by Ralph Egbu

Given the level of our social and economic development, some inter­ventions from notable quarters can sometimes be counterproductive because of the level of emotions that can be stirred up.

Today’s discourse was done many days before Saturday’s presidential election, yet, many things can be accurately foretold such as avoidable discrepancies marring what should be a smooth and joyous exercise. Trust many to shout blue murder and perhaps resort to initial action that would place the rest of the nation on edge. All these happen because we have become a people that have disdain for what the brain can do, for the simple reason that we have always been eager to reap personal gains and to satisfy paro­chial interest to the disadvantage of building a virile nation in which things work and life is abundant for the far greater majority.

This vicious cycle has become for us a reoccurring albatross and my prayer is that God will help us over­come it this time. Today’s outing is about my home state, Abia. For a long time I have done what we in the me­dia circle know as “Afghanistanism”, that is the act of leaving issues con­cerning you directly to dissect “dis­tant” matters. For over three years since I became prominent in the Sun Newspaper as a columnist, I have restricted my contributions to national issues and avoided talking about my state even though there is much we desire and so much to talk about in the line of one making his contribu­tions to the proper transformation of his environment. My stance was not borne out of fear or to avoid stepping on toes, rather, it was a decision I took in line with certain precepts I hold dear and which I strongly think we all should hold precious if we really mean to develop our society in a sane manner. The first of such rules is that when providence has lifted you to the position where your views mean much, you must be cir­cumspect about what views you hold publicly and conscious about the time when you make some observa­tions, especially when they are of the critical type.

Given the level of our social and economic development, some inter­ventions from notable quarters can sometimes be counterproductive because of the level of emotions that can be stirred up. This is the under­lining reason I have had to raise cau­tion notes against Obansanjo. While critical interjections are necessary, the channel must be carefully chosen and the timing “perfect” to derive maximal benefit. We must allow governance time, and this is very vi­tal. The other issue is that it does not tell well, to disparage an organisation or structure of which you have been part of notwithstanding the level of disdain or bad treatment shown to you or your organisation by those saddled with responsibility for cur­rent affairs. If one has superiority of foresight and vision, one would understand that what is required to build a great society is personal sacrifices of all kinds. When all of us insist that our vision must be the prevailing one at the same time, we court a dissonance that re-bounces to hurt the society far greater than it would have been if we approached the quest for change in a more stra­tegic format. I can talk now because the hour has come to talk, make con­tributions, critic where there is need, pass a verdict and strongly prescribe new ways in light of experiences and insist on their being taken very seri­ously.

Before I go further, I want to state that every administration excels to the limit of the ability of the Chief Driver, and on the issue of adminis­trative style, no two persons can be exactly the same even when they are products of the same philosophy. I have served various governments in the state, under both the military and civilian administrations, and from that vintage point can tell that so many appointees carry fire in their bowels, but they are limited to what their bosses can understand and approve and what the chief execu­tives consider as their priority areas. These indeed can be very limiting factors for brains loaded with ideas and a mind rearing to go. There are also issues of personalities and small groups struggling for control within a government, which most often are resolved on the basis of closeness, filial relationships and small group interest to the detriment of bigger ideas.

By last August, Abia was 23 years old and I recall during that celebra­tion the important question whether the state had developed or not came up. Depending on where each person stood, it was either we had done very well or nothing had substantially happened. I believe we are better off than if we were still to be part of old Imo State. The unit of administra­tion has been narrowed and that has brought government and governance nearer the people. This is good when viewed from the prism of democratic practice. From what I can see, more residents are taking interest on how they are governed. We have expand­ed infrastructural facilities across the different sectors, even though I am not sure if we actually did so in the right pattern. I take roads to il­lustrate what I mean by right pattern. Between the creation of the state and now, a good number of roads have been constructed and rehabilitated within the state and some of its cit­ies, but as you read this, there is no inter-connectivity whatsoever.

Good brains won’t need the inter­pretation of a civil engineer, to reach the conclusion that for most part, the road programme had been undertak­en in a haphazard manner, without a master plan. What this has done is that it is currently a difficult task to transverse the state from one zone to the other; it is difficult to do 30 kilo­metres without one finding himself on terribly dilapidated roads, and this is in spite of billions that must have gone into the sector in the 23-year life span of the state. We can replicate this analysis for nearly all the sec­tors; and to get the real state of pro­gress would be to scientifically take a cumulative score of the status of each sector and their economic relevance to daily living and then we have a clear picture of where we are in the development index. If I were to do the scoring, I won’t score ourselves high and this would not be because leaders did not perform, it would be for the reason that the absence of a master plan, meant that each leader defined the terms according to what they know constitutes development. The absence allowed by no big vi­sion, led to the birth of a new class whose activities naturally would be against progress. I am talking of the band of sycophants. Sycophancy has become an industry on its own with hindrances on quality development. One of the tasks, therefore, is to have a group not necessarily partisan that would sit and finally come out with a blue print and create a coalition that would have capacity to make governments give undiluted atten­tion and focus to those issues and of course, social climate that would enhance cordiality among the com­ponent parts and propel residents to be at their best in whatever economic engagement they choose to do.

————————-

 
Op-ed pieces and contributions are the opinions of the writers only and do not represent the opinions of Y!/YNaija.

Emmanuel Chidiogo