ASUP, GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRIALIZATION IN NIGERIA

Here’s a dialogue from a movie (“Wall Street Money Never Sleeps”). The movie is about the 2008 crash of the stock market in the US.

Jake is repeatedly asking Lews Zable “are we going under?”

Zable says “You’re asking the wrong question Jacob”

“What’s the right question” Jake asks.

In his answer, Zable’s right question is “Who isn’t”.

In our present predicaments as a nation, it is almost nature to see people asking which political party or aspirant is best? When is government going to listen to ASUP’s demands? When is ASUP going to call off the strike? Is anyone really asking the right questions which, in my candid opinion, is “what is really wrong with Nigeria?” Will Nigeria ever taste industrialization (again?)

Well let me raise a caveat here: answers may make you uncomfortable.

Recently, I began asking questions like the above. I also began seriously reading contents on recent spree of industrial actions. My intent is to understand how Nigeria might get out of the current situation. I also began asking and wondering if we are not unintentionally killing our chances of attaining that Nigeria of our dream. Then again I asked ‘unintentionally?’

At this point, it occurred to me that Fela might yet be right again as he once was (or always is) about the political intrigues of our first and second republics, “people wey no know dey happy, people wey know them dey look” meaning the uninitiated rejoiced while the initiated gazed on.

The country is “No longer at ease” and there might well be calculated schemes in place to really keep Nigeria and Nigerians like this. Far from the oft repeated aspiration to become a viable state, the country keeps heading south and further yet by the day. Otherwise, I dare ask, why did we not continue on the path of industrialization as planned and practised before the military boys got hold of power in the country. Or dare I ask again even where that may have set us back, might we yet not be on a good course were we to pick whatever was left of wherever at the resuscitation of democracy in 1999. In my answers I found that much unlike most developed economies that have attained development through industrialization, Nigeria may not be anywhere near industrialization or development or both. And this may well be self-afflicted.

Industrialization rides on the wings of education and technology. From Greek to Sparta; from England to Nigeria, education remains key tool through which society ensures its continuity. The idea, as Prof. Babatunde Fafunwa sees it, is to equip people, through education, with learning for better integration into and contribution to society. Technology simply describes know-how. And this, in education, is captured as Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET). The world over, TVET remains a key catalyst for development, sustainable development if you like. Most developed economies, especially the first twenty with quite impressive human development index (HDI) have utilized (TVET) extensively. We are talking here about countries like Norway, Australia, United States of America, Netherlands, Germany, New Zealand, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Canada, Korea, Republic of Hong Kong, China (SAR), Iceland, Denmark, Israel, Belgium, Austria, Singapore and France respectively [Adapted from UNDP (2013) Human Development Report 2013. The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World]. It may be helpful to hint that HDI measures how much a country has utilized education to improve peoples' health and living conditions.

These countries have formalized and strategically incorporated (TVET) into their educational systems. Norway for instance starts teaching (TVET) to pupils from about age 8 and this goes on for about the next 10 years of the individual's education (through to completion of secondary education). Similar examples abound in Australia and Netherlands. In Australia especially, very strong collaborations exit between the academia and the industry especially in areas of curriculum design and the country's highly structured national apprenticeship schemes. Others like Korea and Japan have restructured their educational systems to reflect TVET’s relevance to industrialization and development. Such realities are yet utopian in Nigeria. This is not because we are incapable or not so destined. It is largely because such paths run inimical to the interest and aspirations of the few ruling class. And unfortunately, Nigerians keep getting diverted onto the other way. Each time these matters come up for discussion, our collective attention is quickly diverted to some arranged digressions and we soon get too carried away with these plots that we easily forget the big picture. We will easily remember the case of the oil subsidy loots and Lawan. When Lawan seem to be digging too deep for comfort, Nigerians were given a new fish to fry. Today, no one seems to be seriously asking what went wrong with the subsidy imbroglio. Similarly, when Sanusi raised dusts at NNPC, he got alleged of misconduct and inadvertently removed from the seat at CBN. Anyone that gets too smart becomes the bad dog and taking to the slaughters.

When the ongoing imbroglio between the Polytechnic teachers and the Federal government of Nigeria is put in context, I began to see why the ruling class in Nigeria may not do more than pay mere lip service to education in general and (TVET) in particular. Whenever such discussions are presented, government brings its habitual distractions and the chorus and beat changes. Is no one thinking of how to move this great nation forward beyond lip service? There obviously are people who sleeps and wakes with the Great Nigerian Dream. The only reason why they seem redundant or their seemingly efforts ineffective is that such persons often shelve the ideas in exchange for a slice of the cake or pay heavily for non-cooperation. In other words, Nigeria may never become industrialized not because we lack the capacities to so do. 

