Thursday 26 September 2013

My case with the Ballon D'Or

While i was listening to a sports station on a local Radio, something came to my mind concerning the award of the Uefa Ballon D'Or. the presenter had argued that in a game of football no one player is dispensable for the system to work effectively. By this i concur that all sections of the team are very relevant and can be buttressed in a red card situation where the game most times changes in favour of the complete team.

My argument is that without some particular mix of players, a certain Messi, Ronaldo or Robin Van Persie would never excel as much as we hear about their exploits (don't get me wrong they are players with exceptional skills). Every section of the game has its own unique functions; thats why it sounds extraordinary when a defender  scores more goals than a striker. So a goalie would have an excellent season for keeping several clean sheets in a particular season. The effect of that may be what Peter Cech described as thus, "Players win games, but goal keepers win trophies". If a player is given an award cos of the contributions he has given to a team obviously a top level team on the log at the end of the season then we should look beyond awarding the presitigious Ballon DÓr to just strikers as it has been the case in recent times,  Ronaldo, Kaka, Ronadinho, C. Ronaldo, Messi. Where do we dump the likes of world class goal keepers, Central defenders, Midfielders who combine to make, for instance the barca tiki taka ( its obviously not just Messi playing the game all by himself.

MY POSITION: Rather than have a single award for the UEFA Ballon Dör, it should be divided into Best Goal keeper, Defender, Midfielder and Striker to advance a perfect competition amongst direct peers. It would be unfair to have a goal keeper or defender compete for a place with a striker who just but scores goals even when these goals don't even win the team trophies. (Van Persie had scored 37 goals in a season without Arsenal winning a trophy; and you rate him better than Sczecny who avoided conceding several goals in the midst of a failed defensive line. Think about this, Michelle Platini, Sepp Blatter, Isa Hayatu

Wednesday 25 September 2013

Oversight Function of the Legislature in Nigeria: Panacea for Development or Compromise for Under-Development



For people like me who follow the activities of the legislature with keen interest given my knowledge of the functions of this arm of government which depicts the difference between democracy and other systems of government, it is only mind-boggling to observe that the much anticipated mandate of the legislature in Nigeria is not being used optimally or better still, to the credit of the generality.
Recently, the National Assembly received an autonomous status in the provisions of funds to finance its critical activities. This would have been more robust if we as a people are actually sincere and realize that the welfare of the people comes first then follows, integrity of Nigerians especially the ones in elective positions. One of the features of true democracy with regards to accountability is an independent legislature free from executive interference. By independence, the legislature should have a straight-line charge with regards to release of funds from its share from the Consolidated Revenue Fund without the vigorous bureaucratic manoeuvring from finance related (executive) government agencies. This also means that with a well organized and direct system of finance, the legislature especially the National Assembly can effectively carry out her functions including lawmaking, representation and oversight.

The oversight function of the legislature in Nigeria is enshrined by Section 88 of the 1999 Constitution. By virtue of its germane and sole mandate to authorize expenditure from the purse derived from Section 81, the legislature is also saddled with the responsibility to cause investigations into (executive) government spending. What this obviously postulates is a system of checks and balances that is meant to institute judicious ways of implementing the national budget for the benefit of all.

The picture I have tried to paint above represents an ideal situation. The real situation however shows that oversight functions in Nigeria do not guarantee a service to the people but reflects a different agenda all together, call it personal interest!

How can a government Ministry, Department or Agency you intend to investigate its budget spending activities, provide the itinerary and necessary arrangements for the exercise and you expect that the result of such exercise shall not dwell in futility? Can you bite the finger that feeds you? The answers to these questions are as clear as the nose on our face! The adage, he who pays the piper dictates the tune further shows that until the legislature in Nigeria begins to spend its time and resources on doing those things that truly reflect the aspirations of the people, we shall continue to lament as to the huge amounts of salaries and allowances of our legislators and the general expenditure of the legislature since its return in 1999. 

When Nigerian legislators embark on oversight visits to government MDAs, the scenario suggests a sightseeing adventure (especially those ones who visit the industrial sector) than a fact finding mission. Sometimes these (executive) government MDAs even provide the vehicles to convey lawmakers embarking on oversight.

