 And let me first congratulate the executive council chamber on this very well appointed executive council chamber. It is possible that the executive council chamber is not aware of the law that says that you cannot build an executive council chamber bigger than the one in the villa. Since he may not be aware of that law, we might excuse him, but I was considering asking his ex-president to issue an executive order to convert this one also to one for the use of the federal executive council. And there might be an advantage to that for the states because we may come here more often that is the federal executive council may meet here perhaps more often. I'm really delighted to be here at this 21st meeting of the National Council on Development Planning holding here in Abakaliki this beautiful and enchanting capital of Abayu state. I bring you the very warm greetings of His Excellency President Mohammad Buhari who as you know feels very strongly that national councils such as this have a very important role to play in boosting cooperation between the states and the federal government as well as in helping better coordination of economic policies for poverty reduction and sustainable development. Permit me at this point to sincerely appreciate my dear brother His Excellency Governor David Umahi and the good people of Abayu state for the kind hospitality accorded to all the participants and their support towards the successful hosting of this meeting and also for the very warm and affectionate welcome that I received from him his family and government and people of Abayu state every time I visit the state. I also commend the Honourable Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, the Honourable Minister of State for Budget and National Planning as well as the Honourable Commissioners of Budget and National Planning who are here with us today for their steadfastness in keeping the tradition of holding this council regularly and using it as an opportunity to exchange views on our national government trajectory. The council on development planning has remained a very important platform for setting the tone of national economic discourse. It certainly provides a good opportunity for federal and state governments to somehow find active collaboration for the well-being of all our people. The need for synergy amongst all tiers of government remains paramount at this critical time especially as we continue to face the challenges of recovery from the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic which is now compounded by the ongoing war between there between Russia and Ukraine the invasion on Ukraine. This war has already led to price and supply shocks especially in food and fuel markets and we must brace ourselves to collectively respond to the inevitable economic developments that will occur and some which are already occurring. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the council a federal ministry of finance, budget and national planning, federal and state MDAs and all stakeholders and indeed the private sector and civil society for the stellar work that has been done in articulating our national development plan 2021 to 2025. The strategic objectives of the national economic national development plan include establishing a strong foundation for a diversified economy, investing in critical infrastructure, enabling human capital development and improving governance and strengthening security all of which will certainly contribute to achieving our national development aspirations. The contents of the plan are as important as the process by which it was developed and I find the extensive deliberations and contributions to fashioning our medium-term blueprint quite impressive and commendable. A lot of work was done in consulting practically all shades of opinion and all tiers of government and non-governmental organizations and groups but the implementation of the plan is the crux of the matter. The implementation of the plan is the crux of the matter and this speaks to the relevance of the theme of this meeting good governance and institutional capacity pathways to sustainable national development. A question that I am sure many of us ask ourselves especially as planners is why countries with huge natural and human resources such as ours still develop slowly, rate poorly on many human development indices and have greater levels of poverty than other less endowed societies. Why, for example, two countries with no resources at all the likes of Japan, South Korea, Singapore, why do they still perform better than the resource rich countries of the world? I think the sum and substance of most studies that have been conducted on this subject show that it is the lack of good governance and weak institutional capacity in the poorer and less performing economies that largely account for the difference between the poor and the rich countries. In other words, the way that public institutions and agencies perform public affairs and manage public resources and also how they manage the participation of citizens and ensure equity and the rule of law and what makes the difference between the poor and the rich, the performing and the non-performing economies. How public institutions function is, of course, likely determined by institutional capacity and I think this is an important point. How public institutions function, how they deliver their services, is determined by institutional capacity. But this is not merely having a well-educated and well-motivated workforce, but systems that are and can enforce transparency and accountability. So it's not just about having an educated workforce or a well-motivated workforce. We must have systems that can deliver on transparency and deliver on accountability. So even where a country has all the natural resources in every local government and a reasonably well-educated workforce, willing and able foreign and local investors, the economy can still fail, social services can still be poorly delivered, and there may be no jobs and extreme poverty can prevail. Why? Because if the system of collection of taxes, for example, is weak and most people do not pay taxes, or the processes for getting government approvals of any kind is cumbersome, and if most public servants want to make money from bribes or thank-yous received from those seeking government approvals, or investors find it difficult to get land approvals, building permits to build factories or plants, or the administration of justice system is so slow that plaintiffs can be floated just by delays, and law enforcement is weak or capricious and arbitrary. Where accountability is weak or nonexistent and poor performance or misconduct has no real consequences, then poor performance becomes systemic. So the result of poor governments is that the delivery of public goods is ineffective. Every public service is effective, whether it is in collection of taxes, as we said, or delivery of social programs, or public education, or health services, obtaining trade facilitation approvals, or even just obtaining passports, or driver's licenses, or any kind of forbearance from the state, or the running of power services, whatever, poor governance and institutional capacity mean a weak economy. And that is so for states, is so for local government, is so for all governments. The private sector will perform suboptimally because the business environment is hostile, so fewer jobs are created. Housing stock may fall where private people do not want to build houses for rent, when tenants, for example, fail to pay their rent so they can remain in accommodation for years without paying rent. We had a problem while I worked in Lagos as attorney general, where we noticed that the housing stock fell. In other words, people were building fewer houses, and they were preferring to invest in stocks and shares instead of building houses. We tried to investigate what was going on, and we found that generally speaking, people were considering building middle income accommodation a poor investment. And the reason is because after they build their houses for rent, and the tenant pays for two years, thereafter no further payments are made, the tenant goes to court, and the landlord and tenant are stuck in court for years, so if the investment is essentially idle as far as the land is concerned. So people rather than building middle income houses would rather go and invest their money in stocks or shares. So wherever you have the failure of governments, such as the failure in this case in the case in question of the administration of justice system, it has a direct impact on the economy. If people cannot trust the administration of justice system, if they cannot trust the adjudicatory system, then it has an impact on the economy. So we had to work hard on our justice system in Lagos to remove those delays. We set up laws called the Citizens Mediation Centers to take rent disputes out of the majesty court system and have them mediated so that they could be done faster. So the truth of the matter is that every time that you have these problems, we must recognize that they are human problems. These problems are human. Problems of governance, problems of institutional capacity are human problems. They can be solved by human beings. Every country that chooses to solve its governance and institutional problems has an effect chosen to develop and prosper. And that goes for every state, every local government, every sub-every type of community. Once you choose to solve governance and institutional problem, you've chosen the path of development and the path of prosperity. But anywhere where dishonesty, lack of transparency, bureaucratic corruption becomes the norm, then such a society chooses backwardness and the poverty of the majority of the citizens. And I think that the most effective views of this meeting, where if there is still room for that, will be to find some answers. I really strongly believe that even at our state deliberations and our national planning deliberations at the state level, we should be finding answers to these elephants in the room. How do we improve governance and institutional capacity? How do we improve governance and institutional capacity? We have the policies. We have the plans. But the weakness is implementation. The weakness is governance. The weakness is institutional capacity. And I hope that this may form the substance of some of our subsequent discussions, what I hear, or perhaps at the various levels of interaction at the state level. I'd like to thank you very much for listening and also to wish you very good results as you go forward with this meeting. Thank you very much.