Nigeria may never experience development because underdevelopment favours a section of the population. It is a system that oils the wheel of prosperity of the ruling class in the LDCs. In such countries, these elements in power often create social systems that nurture and sustain poverty in the larger society. In this particular discourse, they cripple the industrial sectors of the economy. Experiences in the third world have shown how such ventures lead to thriving terrorism industries.

Where a nation has poorly structured or deliberately crippled industrial sector like Nigeria, she is left to depend largely on importation to meet her industrial needs. Yes, we may argue that fingers are not equal. Yet one of the ironies of life that what the bald misses on his head is often compensated with beard, or at least as is documented in Yoruba/ African proverbs. Natural endowments of nations often come in complementary bundles. Most nations will handle their relative realities relatively well in-house if they concentrate on their opportunities and strengths leaving their weaknesses and threats to be handled by those better at such. Relatively, equilibrium will eventually be attained where those other countries outsource their own weaknesses and threats.

No thanks however to capitalism (especially as practised in the 21st century) where nations strongly aspire to be the all-in-all point of reference; you either have all your need met by us or routed through us.

You might argue for the law of comparative advantage here but forget not that what the law really suggests is that countries specialize in producing what they produce better, cheaper or at relative low cost than others. Consequently, international trade occurs due to technological differences (and not due to abject lack of technological know-how) between countries. Instead of becoming ‘jack of all trades’ the law of comparative advantage hopes that such concentration will eventually lead to specialization.

The questions: what is Nigeria's specialization? What really is the nation's export earner? Or rather what went wrong? Neither should the truth surprise you nor should you need to search deep. The death of Nigeria’s industrial sector was rather calculated to meet the aspirations of the ruling class as indicated earlier.

 It is often common to hear propaganda on how massively Nigeria has invested in Agriculture etcetera. But won't you ask: what need serves agriculture etcetera when most harvests never make it to the market let alone make it to the export market? Rather than export for comparative economic advantage, most less developed countries (LDCs) depend largely on importation for domestic consumption. This is particularly in areas of consumption: food, clothing, and power consumption products. But then, importation is by no means child’s play.Until recently when China opened its doors to medium scale importers/entrepreneurs from the LDCs, importation remained for long, only a game of the affluent; individuals and groups who live or dine at or somewhere around the corridor of power. Such are individuals or groups who, through the right connections, as multiple connections and evade all duties and taxes for instance. Who can and always meet bank’s conditions leveraging on all and every state resources at their beck and call. Such are the individuals and groups who commissioned the death of our industrial sectors.

We will easily remember the case of the railway lines of yore in Nigeria and why efforts to revive it are moving at snail pace. Neither is the story of oil subsidy too stale to be forgotten. Majority of the beneficiaries of the subsidy are those powers that be (or their buddies) who got free oil blocks allocations. Such ones that have friends in the Navy and so could borrow equipment from their friend to lift crude; who have friends in the Army to escort their fleets through the creek to the high sea or those whose promises of returns can keep the ‘ND’ boys at bay; who have built (or have Nigerian friend who have built) refineries in Netherlands and elsewhere so that they can refine the crude at relatively low costs; who have contacts in the oil subsidy desk (who record 2 for every on vessel and) expedite the processing of their claims on return with the petroleum product; to be sold to their Perm. Sec. and local government career officer friends who own fuel retail stations or with the aid of their friend in the customs ‘export’ the product to neighbouring countries and later sold on highway shoulders at double the regular retail prices.

The story is same for virtually all subsectors in our national industrial life. The case then becomes that of the hoe user who naturally till towards himself. Or where do you want these free allowances to come from if the rail hauls heavy goods? What again do you expect to become of their friends who get the ‘road resurfacing contracts’? Nor is the failure of power sector reforms inspite of huge disbursement surprising. What becomes of the huge investments and gains there from in the importation of power generating alternatives that flood the Nigerian markets? Neither would it surprise you that key amongst items given by political as dividends of democracy at the grassroots as well as prizes to be won in contests is the generator. Nor should it surprise you that a new TV with rechargeable battery is available in the market.

All these are some of the reasons why the powers that be will continue to pay only lip service to matters of TVET in Nigeria. Another unhealthy reality is that fact that besides lip service, government really spend huge chunk of resources including money on these white elephant projects. For instance, through SURE-P, government has disbursed huge funds for the construction of medical facilities at the grassroots. In a recent interview, the supervising minister of the economy was challenged by a law maker on SURE-P. He argued that were there to be such infrastructure in his constituency, he would have known. All the minister could say was that she was speaking on the strength of the report submitted by their field operatives.

