 You're welcome back. Before we are joined by Mr. Chiquitude, I'd like to give you more details about what we're going to be looking at today. Remember that the federal government yesterday blamed the high level of poverty in the country on state governors, who it said operate only in state capitals. Pay more attention to building flyovers and airports rather than improvement of life in the rural areas. The Minister of State Budget and National Planning, Clement Agba, made the allegation while fielding questions from state House correspondents at the end of the Federal Executive Council meeting presided over by President Mohammed Buhari at the Council Chamber, Presidential Villa Apuja. Efforts to get governors to speak on the allegation through the Nigerian Governors Forum, Northern Governors Forum, Southern Governors Forum, and other platforms did not yield dividends at the press time. But we all know that there will be reactions in the coming days, but for now that is the acquisition that has been left there for people to just see and pick a side if they must. Also the Federal Executive Council has approved a national language policy for use in all primary schools across the country. The Minister of Education, Adamou Adamou, made this known to state House correspondents also at the end of the Council's meeting which was presided over by President Mohammed Buhari on Wednesday in Apuja. He said a memo, I'm quoting now, a memo on national policy was approved by the Council, so Nigeria has a national language policy and the details will be given later by the Ministry. One of the highlights is that the government has agreed now that henceforth instruction in primary schools the first six years of learning will be in the mother tongue. According to the Minister, the decision is only in principle for now because it will require a lot of work to implement it. These are some of the things that we'll be looking at when Mr. Achike Tuday joins us, but let's take another very brief break to enable us to get to Mr. Achike. Okay, Mr. Achike is already here. Hello and welcome to the program Mr. Tuday. Yeah, welcome. Thanks for having me. Okay, let's begin with the first one. The federal government is trading blame and they're saying that whatever is happening in the country, the hardship that we're finding in the country is as a result of what the governors do and the accusation goes forward to say that whatever they do in their states remains in the state capital. What is your take on this accusation by the federal government? Well, maybe the first thing would have been to tell them to mind their business and run their own government, run their own, I mean, the way they see fit and the promise they are going to improve on the economy. Of course, the economy at the level also has a wide range of implications everywhere. Obviously, they have not been able to do that, but that is also not to say that the government representative, Mr. Agba, is saying something that is absolutely wrong. Of course, there's some truth in it. But the reality is that if you have failure in governance in a country, then you cannot locate that failure just within a particular sector, within a particular branch of a government or level of government, in this case, the federal government, but there has been failure all around. There has been failure at the center. There has been failure in the states and they have been failure at the level of a local government, local governance in the country. So all of this failure. Mr. Chude, we seem to be losing your audio there. I do hope that we're going to return to Mr. Chude. We cannot hear him anymore. And when he does return, we are going to continue with the discussion. But we're talking right now about the first topic that he is going to handle. Both of them are going to be handled by him. And the thing is that the federal government is saying the level of poverty in Nigeria is because the state governs and is not doing what they should do. They concentrate on only the urban area. That is the state capital, not even just urban area, because there are some states that have more than one urban area, more than one place that they can call an urban area. So they just concentrate on the state capital and don't go anywhere else. And so the governors need to do more and not just concentrate on the state capitals. That's what the discussion is. And Mr. Chude is trying to throw more light on that and what he feels about what is being said by the federal government. Hello Mr. Chude, are you still there? It appears we'll just take a little break and see how we can get through this technical issue and return in a bit. Don't go away. We're glad to know that Mr. Chude has rejoined us after that technical issue. And we were talking about what the federal government is saying that the state government is responsible for the level of poverty in the country. We are more or less like starting from the beginning. So Mr. Chude, it's like what we hear in the Bible where God asks Adam, what have you done? And Adam says, the woman you gave to me, the woman is now saying, is this the snake that tempted me? Everybody is trading blames. But what is your take on the accusation of the federal government? Yeah, absolutely. I think there is something a little bit unsettling and hypocritical about the port calling the Keto black or the Keto calling the port black. But either way, you have guilt, enough guilt running, going around to these institutions, whether federal or the state. The reality is that I was not the federal government that promised to give us, to provide, to lift about 10 million people out of poverty on a yearly basis. How many have they been able to lift up out of poverty? So you see a government that has been unable to deliver, that has failed in every