Five reasons why Governor Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term

If there are any reasons why Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term, here are my 5 reasons.

I was jubilant when Dr Fayemi was eventually awarded his electoral victory and I was on the phone to a close friend of his at Christ’s school, to share the joy. We knew that Dr John Kayode Fayemi (henceforth JKF) would deliver an unblemished good governance, constrained only by human foibles. In a way, this very high expectation of JKF may be his undoing. A determined intellectual and an avowed democrat, there is no better candidate to govern Ekiti. Or so did I think. Good governance was what he fought for, and what would be his forte. Or so did I think. He was the Moses that would lead Ekiti Israelites out of slavery of poverty and penury by harnessing the natural untapped resources of the people, their knowledge and their industry. Or so do I think.

Our expectation was further heightened when JKF named governance as of one the 8 point agenda. Good governance and transparency in government? If anybody can, JKF can. If anybody can be whiter than white, JKF is it. He would allow free access to information about the ways in which the society is governed as practised in the UK where JKF once lived. Perhaps JKF has been whiter than white but I have been ignorant of his transparency in government and I am ready to be corrected.

What is transparent about the salaries of commissioners, special advisers, personnal advisers and the taxes they pay, being kept secret? Or the salaries of legislators in the house of assembly and the taxes they pay. How can JKF pay huge sums of money to legislators without asking them to pay taxes? How can JKF collude with the legislators to siphon huge sums of money out of Ekiti budget?  This contradicts the good governance agenda.

Taxation is important because it provides a mechanism to redistribute wealth (forgive me, I am not an economist). Taxation is the wheel that makes the money go round in an economy. We live in a society where “fingers are not equal”. Robin Hood was not in government but he left the fabled legacy of making the money go round by redistributing wealth. He introduced a form of taxation, howbeit an illegal taxation. He robbed the sheriffs to give the money to poor people. Taxation is what makes for a fair society. The more you earn, the more you give to the society in taxes. How can the poor and the weak go to bed hungry, and the elderly dying of hunger everyday whist commissioners, legislators and special advisers and official contractors, pay nothing in taxes? Instead of making the money go round, money has accumulated and stagnated in the pockets of politicians, particularly the legislators. I will call this phenomenon in Ekiti economics (nay Nigeria) “counter taxation” economy. This is the taking of money (the national cake) from the poor and giving it to the rich: the special advisers, the sacred cow legislators, and now the monarchs, who are the newest vested interests. How can our JKF preside over “counter taxation” economy that spells only poverty, doom and destitution for the populace?

The vexed issue of Security Vote needs revisiting because of the conspiracy of APC and PDP not to talk about it. The security vote remains a “no-go area”, kept secret by a conspiracy of silence by all the political parties (LP, APC and PDP et al), but for the apostle and the messenger of good governance agenda, this does not augur well. What is good governance about the quantum of the security vote being kept secret? What proportion of the resources of Ekiti people is accumulating in the pockets of politicians and their vested interest cliques in Ekiti via the security vote? Street whispers suggest at one time that the Security Vote could be 200million naira every month, but at other times it is estimated as 500million naira. Why do I have to guess in an era of transparent governance? But a good guess is that the Security Vote is nearer the latter figure, say, 400 million naira every month, shared in a shrouded, smoke filled, sound proofed room by politicians and their vested interest cliques, presided over by JKF, our JKF. The people’s governor. Is this why JKF wants a second term? Four hundred million naira every month is too juicy to let go! Is this why they all want to become governors? Is this why ex-governor Fayose is so desperate to become governor again? JKF could become a hero of the people by publishing all the money he has taken from the people as Security Vote and telling us how he spent the billions of naira, warts and all. Don’t hold your breath.

The only antidote to poor governance and corruption is open information and accountability verified by open, independent audit. The corollary is that lack of open information means poor governance and corruption. This lack of transparency, is one reason why Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term. For tolerating vested interest cliques who live on Corruption Street near him, Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term.

The last time I was in Ekiti, I tried to organise a one man protest against government borrowing, but I was dissuaded. My gripe? JKF is accumulating too much debt for my grandchildren to pay.

Those who should know understand that you do not spend the money you have not earned, subject to one caveat: for investment only. Culturally, Ekiti people detest and abhor debt. However if you borrow money on their behalf, it must only be for investment purposes. Investment means a project that will yield sufficient return to pay off the capital and the interest over a specified period that does not extend to the next generation. As in personal microeconomics, so it is in macroeconomics, according to Margaret Thatcher. No one should take a mortgage to buy a house he cannot afford, leaving his children with a huge debt. In fact prudent people protect their offsprings from debt. I am not sure whether Margaret Thatcher did but some people do take out insurance to cover their funeral costs when they die, lest their children run into debt. Such is the anathema of leaving debts to burden children and grandchildren. The edifice may provide an enduring, endearing architectural and civil engineering legacy but this legacy should be one that is affordable by the present generation. The Cocoa House that Awo built provided rental income sufficient to repay the mortgage, leaving no debt but “gold dust” for our generation. The engineering legacy that Awo built was one that was affordable by his generation, for the benefit of our generation, that is the wisdom and sagacity of the sage. The engineering legacy that JKF is building, the new government house that has no economic value is being built with borrowed money leaving no “gold dust” but debt for future generation.

