attempt to put a human face on a
pungent revisionist history! Guess what, for this below average job, Yar'Adua might
decide to give Adeniyi a 15% pay increase! That's seems to be Nigeria's albatross-
mediocrity in high places! And you wonder, how can a country so blessed with some of
the most brilliant minds in the world have as their leaders a bunch of........... Are we just
too wealthy and too intelligent for our own good? Adeniyi is paid to spin, spin and spin
until he can spin no more. But one thing is clear. Obasanjo is evil personified. And while
Adeniyi is considering about letting us to suffer in peace, it's nice to know too that
Obasanjo has lost his credibility as a leader who brought the greatest failure to an
otherwise great country. So wherever he's enjoying his loot, Obasanjo cannot escape
thinking about this paradox. He'll continue to wrestle with his conscience for the rest of
his life. The question is, will Yar'Adua learn from Obasanjo's misery? The fear now is that
Adeniyi seems not to be interested in helping his new boss to understand the lessons
of Obasanjo. Once again, we are in for a long hurricane season in Nigeria! Cry, the
beloved country.
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Omowa2 posted on 06-24-2007, 20:44:44 PM
My reaction....Most commentators DO NOT love Nigeria. No logic at all. Yes NLC is a good platform to launch your political career. Adam thought he had an Apple..thank our stars he lost the election. And may all who want to ride on the backs of Nigerians go the way of Adam...

My mean mouth

I hate my mouth and the non-sound
It produces most times
I hate my mouth for its small size
My enemy's mouth is so wide
You can ride a trailer into it
I hate my mouth because of its silence
When vocal harassment should be license
I hate my mouth and its absence
When nation bashers foul the air with their non-sense
I hate my mouth and the flapping tongue
that eats my food and allow fools
parade so much wrong
in a land which needs songs of knowledge
I hate all mouths that pronounce Nu eel sea (NLC)
When in truth they are Never
Love
Country (nlc)
Confused lot seeking fame at the expense
of our collective tomorrow
I hate all mouths that hail supreme cutters
who drape laws to cut another to size
They have made the ass the law
and rule of law turned into fools of law
My mouth is filled with fury
and my teeth now the biased jury.
Watch as I cut the meat
and misjudge the portion for me
It is my mouth and it can be mean

© Omowa2
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Omowa2 posted on 06-24-2007, 20:58:27 PM
QUOTE:
Strike is over!!!!




This could be a headline!!! if Nigerians as a whole, the President and labour help change
the strategy....


\"President Yar 'adua Reduces Fuel To N7 Per litre, Nigeria's Economy Grows by 12%?

God Bless Nigeria!!!!!!!!!
Joseph Inyang
]


We need MORE minds like you NOT those who SEE no good in what others are doing. Nigeria has grave structural economic problems that need creative solutions. I really pity the Professors we have on Nigerian websites. Too much reading renders them impotent. How can anyone in a right frame of mind not read between the lines of what Adeniyi tried to communicate. The simple message was that something was been done to the problem at hand even before the NLC jumped up and gave their notice for a strike. Read what he (Segun Adeniyi) wrote against the former press advisers (Remi Oyo and co) and you may notice a slight difference.
I tell you Lawyers and Professors are the bane of Nigeria's nation-building project. I wish the people of Nigeria can learn to ignore them and seek out first degree holders with practical solutions not these PhD too much book fellows. They give me a terrible headache...these Professors ...SAVE US FROM LAWYERS AND PROFESSORS...

Omowa2
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Tonsoyo posted on 06-24-2007, 21:24:01 PM
QUOTE:
We need MORE minds like you NOT those who SEE no good in what others are doing. Nigeria has grave structural economic problems that need creative solutions. I really pity the Professors we have on Nigerian websites. Too much reading renders them impotent. How can anyone in a right frame of mind not read between the lines of what Adeniyi tried to communicate. The simple message was that something was been done to the problem at hand even before the NLC jumped up and gave their notice for a strike. Read what he (Segun Adeniyi) wrote against the former press advisers (Remi Oyo and co) and you may notice a slight difference.
I tell you Lawyers and Professors are the bane of Nigeria's nation-building project. I wish the people of Nigeria can learn to ignore them and seek out first degree holders with practical solutions not these PhD too much book fellows. They give me a terrible headache...these Professors ...SAVE US FROM LAWYERS AND PROFESSORS...

Omowa2



Thank you jare Omowa2. You know some people have created a hobby out of criticizing anything government in Nigeria even when do not have a clue about how government works.

When the government got to the negotiation table with labor leaders they quickly conceeded about 90% of their demands, they still went on strike just to show Nigerians that hey look we know you hate your govenrment here, see us here we are on your side, we will deal with them.

Four days later they accepted the same term and called off the strike, after the country has lost billions of Naira.
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Omowa2 posted on 06-24-2007, 21:38:35 PM
Omar simply wants to inform Nigerians that another Adam has come to eat their apple. Now Nigerians should know better that all Adam wanted was visibility and he had it on the back of the suffering people of Nigeria. Read how the man jumped from one party to another seeking a platform to run for election. There are too many opportunists in Nigeria. Do you remember Mike Ozekome Esq., please tell him NOT to keep silent; he should come out strongly to let Nigerians know the stuff this Adam is made of....Omar sit down and assist Nigerian workers to be PRODUCTIVE. They are lazy bones. Labor creates wealth we are told not the set of lazy government file pushers who punish the people. Any way some day monkey go go market him no go return
Omar the brother of Umaru let us have Uhuru

Omowa2
Re: Adeniyi, Allow Us to Suffer in Peace
Oluye posted on 06-24-2007, 21:46:49 PM
Tonsoyo,
The strike was not about the price of oil at all. They would have found a reason for it anyhow.
It's about launching Omar into the Nigerian political scene and establishing NLC as a force to be reckoned with in the present dispensation. Now we read that Nigeria lost N164billion. Some people in Nigeria sure have expensive ambitions.

Evidently, once the president realises that NLC will call a strike to protest anything , it will always add their "ego factor" so that after negotiations we'll just be where govt. wants us to be- after we've lost so much to the strike. Since I've been in the U.S. , I've witnessed petrol prices going up, not once did anybody riot or go on strike. Of course, we don't learn such constructive things from the West. Anything other than dialog amounts to the tail wagging the body.
1 2 3 4
Please register before you can make new comment