If Nigeria's problem is not leadership, what then is it?
I think our problem here in Nigeria is that we lack a
sense of history and we live only in the present moment
which means that we are always reacting and hardly ever
pro-acting.
Nigeria has seen phenomenal growth sometime in the past
with our Gross Domestic Product, GDP, growing at a rate of
over 6% per annum, making us one of the world’s 10
fastest growing economies. Yet, we still have areas of
Nigeria where population growth is higher than the growth
rate of our GDP; and it is only common sense that where
population outpaces production, there will be crisis. This is
a theory that Reverend Malthus propounded and which has
stood the test of time.
Between 1960 when Nigeria got independence and 1966
when we experienced the first military intervention in
governance, Nigeria experienced phenomenal growth – a
feat that has evaded us since, except for the growth we
have had in the last three years. Almost all of the national
institutions that were responsible for our growth pre-1999,
were products of that first golden era before the first coup,
such as the four great universities, (Lagos, Ife, Nsukka and
Zaria), Kainji Dam, Nigeria Airways etc.
Also, in the same time period, we had some of the best civil
servants in the world and our public service was very
functional. There were reports from that era that some of
our politicians were corrupt, but it is universally
acknowledged that our civil servants of those times were
above board. Our hospitals were renowned worldwide and
it will surprise some to note that the Saudi Royal family
received treatment at the University College Hospital,
Ibadan, in the early 60s.
At that time we did not have oil in the quantum that we
have today, yet, the nation was thriving, we had little or
no foreign debt and we were first amongst equals in the
council of emerging nations that included Indonesia, Brazil
and Egypt.
But all these changed after 1966. So, as I would say to my
five year old, if you are looking for a thing, go back to the
last place where you saw it. That place is 1966!
Pre-1966, admission into primary and secondary schools
was purely on merit. The same was the case for
universities as well as the federal civil service. After 1966
when the military intervened and ended the First Republic
all that changed and has remained the same till today.
A child could no longer bank on academic prowess as the
yardstick for his gaining entry into primary and secondary
schools. Children at their most tender years, when they
were being emotionally scripted, were told that even
though they passed and passed well, they were not good
enough for government funded schools because of where
they came from.
With the Quota system of entrance into public schools
introduced after 1966 and enshrined by the military into
our body polity extant laws, children as young as nine got
to understand that in Nigeria, where you come from is
more important than how intelligent and hardworking you
are.
Now, the sad thing about the policy of quota systems is
that geneticists in the very best universities of the world
have established that some races and tribes are not more
intelligent than others and as such you can find intelligence
in almost equal measure wherever you use it as a yard
stick. In fact, many, including the Harvard Medical Journal,
have reported that culture is more to blame than
intelligence for the reason why some peoples are backward
while others are progressive.
And our culture has been that children who are more
endowed intellectually are held back and children who
could grow their intellectual capacity are prevented from
doing so because there was no need to challenge them
intellectually. Come as you are, the system says.
This system would probably have brought minimal damage
if it was limited to secondary schools, but it is not.
After completing secondary school, post 1966 Nigerian
youths faced the same issues in gaining admission to
Nigerian universities. Cut off marks and catchment areas
were discriminately apportioned using region as a yard
stick. So, after being told at age nine that were you came
from was more important than your intelligence or your
academic hard work, the message is reinforced at age
16-17 when you are still in your formative years.
At 16, you enter university and study for four or five years
(ASUU permitting) and then graduate and go through your
National Youth Service (one of the best policies the military
bequeathed to Nigeria) and then you start to look for a job.
The largest employer of labour is the government, so
naturally you start there. And what do you find? At age 24,
just as when you were nine and sixteen, you are now faced
with a policy that says where you are from is more
important than what you can bring into the system. You
are told that although you are qualified, the system must
take people who are less qualified than you because of
where you are from and where they are from.
So, between the ages of nine and 24, our psyche has been
reinforced and scripted with the message that where you
are from is more important than what you bring to the
table.
Why wouldn’t a post 1966 civil servant face temptation to
steal when merit is not the order of the day and you are
forced to serve under someone who did not get his
employment by merit – who enjoys perks and privileges far
above you? How can such a system promote morale
and how can you have efficiency where morale is low?
No comments:
Post a Comment