way, to deliver on its economic promises to the people. Now turning around, after seven years, mind you, after seven years of governance, they now come back to, they suddenly realize that the reason why the vast majority of people are poor is simply because the states have failed in the obligation of bringing wealth and prosperity to the rural areas. And it's interesting really that they are telling us that the major reasons that the states are building infrastructure, at least as an admission of something positive at the level of the state. And it was also interesting that they didn't mention a corruption that is also rife in the country, virtually everywhere, that they didn't mention corruption as one of the reasons why the dividends of democracy are not flowing down to the people in the rural area, even in the urban areas. And obviously that would have been a very sore talking point because the federal government cannot dissociate itself from the corruption, mindful corruption, that has been there for this country in the past seven years. So maybe that was why they delicately scattered away from that. But be that as it may, we are not as unwritten at the government in any way because there's so much to be done, not just at the level, because it is not just poverty at the rural area. And of course, what brought up at the whole of this discussion is the fact that the National Bureau of Statistics says that about 63% of Nigerians are living in multi-dimensional poverty. That's about $133 million of the country's population. That is a very horrendous figure. So they had to provide a reason why that is happening. And then the state governments, of course, became victims naturally. But the reality is that the federal government has failed, the state government has failed. Obviously, there is so much to be done in the rural areas. And we know, and then once you put the right kind of structure in place in the rural areas, you stop people from migrating from the rural areas to the urban areas that are already saturated. There are no jobs and so many other issues, but definitely the urban areas. So it's not a terrible situation. Look at the issue of farming. And I think that the government, is it the minister that talked about the situation with farming in many states in the country? Nigeria is rich. With arable lands. But first, now that you have, you know, political leadership, governments in these states that are visionless, that are not patriotic and committed. And the welfare of the people, it is going to be difficult for them to be able to turn the very rich and natural resources that we have, you know, into a situation where the vast majority of people can actually begin to get involved in productive activity. And that has been the problem. It is not passive. We do not have a working population, the youthful population, that have the energy to work. But unfortunately, the enabling environment, being created is not just adequate. In most cases, it is nonexistent. And so between the state government and the federal government, you have to hold this report responsible. The local government, to some extent, you can try to accelerate the local government in the sense that local governments is something that is necessary over the years by the governments, who have so battered the constitutional provision of a local government in the country, and are now running it the way they see fit. So that is the only reason I'm exonerating the local government, because we do not have independent local governments in the country. So the play lies well with the federal government and the state government. But beyond that, again, is the fact that when you are looking at macroeconomic indices, macroeconomic indices is usually within the overview of the government. You have the Ministry of Finance that is involved with the overall national planning of the country, working in tandem with the CBR, that's in charge of monetary policy. All of these things have a lot to bear on an economy. Look at the issue of, for instance, of the pressure on the foreign exchange. It is as a result of the failure of government to either build refineries or to repair the board of planners. So the government, the country continues to spend so much money, you know, to import foreign exchange that we don't have to import the refined petroleum products into the country, putting pressure on the Naira itself. So all of these things, and then how productive, what kind of policies, productive policies that we have in this country that will take away, you know, the unemployed youths, so many of them that have over 35% unemployed youths in the country, take them away from unemployment into meaningful employment. This is not happening because what we are having is the industrialization of the productive sector of this country. And so we have all of these things. And so that's what I'm saying that a large chunk of the problem, the blame, would lie with the government, with the federal government and the center, but the state government are also open for the misuse of the funds that have been in their hands, some of them outright based on it. So if they are not building infrastructure, I would say that that is a good, that is good, you know, and that should not be negative. After all, the federal government has complained about state governments building infrastructure, have where you ask them what has happened with the money, their batch of loot and some of this other, the monies that they have handled over the years, they will tell you that they were able to put infrastructure around. So if they agree that when it comes to them, infrastructure is not a bad thing, what would infrastructure be bad when it comes to a state government? Okay, well, let me try to play the devils, let me try to play the