For borrowing too much money and spending the money he has not yet earned on non-revenue yeilding projects, and for leaving debt and no “gold dust” for my children and grand children, JKF does not deserve a second term.

Sometimes in 2013, Dr Christopher Kolade delivered a lecture to the alumni of Christ’s school, of whom Dr Fayemi is one. I am not sure whether Dr Fayemi personally attended the lecture but he must have heard of the lessons from the lecture. Dr Kolade’s 10 rules of heroism provides any leader with the wisdom and template to become his people’s hero but Dr Fayemi has not taken on board these lessons. For the 10 Kolade rules please find attached. In lesson 7 Dr Kolade suggests that true heroes in contemporary government should empower citizens (the teaching fishing and giving fish phenomenon); allow free access to information (perhaps without referring the enquirer to freedom of information act) and allow open audit of governance rather than, according to him, “an exercise in telling us how well they are performing”. I am not unaware of programmes designed by JKF to empower Ekiti people but what proportion of our youth has JKF empowered? Perhaps 0.1% or 1% or 5%.  I do not believe that Ekiti people have free access to information: like what is the exact take home pay of legislators or the quantum of the Security Vote. Although we are told that JKF is performing marvelously, we are not allowed an open audit of government activities. For example how many computers were purchased for secondary students and who supplied them and what is the unit cost? What was budgeted for renovating secondary schools who renovated which school at what cost? The list is endless.

Dr Kolade also suggests that heroes in government should create only “respectable legacies with the opportunity they have”. Some of the achievements of Dr Fayemi have been described as “legacy projects”, this may be true to some extent, but do they merit legacy status as described by Dr Kolade? True respectable legacies, leave gold dust (like Cocoa House) rather than debt and destitution, like JKF’s new government house, for succeeding generations.

A hero is an ordinary person pursuing extra-ordinary things for the benefit of the people. I struggle to describe any of the engineering legacies that JKF is building with borrowed money as extraordinary, like Cocoa House was when it was built. For not learning from Dr Kolade’s lessons on governance by pursuing extra-ordinary things for the benefit of the people and becoming a hero in his first term, it is my opinion that JKF will not practise Dr Kolade’s rules of heroism in his second term, whereas Ekiti people, at this juncture of their history, need a hero. For this reason JKF does not deserve a second term.

I have pointed out that the people oriented policies of Dr Fayemi are enough to earn him a second term but I will argue here that they are not sufficient because some of them have been implemented poorly. The second term syndrome will mean poorer implementation still. I will use three very good policies to illustrate my thesis.

The one computer per secondary school student policy is an extremely good programme, except that it is extremely poorly implemented. The intent is laudable but it is financially lunatic to buy a computer for every student at an extravagant cost, by one of the poorest states in Nigeria. Even the wealthy government of UK cannot afford to buy a computer for each student. The revolutionary governor of Osun state, Ogbeni Aregbesola, has shown Ekiti government how such a policy can be delivered: the Opon Imo policy is 100 times better, I dare propose, than one computer per pupil policy. An alternative approach is to build one well equiped computer room in each secondary school. The computers will be provided with wifi or similar; and will be powered at specified hours of the day. The computers they remain the property of the government and cannot be sold off to buy food by poor and hungry students. They will not be easily lost or damaged or mis-used. We do not need to buy new computers for new intakes every year!

Secondly, the Social Security for the elderly is a potential legacy but for its haphazard implementation. I have sought to know how many people in my local government area are receiving this benefit but to no avail. In fairness to Dr Fayemi, I was told that some people are receiving the benefit. Proper implementation of such a policy is difficult because of the inaccurate, fraud ridden and misleading census in Nigeria. How many people in Ekiti are elderly citizens (65 and above) deserving of this benefit? And what proportion of them receives the benefit now? How do we determine the budget if we do not know how many of them there are? Do we just choose a figure at random and use it as the budget for the Social Security? In Lagos State, Governor Fashola, (probably the best contemporary governor) embarked on enumerating Lagosians because he understands that service delivery is virtually impossible without knowing the number of people who will use the service. Governor Mimiko has taken a similar step issuing resident cards to the people of Ondo State. How was the budget for “….a social security scheme for all our senior citizens that are 65 and above within the shortest possible time” determined if we do not know how many of them exist?

Another very good policy that is being implemented hapharzardly is the Revolving Drugs Fund, RDF, which is implemented in a manner that disregards the fundamental concept that RDF is an investment. The implementation does not ensure replenishment of the cost of the drugs and the fund will soon be decapitalised, becoming a bottomless pit, making the fund to fail and depriving Ekiti peple drugs in their health centres. The health centres have not been allowed to determine what drugs they need and in what quantities to purchase, (in the true “cash and carry” fashion). Instaed, drugs are delivered to them regardless of their needs. Decentralisation of decision making on ordering and purchasing of drugs is an essential aspect of RDF.

Having good policies is one thing and implementing them to the benefit of the people, rather than the benefit of vested interests, is another. In my opinion Dr Fayemi has good policies but he does not deserve a second term because of the poor implementation of these policies. The second term syndrome would make this even worse.

