Connect with us

Uncategorized

Oshiomhole’s intolerance caused APC Crisis, not 2023 ambition – Lukman

Published

on

The Director-General of the Progressive Governors’ Forum (PGF), Salihu Moh. Lukman, has dismissed claims that the current leadership crisis in the party is as a result of scheming by political gladiators to control party structures ahead of the 2023 general elections.

The APC chieftain, however, attributed the wave of crisis in the party to the intolerance of its leaders in the National Working Committee (NWC)

Lukman in a personal statement signed Sunday in Abuja, also chastised the NWC of the party for its inability to convene important party meetings, saying it is now easier to organize a general election in Nigeria than hold a meeting of the APC’s National Executive Committee NEC.

The forum DG said he was reacting to a commentary by a certain Peter Oparah calling on the APC Governors to sack him for doing a ‘cheap hatchet’, adding that the task of DG of PGF is separate from the responsibility of being a member of APC.

Stating that no one was using him to fight any cause, Lukman said political debates are now reduced to propaganda partly because Nigerians take leadership for granted and expect that people working with leaders must always demonstrate agreement. “Once that is the case, leaders limit themselves to recruiting sycophants to work with them”, he said.

Lukman advocated the need to divorce the politics of 2023 from the current leadership crisis in the party.

According to him; “As Nigerians, we have the constitutional right to freely express ourselves, and by extension, also have expectations that should guide who gets elected. Does that explain the leadership crisis in APC and to what extent does that confirm or otherwise the allegations that those who are against Comrade Oshiomhole are doing it for 2023?

“Inability to manage disagreements and resolve conflicts bordering on leadership disputes is at the centre of the crisis in APC. Unfortunately, these are not the issues being debated. What is being debated is about the personalities in the conflict and who is supporting who. It is not about the details of the disagreements. We may succeed to come to agreement about who should occupy the positions, but will that prevent a situation whereby organs of the party will not meet such that vacancies will emerge and proper processes of refilling the vacancies will not be followed?

“Partly, to blackmail those of criticising Comrade Oshiomhole, all those alleged to have been opposed to him are being accused of nursing or supporting ambition for 2023. False as it is, to avoid falling into the pit being dug to produce intolerant leaders, party leaders and members should not be defensive about their positions. They should be able to ask, since Comrade Oshiomhole is a threat to the ambition of those opposed to him, it means that there is someone he supports. Who is that person and what does that person represent? Is Comrade Oshiomhole’s leadership attributes representative of the orientation of the person Comrade Oshiomhole is supporting?

“We must not allow the debate to be reduced to a simple strategy to conquer and subjugate opponents. The danger here is not that Comrade Oshiomhole may succeed in defeating his opponents, but that if it is part of the strategy to promote a particular person to emerge as President Buhari’s successor in 2023, for instance, based on Comrade Oshiomhole’s style of leadership, it then means that there is a very high possibility that such a post-President Buhari successor will be closer, if not worse than, President Obasanjo’s model of garrison leadership. Is that the type of President we want?,” he queried.

Berating Oshiomhole for reneging on his campaign promises to reengineer the party by activating all its organs, Lukman lamented that it has now become easier to organize a general election in Nigeria than hold a NEC meeting of the party.

He said; “Just as an illustration, it will be useful to recall one aspect of his (Oshiomhole’s) vision statement, which commits him; ‘To promote internal party democracy, we will ensure that all organs of the party regularly meet, as stipulated by the party’s Constitution. For instance, article 25 of the APC’s Constitution provides that National Convention of the party shall be held once in two years; National Executive Committee NEC every quarter and National Working Committee NWC once every month’.

“Yet, when party leaders are criticised for these infractions, it is being translated to mean agenda for 2023. Rather than therefore allow distractions based on highlighting issues of contractual relationship that have no bearing on the challenges, the focus should be on problems of intolerance, which is the source of the leadership crisis in APC. In terms of how it manifests in APC, it is two-fold. The first is, what is it that should be done to ensure that the APC is able to democratise itself and based on its democratic credentials produce the kind of leaders Nigerians are looking for? The second issue is, how can we support APC leaders to re-orient themselves in the direction of democratising the party to produce the kind of leaders Nigerians want?

“The first border on the details of the current leadership crisis in APC. The second is really about challenging our leaders to be much more tolerant and honestly engage the issues. It is not about scheming to dominate. If it is about scheming, then no need to expect internal democracy in our parties and we should be ready to accept all the crude practices of manipulating and producing fictitious membership register just ahead of party primary. Once we encourage our leaders to be intolerant, we should just be ready for every known democratic requirement to be undermined.