devil's advocate here and in fairness to the federal government, every month, the state governors go cap in hand, as it were, to collect a location and come back to their states. And what the federal government is saying is that whatever money is spent, which maybe is not as much as they collect, is only done in the state capitals. So it's like a form of eye service. And you have said yourself that over the years, the local government system has been, has been bastardized, has been killed by the actions of the governors themselves. And even the federal government we know has given this autonomy has made pronouncements for the autonomy of these local governments. And the state governors seem to be sabotaging whatever is constitutionally provided for the local governments. So can't the blame squarely just rest on the state governors, knowing that the federal government pay places part and expects them to be the people that are closest to the, to the people that need this poverty alleviation, that need these programs that will make them better or will make their lives better wherever they are living? Yeah, we look at the governments across board, across, you know, political parties, across all the geopolitical zones in this country. They stand and acted for their stance, you know, over the local government autonomy for the local government, because they are selfish, you know, and that shows that, of course, there's everything wrong about their attitude towards the local governments and the country. They want everything to be under their apron strings. They want to be the, you know, the ones to dictate what are possible at the local government level. And that's one of the most important ties of government. And because that is the one that is closest to the people, but there seems to be some level of hypocrisy here, because you also have a situation where even this money you talk about that state, state governments go to the federal government every month, cap in hand to beg for money from the, you know, federal allocation. And the question you will need to ask is where are these monies coming from? These monies are coming from states. They are not being generated by the federal government. They are being generated, you know, from certain states in this country, you know. And so, and that's why, I mean, right now the federal government has about maybe over 60 something items on the exclusive list. Some of these items on the list do not have anything to do, should not have anything to do with the government when you are running a federation. And that's what people have been talking about through federalism. Because you see what you need, and that's why I keep on saying that the model, the economic model that is being run, or the federation model that is being run in this country, is being run in the wrong way. In the sense that, you know, rather than the government appropriating, you know, what happens in most of the states, the resources in most of the states in the country, and taking it to the center, then the states have come to the center to beg for them. You know, the federal government will have a situation where we have, you know, requisite some of, you know, some of, I mean, this situation is changed. Where the states now can now truly own the assets and the resources within their territories. And then pay, you know, and as these assets are exploited, you know, and that is not, they cannot pay, you know, charges, you know, or levies or taxes to the federal government. So you can imagine being that, particularly every state in this country is blessed with one mineral resources, major mineral resources, or the other. You can imagine a situation where, virtually, all the states are paying maybe 10 or 20 percent each to the federal purpose. And then so you have a federal government that is a wash with cash. And then you have state governments that are controlling about 70 or 80 percent of the resources from their states. So you also have state governments that have also a wash with money. And, you know, and so if it becomes a win-win situation, both the states and the federal government, you know, ultimately at the end of the day. So this is the model we're talking about. But then beyond what were, what were even beyond that is the fact that some of that many of these states are in a position to adequately, properly cater for the benefit of their citizens. But it's simply because of the misappropriation of the funds of the resources of these states. That is why there is so much poverty. That's why we're now talking about 133 million Nigerians living in multidimensional, you know, poverty. So the federal government should up its game, should do its own part in ensuring that, you know, the major economic control that the government has in terms of, you know, macroeconomic, you know, dynamics and all the other financial, you know, regulation and all that are also in place. And that also that the power sector too, that is also critical for generating employment, is also, you know, put in place not just this miserly 3.5 thousand, you know, megawatts of electricity that we are producing on the daily basis. So obviously the country can now move forward if we don't change, you know, the narrative, if we don't change the basis, you know, on which, you know, I mean the infrastructure on which our economy, you know, is sitting on. Okay, well, but in fairness, before we move to the second topic, you are supposed to handle, do you think that if the states are really made to function as in a federating unit, they will perform better than they are performing now? Because why I'm saying this is one of the greatest controversies that are, or the greatest problems that has come up now is the revelation by the River State Governor about the amount of money that was