The second term syndrome, STS, is an affliction of politicians all over the world, who won elections at the second time of asking, when in fact they have lost the fire in the belly. There is no third term to fight for and the motivation is gone. It is the nature of human beings that behaviours can be contingent upon a perceived reward. “Second termers” can behave with impunity, and why not? What is motivating them? There is no third term to fight for and there is no fire in the belly to deliver.

In the USA, the second term syndrome is usually characterised by scandals and Americans call it the curse of the second term syndrome. It doesn’t matter who the president or governor is in the USA, the “second term just never works out well”. President Obama recently confessed of his acute awareness of the second term syndrome. He has started to suffer from STS.

In New Zealand, Prime Minister John Key was accused of “a pretty cavaliar attitude” in his second term. The fire in the belly has long gone, tired of governance, he took to overseas trips to cure his STS.

Nearer home, commentators believe that Governors Fashola and Mimiko did better in their first term than they are doing in their second. They have symptoms of STS. The omens are that Dr Fayemi, being a fallible human being, would be another example of a governor afflicted by the second term syndrome and for the reason of the curse of STS, and prevention being better than cure it is my opinion that JKF does not deserve a second term.

In my humble opinion Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term for the singular reason of his inability to deliver Universal Health care that he promised Ekiti people during his inauguration. Dr Fayemi said: “Your health will be my wealth as we set about fulfilling our promise of an affordable, accessible healthcare for every Ekiti citizen. In this regard, children at birth up to five years of age, pregnant women, the physically-impaired and senior citizens are exempted from paying medical bills in all government hospitals….” Has Dr Fayemi fulfilled this promise? Although senior citizens, disabled people and under five children are exempted from paying medical bills, JKF has not moved forward with the promise of “an affordable, accessible health care for every Ekiti citizen?”. Instead, his health policies appear to be dictated by vested interests.   Can affordable and accessible healthcare for every Ekiti citizen be provided by renovating hospitals? By Health Missions? (especially for the privileged monarchs in their palaces)? By “the state of the art ambulances stationed in two locations in the state? By expensive cancer screening centre? Or three new hospitals where hospitals already exist? No, not in my opinion although these are the policies that vested interest cliques would clamour for.  Healthcare is “knowledge work” that cannot be delivered by painted hospitals, shifting health structures and healthcare on the wheel, come today and gone tomorrow. An “affordable and accessible healthcare for every Ekiti citizen”, in another phrase, is universal health care in Ekiti, not free but not causing financial calamity for the people and available near their places of abode. This can only be delivered by a radical transformation of health systems in Ekiti, an extraordinary thing that can be done by an ordinary governor to achieve heroism.

When the germans introduced the sickness fund at the beginning of their industrial revolution, it was the because of the recognition of the health prerequisite for their economic revolution. Dr Fayemi prefers to provide free health for economically inactive sector of the society leaving out the people who would generate the wealth for the society. This amounts to a perverse incentive.

In my opinion, if you promise something you need to make all efforts necessary to deliver it.  If in certain circumstances you are not be able to deliver, it must not be for lack of effort. In these circumstances you must be honest with the people and cite your difficulties, demonstrating sincerity of purpose and the efforts you have made.  In the circumstance of Ekiti, universal healthcare is practicable and doable and there is no justifiable reason why JKF failed to deliver on this promise. He may plead poor finance, Ekiti being one of the poorests states in Nigeria, but this is lame excuse. Instead of buying cars for obas for 600 million niara; (following a bad example of ex-Governor Segun Oni); instead of painting hospitals and instead of health missions, instead of sharing millions of naira in cloud filled room every month, these monies (considering the opportunity costs) should have been directed at “affordable and accessible health care for every Ekiti citizen” as promised. A promise is a promise.

For members of this forum who are aware of my clamour for universal health care, no one will be surprised that for his failure to pursue universal health, I am of the opinion that Dr Fayemi does not deserve a second term. I will confess that all the other 4 reasons are “add ons”.

In presenting my 5 reasons for and against Dr Fayemi’s second term, the intention is to stimulate a vigorous political debate based on programmes and policies that will advance the state socioeconomically. In doing so, I have tried to be as provocative and as audacious as possible, ignoring the whirwind of abuses against my person that will follow from overzealous supporters who believe that JKF is perfect and inviolable, even though the man comports himself with a measure of humility. I will remind these people of Margaret Thatcher: “I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single policitical argument left”. I will respond to every argument but I will ignore every attack on my person, taking this to mean that the attacker is bereft of plausible political argument.

The state that prides itself with the Fountain of Knowledge tag should be able to ask politicians for their programmes. Welcome to the new era of policy based politics in Ekiti. There are people on this forum who can organise a serious debate between the candidates on their policies and we should all look forward to such debates, particularly one devoted to health policy. I have only one vote in 2014 and only one mouth. I will devote both to any candidate promising universal healthcare, regardless of their political party. In other words, I will vote and campaign for Dr Fayemi if he is converted to our Universal Healthcare campaign.

Dr Laofe Ogundipe.