Ayo Olukotun
“Bi aiye se n koja lori eniyan, a ki gbo iro nla re.” (A loud bang does not announce the passage of time) –Yoruba proverb
Picture the scenario. The commissioner for information shows up in the governor’s office, in one of the states, manifesting a bubble about the first 100 days of their administration, exuding ideas on how to mark the milestone. As he unfolded his template for celebration, the governor stopped him abruptly, interjecting. “Between you and me, what really do we have to celebrate? We are still settling down, we have not even appointed commissioners, we are planning to set up committees to study the transition committees’ report, after which other committees will fine-tune all the reports from the committees”. Crestfallen, the commissioner however, manages an explanation as to why it will be self-defeating not to come up with a publicised narrative of their achievements, in the first 100 days, however meagre. The meeting ended with a consensus: do a low-key celebration, taking generous clues from all the promises made by the governor, since no single achievement can be honestly attributed to him.
The story may be apocryphal, but it underscores valid lessons, and takeaways about the dangers of thrashing about in office aimlessly, doting on how lucky one was to have won the election, cracking acid jokes about the opposition three months, and 10 days after public officials were sworn in. Look around the country and you will find out that not much, by way of governance, has happened in the last 100 days. With a few honourable exceptions, the states as well as the centre have been preoccupied by what we may broadly call “settling down”; the centre took its time to set up a cabinet, omitting to match names with portfolios in the list sent to the Senate. The ministers only got to know what positions they would be serving on at their swearing-in, with one of them, Rauf Aregbesola, with characteristic candour, exclaiming that he does not know much about the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to which he has been assigned.
The same picture is replicated in the states, as there are still more than a handful yet to announce their commissioners. Only last week, the governor of Plateau State, Mr. Simon Lalong, complained about being virtually overwhelmed by lobbyists for commissioner positions. This is a far departure from the spirit of 100 days, which denotes clear momentum, agenda-setting, and dynamic policy initiatives within the first three months in office. The idea, let us not forget, was patented by the United States’ 32nd President, Franklin Roosevelt, who within a 100 days of being sworn in as president, in 1933, made a clear turnaround in the economic fortunes of his country. He accomplished this uphill task through a beehive of programmed legislative activities, featuring: job creation, expansion of public works, anti-poverty initiatives, and visionary social engineering. Designated as the New Deal, Roosevelt had laid the foundations of a far-reaching social policy which eventually became the needed panacea for resolving the great economic recession of those times. Since then, virtually all American presidents, and governors for that matter have tended to measure themselves, in one form or another, by their capacity for hitting the ground running, and for indicating the tenor of their tenure.
For anyone to make a lasting impact in their first 100 days, such a leader must have developed an agenda well before their campaign for office. Roosevelt’s programme did not fall from the sky, but much of it came from the Democratic Party credo, based on social Keynesianism, of using big government to address issues of poverty, unemployment, and destitution. He also had around him, a think tank which created an action plan by turning these ideas into policies. By contrast, most Nigerian political leaders are not in this mould. If they seek help from their parties, in order to set policy agenda, they are likely to find little, because the parties themselves are not wired to discuss governance, and policy ideas. Rummage through the minutes of the meetings held by political parties, and you will find much about brokering peace between one political warlord and another, distribution of amenities, how party faithful are being side-lined in political appointments.
There are no institutional memories that echo policy debates, competing governance ideas, or progress reports on the implementation of important initiatives. Hence, new leaders in our clime will have to make their own coffee, as the expression goes, because their parties are of little use in this regard. In the older tradition of governance in this country, we had leaders who wrote books, or pamphlets, about certain political ideas which they canvassed, and were known for, which they promised to implement if they gained office. In other words, their preparation for public office, long predated their political campaigns and election. We have virtually lost that tradition, replaced by a hodgepodge of slogans, and sound bites, hastily put together by consultants, just before the elections. In such a context, a hundred days may drift by without noticeable accomplishments, pointing up the tragic clarity of the Yoruba proverb, quoted in the opening paragraph.
Another drawback in the governance culture, which militates against a hundred days, achievement-driven pace, relates to the practice of long holidays, and extended off-work breaks. The political cycle itself is reduced to a slow-motion picture, in which very little that is important takes place. Of course, as contingencies such as flooding, the swelling victims of banditry, and matters of that nature emerge, leaders think on their feet, providing the same jaded answers that previous governments toyed with in vain. There are no new departures or thinking outside the box, because nobody has taken time to do the nitty-gritty that is required for genuine progress. Obviously, change cannot come by simply wishing for it, or rotating power among different sections of the elite, but by undertaking the hard grind of thinking through previous policies, in order to understand why they have not worked.
Again, because the system is bogged down in mediocrity, there are few, if any outstanding leaders from which others can learn or draw insight. Gone are the days, when political apprentices sat around a great leader with a vision, in search of policy ideas. The political neighbourhoods reek with conformism and the regurgitation of failed slogans, and mantras. Those who try to make a clear mark or difference are viewed with suspicion. That is why, in my view, a hundred days or two hundred or even five hundred may pass by with little or no notice.
What then can be done? A system of accountability in which civil society demands a transcript of achievements, within specified time limit, must evolve, and be sustained. It is not just that, a managerial culture of competence and excellence must become the grammar and language of governance, to the extent that assignments are given with datelines and deadlines, in order to encourage maximum productivity. Finally, we must resituate our political party ethos, by bringing back one of the important functions of a party namely, to generate policy relevant ideas that have the capacity to both edify, and transform governance.
[Punch]