given to every state and how he used his own to do whatever he did. Like we had a time when almost every day he was commissioning one project or the other and he said this, there was a particular kind of money, particular amount of money that came to the state and it went to all other states. It made some people even protest against their own state governors. A case in point is the current vice presidential candidate of the People's Democratic Party where people from his state, Delta State, were protesting in Abuja to come and that he should come and give account of that kind of money if a governor has revealed this and there is nothing to show in their state that this money was ever paid. So do you think that having the power over the mineral resources that are in their states will make any difference knowing how politics is played in our country today? No, there are no guarantees, I cannot give these guarantees because we already know the nature of our politicians, the character of those people who govern us. I have maintained that these people are not patriotic, you know, they are not committed to national development. All they are interested in is satiating a local, you know, promoting interest that is themselves and their families. That is what happens. That's why the vast majority of our youth are escaping from the country because there is no feeling of hope, you know, and no expectations that greater things or good things we have put in the country. Of course you also know that the children of these elites are, you know, schooling abroad are going to the best educational institutions in the world and they will also know that access to health facilities to the best, you know, medical facilities, you know, is abroad and so day to day and the awards and their families are the ones that access these things. So that shows you, you know, the level of thinking of the political elites. So and they say that to whom much is given, much is expected. So if you have found wanting is more things, definitely we found wanting is big things. And because they have failed in small things, even if you give them something bigger, they are surely going to fail. But then the issue, the question you ask is this. So you now have the federal government also playing a role in terms of managing the resources of this country. In what way has this federal government also been able to account for all the resources that have been made available to it? Is it not under the same federal, you know, government that we are having a situation where 700, a situation of 700,000 could buy less or could buy in what about 70 billion dollars have been stolen on a daily basis. So who is going to build a cat? Who is, is that why I use the expression, the port calling the cat to black? Because they are all in the same category. Whether it's at the state level or whether it is at the federal level, the people that have been entrusted with responsibility have not been able to live up to this responsibility. So it becomes a way, when a nightmare situation between the devil and the deep blue sea, you know, so where do you go to the center for salvation or to the states for redemption? There neither is actually going to happen and that's why everybody's talking about a proper different political process that we need, hopefully, you know, to the within a way of the people who have been in power and who have shown that have not shown anything meaningful to account for the position of responsibility they have held over the years. So it's a difficult situation that we find ourselves in, but there is no where you point to and you find end just and you find sense in all of those places. Most of them, especially the political actors right now, are all stained and so I cannot tell you, but I'm only telling you about the structure that will be equitable, the structure that will be just, a structure that will make sense and that is to ensure that people who are generating certain resources of this country are benefiting from the resources of this country while making their obligations, their financial obligations to the center and you know, so that they will, you know, be the ones to now call their leadership, their political leadership and the local left to order and it is easier actually for them to come within, you know, their states to hold their leaders more accountable than they would perhaps before the center. All right, well it's a whole new ground that we need to cover when we're talking about whether the states will perform better as a good federation if our country becomes a good federation or a proper federation as it should be. But let's move to the second topic and very briefly now because the time is almost up. So in a few sentences, the federal executive council yesterday approved a new national language policy for primary schools. The policy makes mother tongue a compulsory medium of instruction from primary one to six. What significance is this introduction in your own opinion? How? I think it is, yeah, I think it is good, it is significant and I think it is, it is, it is practical in the sense that, you know, if you, if you listen to, I think, the United Nations Agency, the UNICEF, one of the United Nations Agency that is also, you know, promoting, you know, the practice of indigenous languages that are seeking to, that is seeking to protect indigenous languages, you realize that the, from time to time, they sound the alarm, you know, on the danger or the threats that are facing indigenous languages all over the world. And of course, you know that a lot of them have been swallowed up by other, other, other, other, you know, language groups. And so, in the language, it is one of the most important aspects of our culture. In fact, our culture, the entirety of culture, our culture