Over the past year, I’ve made several issue-based interventions ahead of this month’s presidential election. But one issue is, so far, missing: manifestos of the leading presidential candidates. I turn to that subject in this piece.
In a democracy, a manifesto is the formal contract, a social contract, between the elected and the electors. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, few engage with election manifestos. On the one hand, some candidates avoid debates and live interviews to answer critical questions about their manifestos; on the other, the media and experts do little to scrutinise manifestos.
Elsewhere, democracy gets better helping hands. In the UK, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) would analyse the costs of manifesto promises, and expose un-costed and unrealistic pledges. The British media would seize on the findings and give them maximum coverage to educate voters. However, in Nigeria, such expert analysis, media exposure and voter-sensitisation rarely exist.
So, then, kudos to the highly-respected think-tank, BudgIT, whose research outfit, Civic Hive, extensively analysed, in a report titled “Candidate’s policy and schematic assessments”, the manifestos of the three leading presidential candidates – Peter Obi (Labour), Atiku Abubakar (PDP) and Bola Tinubu (APC). Sadly, though, Civic Hive’s brilliant assessments have not received the traction and coverage that a similar IFS report would have received in the UK.
Unfortunately, when Nigerians elect the next president this month, most won’t vote for a candidate based on his manifesto. If they did, Obi would win: he has the best agenda!
Now, having read the candidates’ manifestos myself, I agree with much of Civic Hive’s analyses and main conclusions, namely: (1) the candidates’ manifestos largely lack quantifiable commitments; (2) where there are measurable commitments, most are unrealistic; and (3) little or nothing is said about the implementation costs and funding of the lofty promises. Basically, they fail the key test of any manifesto pledge: how much would it cost and where would the money come from? They also ignore the saying: “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.”
However, beyond those weaknesses, given what policies and institutions are needed to transform Nigeria, I believe Obi has the best manifesto, the best agenda for government, which, if implemented, would transform Nigeria politically, economically and socially. But before the specifics, the starting point is the candidates’ credibility. And on that, Tinubu has the worst credibility. Why? He’s the candidate of a ruling party that has failed woefully.
When Tinubu tagged his manifesto “Renewed Hope 2023”, which hope is he renewing? Is it, as the plagiarised title suggests, MKO Abiola’s unfulfilled “Hope 1993”? Or APC’s “Hope 2015” blatantly dashed by President Buhari? Certainly, it’s the latter! Many promises in Tinubu’s manifesto – 10% annual GDP growth rate, a post-oil industrial economy, world-class hospitals, ban on medical tourism, restructuring, etc – were in APC’s 2015 manifesto.
There’s no civilised country where a candidate of a failed ruling party would repeat many old pledges and simply say: “Trust me, I’m a different person.” As Civic Hive rightly says, Tinubu’s manifesto lacks “bold political and policy direction” and “a vision of the future”.
What about Atiku? Well, he has a trust problem. Recently, he said: “I will restructure Nigeria in six months.” Really? Does he want to restructure Nigeria by Executive Orders or through constitutional amendments? If by Executive Orders, then that’s not restructuring. And if by constitutional amendments, well, you can’t credibly restructure Nigeria constitutionally in six months, not when two-thirds of Nigeria’s 36 state assemblies must approve any amendment.
By contrast, Obi recognises that the radical restructuring he proposes requires a consensus, but says that, as president, he would lead “to help stimulate and attain a genuine and enduring consensus” on the matter. That’s a more honest position on restructuring.
Another relevant point is how the candidates diagnosed the problem. This is important because a wrong diagnosis leads to a wrong solution, and a right diagnosis is a prelude to finding a right solution. So, what’s Nigeria’s problem?
In her book ‘Fighting Corruption is Dangerous’, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, two-time finance minister and current Director-General of the WTO, identifies the following as barriers to Nigeria’s progress: “inappropriate policies, inefficient and non-transparent institutions, corruption, and capture by leaders and rent-seeking elite.” Nigeria, put simply, is an “extractive” state, where a small group of elite dominates and exploits the people.
Well, Obi’s manifesto provides that contextual analysis, saying: “The problem with Nigeria is elite capture, highlighted by plundering of state resources and insensitivity to the suffering of the people.” But Tinubu and Atiku do not see it that way. Not surprising, because if you have an Emi lokan sense of entitlement, with unexplained and inexplicable wealth, or if you are a beneficiary of rent-seeking and conflict of interest, you won’t see Nigeria’s problem as elite capture or extractive state.
But because Obi sees the problem in a structural sense, his solutions are radical reforms. For instance, on corruption, he would create the “Office of Special Counsel” to “investigate and prosecute every executive abuse of power and corrupt public practices that do not fall under the prosecutorial powers of existing agencies or are bureaucratically concealed.” That must include investigating and tackling unexplained and inexplicable wealth!
On restructuring, a President Obi would not only move most of the 68 items on the exclusive legislative list to the concurrent list, he would ensure that revenue mobilisation and allocation are “bottom up like in most federations across the world”. Thus, states would control their resources, while the Federal Government “will now rely on revenues from taxes collected by states.” Radical? Yes, but if Obi wins, he would have the mandate to rally the country behind them!
Of course, Atiku wants to restructure, but details are hazy. Hence Civic Hive says: “For a candidate who built his messaging on restructuring, the points in the policy document are too thin and lack coherent details.” Tinubu, too, wants to restructure by “devolving more revenues and powers to state and local governments”. But one must wonder why Lagos State House of Assembly, which he teleguides, repeatedly rejected constitutional amendments on local government autonomy!
Obi also has the most radical commitments on wider economic and institutional reforms. For instance, he would tackle cost of governance by implementing the Orosanye Report, “within the first year of our administration”. He would demand transparent liberalisation of the foreign exchange market and “the dismantling of the opaque multiple exchange rate regime”. Obi would “drastically reduce” the debt-servicing and debt-to-revenue ratios; dismantle impediments to free trade and aggressively promote non-oil exports.
Everyone talks about the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4iR), but its two components are Artificial Intelligence (AI) and clean energy. Obi’s manifesto is strong on tackling climate change and driving transition to clean energy. He sees climate change as a threat but also an opportunity to tap into the $3 trillion international climate finance to aid transition to clean energy. The fact that Obi strongly links his agenda to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and clean energy would, if he wins, give his government traction and leverage internationally.
Obi would create the “Office of Regulatory Review (ORR)” to ensure proposed regulations “pass cost-benefit analysis and enhance economic efficiency”. As someone who worked at the UK’s Better Regulation Executive (BRE), I know this is a wise proposal.
Neither Atiku nor Tinubu commits to any of the above. Atiku would privatise all refineries and boost the private sector, but says little about supply-side constraints. Tinubu’s philosophy is “spend, spend, spend”! He would “break the explicit link between naira expenditure and dollar inflows” and “legislatively suspend the limits on government spending”. That’s a recipe for utter economic disaster!
Unfortunately, when Nigerians elect the next president this month, most won’t vote for a candidate based on his manifesto. If they did, Obi would win: he has the best agenda!