What then are the monies appropriated for oversight visits used for? Are we saying there is no money appropriated for an obvious function of the legislature? If inadequate, the legislature knows exactly what to do, since it remains the only institution responsible for appropriating funds to service the nation and for the advancement of good governance and state policy. 

Whereas, oversight visits are meant to advance development, they rather deplete the purse and end in futility. There is apparent compromise on the aspect of legislators. Employments are done with the consent of the lawmakers who enlist their preferred candidates (even when they are not necessarily constituents) and therefore do not require vigorous enquiry by respective committees of the legislature to determine equity in the spread of employment. Lawmakers are offered contract opportunities to implement some of the projects of MDAs. More so, there is currently a system of seasonal remuneration to lawmakers; during Sallah, Easter, Christmas, Burial, Birthday and other celebrations. There is no gainsaying that compromise negates development.

This does not mean that the legislature has done nothing in this area of endavor. Applause must be given to them in unveiling some of the ordeals (though insignificant) of government culminating in the misuse and diversion of funds meant for public utility. What amuses me most times is that they sometimes begin the process in a well fashioned manner, thereby lifting our spirits, but end in the obvious (vague) manner we anticipated. Look at the power sector and fuel subsidy probes, the intervention in the aviation sector, pension scam, to name a few. Where did they end? No single culprit was convicted for a crime that is punishable by death in other countries. Rather, a minimal N750, 000 was awarded as penalty to an individual who was found guilty of misappropriating about N27bn or there about. How sad, the legislators never envisaged that their efforts would be frustrated by the same laws they have the power to make or review.

There is this argument that legislative office should be made selfless to encourage those who candidly wish to serve their people vie for these positions. I agree totally with this assertion but I also want to state that bulk of it lies with us human beings especially the acclaimed ordinary Nigerians. We must sacrifice our old ways of doings things, of not paying attention to the activities of those we voted for (when we really come out to vote and ensure that our votes count) so we can keep legislative office holders on their toes, giving them the required push to pursue selfless service to the nation and its citizens at the expense of self interest. We must resist voter apathy, vote in subsequent elections and ensure that the notion of one man, one vote prevails. Only so, would governance attract our attention and vigilance would ensure that those who go out of our wishes and aspirations are shoved aside for better representation. Under this situation, while those who we voted to represent us help to check the excesses of the executive arm, we, the people shall also oversight on our representatives. Obviously, we shall be enshrining a new system of government that is mindful of every single Nigerian.   
           

Wednesday 18 September 2013

WHEREAS THE ISSUE WAS NOT CHILD MARRIAGE BUT....

After all the hullabaloo about Sen. Yerima and the Nigerian Senate voting for child marriage, it wasn't the  case afterall.

Why do Nigerians appreciate rumors even at the expense of peace.

The Nigerian Constitution stipulates that a woman can only denounce or renounce her citizenship as a Nigerian only when she attains the adult age of 18. Using the current Constitution amendment process, Senator Yerima and a few others argued that once a woman is married regardless of her age i.e under 18, she should be able to renounce her citizenship since as a married woman, she is viewed as an adult that can take critical decisions for herself.

Those mischievous Nigerians (wonder if they actually paid attention to the debates) heard child marriage and jumped into conclusion. Like fire the news about the Senate of Nigeria voting for early child marriage becomes public discourse; a lot of energy, resources and time is being used to discuss a mere rumor! how sad!!!

 

Whereas there were pertinent issues to protest about, Nigerians were deep in trivial discussions. I wonder if they succeeded in making the Senate reverse its position.  (and I ask, position on Yes or No for under 18 marriage?)

I like to use this medium to implore Nigerians to try as much as possible to get to the root of the matter before engaging discussions on irrelevant issues. While the poor Senator and his followers argued that they were trying to improve the rights of women to denounce their citizenship at any age once they are married and have become adults, they women themselves were crisscrossing the country bastardizing their personalities. Hmmmmm! Ignorance is evil!!!!

My point is, know it to a large extent before you say anything about it or else silence is golden!!!!