Neither will it shock you that the ruling class benefits massively from unemployment. For one it helps in the creation of the terrorism industry in most LDCs. It may interest you that most terrorists or those so described used to be members of some affluent individual’s private militia. Secondly, where industries and manufacturing concerns are scanty or completely nonexistent, graduates of technology scavenges for jobs in the ministries and such other places that seek to force their square pegs into round holes. They cause a stampede in these sectors thereby living those better suited for these jobs stranded. One reason why this is so is that because these technology graduates are ill-fitted for these desk jobs, they gladly accept meager pay packages where others will demand otherwise. It is often not because these individuals think low of themselves. Rather it is because there are not ready holes for them to fill.

Given such scenarios, all such monies like those spent through the Bank of Industry (BoI) for instance find their ways into private pockets. What would you expect? One, there are no industries where these funds can be invested and two incentives for entrepreneurs to initiate such on large scales to meet BoI’s standards equally end up in wrong unintended pockets; pockets of friend on the corridors of power to further fortify their importation empires.

This is why such common proclamations that blame the government are shocking especially coming from the academia. Such comments often cite the roles played by government in the East Asian giants for instance. I contend this position and submit that such propositions including those of the UNIDO and UNCTAD (2011, p.68 - 69) only work where public interest – and not self-interest – holds sway. Unlike in other advanced democracies, government in LDCs solely mean the political class. The way the political class emerges in these countries is nearly as simple as virtually buying their ways into power. This element of buying constitutes commerce and commerce presupposes that you seek gains fundamentally. Most prominently, such gains accrue from planned failure of the system. This is what is popularly called corruption in these countries. This is why these countries have poorly structured industrial sectors and are thus left to depend largely on importation to meet basic domestic and industrial needs.

Power is usually not given. It is almost always taken. With such political class, not much can be expected to start from the corridors of power. With not too impressive number of TVET stakeholders in government, the task to properly position TVET in the scheme of development in Nigeria lies on those stakeholders in technical education.

But a caveat is deems prudent here. Polytechnic teachers may well be on the verge of national irrelevance. You will hardly have the need for cobblers where people have no legs or don’t buy shoes. Where your products are less patronized, chances are that your shops will be submerged or closed inadvertently. The recent developments including the response of government to ASUP’s demands have shown that polytechnic teachers may not be the favourite child after all.

This is a call for complete redirection of our national energies to profitable ends rather than mere lip service to development and industrialization. While we may not fail to call on policy makers and implementers to revisit educational policies and programmes to re-address the TVET agenda, a more urgent call is necessary to TVET teachers to engage using technology. It is unfortunate to hear teachers of technology ask “what can we do” when they are the ones that supposedly teach these technics and vocations. It is only natural that they use it; it remains their only veritable battle weapon.

Discussions in the 21^st century have moved from the monologues that we have on our campuses to the social media.

Let Polytechnic teachers contribute actively through Blogs, twitter, facebook accounts and other social media platforms to the development discourse. Let them begin by cross-fertilizing thoughts, improving their knowledge base, collaborating on researches and projects, and creating a virtual TVET community that is well informed and speaks with a single voice.

The world is moving and it is riding on the shoulders of technology. It will rather be unfortunate that those who apparently give the TVET do not maximize its benefits. With resilience and through well-constructed and coordinated campaigns, the perception problem will be effectively handled when teachers of technology make unprecedented advances with technology and students break new ground putting learnt skills to productive use in their private and employment lives; when evident economic growth results from TVET graduates’ high productivity, employability and successful career progressions. This can eventually endear TVET to the hearts of players in the industry for strong productive synergies.

TVET teachers need to seriously get involved in the drafting of the TVET curriculum. TVET teachers often see the curriculum as instruction handed down by the boss when indeed they ought to be the ones to say what really matters. Who wear the shoes ought to know where it pinches. Collaborative discourses on self-created and self-moderated social platforms can generate such amazing contents that project TVET teachers into limelight.

Pursuing TVET is like killing many birds with a single stone throw. And the thrower in Nigeria's particular example ought to be the teachers of technical and vocational education and training. This change of role is essential because unlike in developed economies where public interest reigns, in Nigeria, public interest is almost always relegated. TEVT will expose the nation’s indigenous technologies to the global market place being the Africa’s commercial hub. Nigeria’s hitherto thriving but now slumbering indigenous technologies will be revived. This will accord TVET teachers respect and relevance in the nation’s developmental agenda. Thriving industrial sectors benefit all stakeholders. And the country is able to meet both domestic demand for manufactured goods and gain competitive export advantage. Such aspirations invariably shape public opinion and perception about vocational education and training.