is all about language, because language contains the history, the values, you know, and the, I mean, the origins and the practices of the people. And so, I think it's a good thing, but, you know, what we should be looking at really, you know, that is how, you know, they came up with this policy, who did they consult with, you know, did they engage the public, or is it just a few people sitting down somewhere in a room? Well, they, they have, they have said the, the details are not out yet, as it is, they have made a pronouncement before even thinking about the details that should come. But what worries some of us is the fact that, okay, if I have a child in Yoruba land, I don't speak Yoruba, I'm not from Yoruba, but the predominant language in Yoruba land definitely is Yoruba. So my child gets to speak Yoruba, learn the values that you have talked about of the Yoruba people, and my own values, my own traditions, my own language cannot be learned because I live in Yoruba land. Secondly, the fact that in Nigeria we have so many languages, for instance, if you go to Cross River State, almost every local government has a language of its own. I'm not talking about dialect, a language in fact it's so bad that in a look, a particular local government, some, in some villages, the women speak differently from the men. So in this kind of a case, don't you think there will be a little bit of confusion in the first? It's not going to be a little bit of confusion, it's a lot of confusion. Look, I was also getting there, that was why I was talking about, because when you are coming up with a policy, there are so many things you consider. You also have to bring, you also have to identify the stakeholders, who are the people, what do we want to achieve, you know, and so you're going to bring people from across the board and these are people that, some will raise objections, some will give reasons why they think it will not work, some will give reasons why it will work. Just like the example you have given, you know, that does not exonerate the family itself, because from the analogy you gave, you try to exonerate the role and the duties of parents, you know, so in educating their you know, culture, in their children, it's important that this thing starts from the home. In fact, the teachers are supposed to be the first, or parents are supposed to be the very first teachers of their children before they go outside. So what they learn outside is a different thing for what they learn, you know, in the home, in terms of values, in terms of the culture and all of that. So we go to that, but then the problem is this, you know, that's why the minister, just like you said, also said, well, it is going to take a bit of time. If it is going to take a bit of time to begin implementation, then don't talk about it, then don't bring it up as a policy and then now tell us, yes, we want to, this is all we intend to do, but we don't have the teachers, we don't have, you know, the textbooks that are needed, you know, for this purpose. We want to start working on them. Then after we have worked on them, we can now begin. So in principle, this is the policy that we have passed. That in itself doesn't make sense, I don't understand what they are trying to achieve, you know, by that. But there are issues, over 350, 280 languages in the country. So what are you going to, so by the time you have finished the first set of 50 minutes for the 1, 2, 3, 6, and they are used to certain terms, okay. Well, no, no, no, I just wanted you to learn because time is up and I want us to just wrap it up. Okay, so quickly, so, you know, so by the time you have put all of these people, you know, terms in indigenous languages and so on, and then you now take, for instance, something like a major chemistry and all these other terms, nickel and the rest. By the time you have taught them this in indigenous languages, by the time they now get into the secondary school, you're not going to change all those terms to English. How are you now going to communicate this empty, how will they now be able to know that this is what we identify as this? For instance, as helio, as gas, and all that. So these are some of the issues, it needs a lot of and tuning, it needs a lot of, it's just too early to announce into the Nigerian public. Exactly. Well, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chude, for coming on the show. As usual, it's always fire for fire when we're talking with you. Thank you so much for being a part of the program today. Thank you, Mr. Chude. So we're talking with Mr. Chude on two topics. First of all, the federal government lays all the blame of poverty on the state governors, say because they don't do what they're supposed to do, poverty has entered the rural communities and so that's why 75 percent of Nigerians who live in the rural areas are poor. So the blame is on the governors. And then the second thing is that the federal government has come out to say that indigenous languages will be used to teach in the first years of instructions of pupils in schools from primary one to six. They'll be using the local language. They didn't factor in the fact that we have nursery schools where children graduate into primary school and then before they become graduates or become secondary school students. So what language we thought in the nursery school and after that if it is English that is taught in nursery school then the break, we take a break and go to indigenous language in primary school and then go back to English language. Some things do not just add up and like Mr. Chude said maybe the government should sit down and have a rethink before they make a pronouncement. We're going to take a short break and return with yet another guest who will be talking on something else. Stay with us.