“In short, the problem of intolerance, is the fundamental leadership challenge in Nigerian politics. Given all the leadership problems of APC at the moment and against the overriding consideration of producing the type of tolerant leaders who should ‘live in the present, with one eye on the future’ as well as ‘right-brain and left-brain’, through democratic process, the first requirement is for APC to ensure that all organs of the party are made functional and they accommodate as all shades of opinions of members”, he added.

Continue Reading

Economy

Despite Earlier Apprehensions, Senators Agree on Funding for Development Commissions

Published

on

By

Despite Senators’ division over new regional development commissions’ funding arrangement, Lawmakers in the Red Chamber on Thursday finally agreed on the source of funding for the newly created zonal development commissions.

The arguments had unfolded as the Senate and House of Representatives moved forward with legislation to establish these commissions, which were also stripped of operational immunity for their boards and executives.

The disagreement emerged during the clause-by-clause consideration of the South-South Development Commission Establishment Bill 2024, which serves as the structural template for other zonal commissions.
Central to the debate was the Senate Committee on Special Duties’ recommendation that 15% of statutory allocations from member states be directed toward funding these commissions.

Several Senators, including Yahaya Abdullahi (PDP, Kebbi North), Wasiu Eshinlokun (APC, Lagos East), and Seriake Dickson (PDP, Bayelsa West), voiced concerns over the proposed funding model.

 

 

Senator Abdullahi warned that the provision could lead to legal challenges from state governments, as no state would willingly allow its statutory allocation to be reduced.

“Mr President, distinguished colleagues, the 15% of statutory allocations of member states recommended for funding their zonal development commissions would be litigated against by some state governments,” Abdullahi said.

Seeking to clarify the matter, the Deputy President of the Senate, Barau Jibrin, quickly intervened.

He explained that the 15% allocation would not involve a direct deduction from the states’ funds.

He said, “Mr President, distinguished colleagues, the 15% of statutory allocation of member states, recommended for funding of Zonal Development Commissions by the federal government, is not about deduction at all.

“What is recommended, as contained in the report presented to us by the Committee on Special Duties and being considered by the Senate now, is that 15% of the statutory allocation of member states in a zonal development commission would, by way of calculation by the federal government, be used to fund the commission from the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

“Each state has a monthly statutory allocation, 15% of which, as contained in this report being considered, will be calculated by the federal government and removed from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for funding of their Development Commission.”

Despite Barau’s explanation, several senators remained unconvinced and expressed their desire to contribute to the debate.

However, Senate President Godswill Akpabio stepped in, asserting that the provision was constitutionally sound.

“We don’t need to debate whether 15% of statutory allocations from member states in a commission would be deducted,” Akpabio said, citing Section 162(4) of the 1999 Constitution, which grants the National Assembly the authority to appropriate funds from either the Consolidated Revenue Fund or the Federation Account.

“Fifteen percent of the statutory allocation has been recommended by the Senate, and by extension, the National Assembly, for funding these zonal development commissions. Anyone who wishes to challenge that in court is free to do so,” he added.

Akpabio then called for a voice vote, and the majority voted in favour of the provision.

In his remarks following the passage of the consolidated bills, Akpabio expressed gratitude to the Senators for their efforts in finalising the Zonal Development Commissions.

He noted that these commissions would provide a foundation for the newly created Ministry of Regional Development.

The bills passed include the South-South Development Commission Establishment Bill 2024, the North West Development Commission Act (Amendment) Bill 2024, and the South-East Development Commission Act (Amendment) Bill 2024.

The South West Development Commission Establishment Bill 2024 and the North Central Development Commission Establishment Bill 2024 were previously passed.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Tinubu Seeks Senate Confirmation for Seven Ministerial Nominees

Published

on

By

By Elizabeth Okwe and Ojone Grace Odaudu

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Thursday urged the Senate to screen for confirmation, seven nominees for appointment as ministers.

Senate President Godswill Akpabio read President Tinubu’s letter of request during plenary.

The ministerial nominees for Senate’s consideration and approval are, Dr Nentawe Yilwatda (Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction); Muhammadu Dingyadi (Labour & Employment); Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu (State Foreign Affairs), and Dr Jumoke Oduwole (Industry, Trade and Investment).

Others are, Idi Mukhtar Maiha (Livestock Development), Yusuf Ata (State, Housing and Urban Development), and Dr. Suwaiba Ahmad (State Education).

Akpabio referred the nominees to the Committee of the Whole for further legislative work as soon as possible

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Tinubu Fires More Ministers

Published

on

By

By Elizabeth Okwe and Ojone Grace Odaudu

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has fired at least five ministers

The ministers are

1. Barr. Uju-Ken Ohanenye, Minister of Women Affairs

2. Lola Ade-John, Minister of Tourism

3. Prof Tahir Mamman, Minister of Education

4. Abdullahi Muhammad Gwarzo, Minister of State, Housing and Urban Development

5. Dr. Jamila Bio Ibrahim, Minister of Youth Development.

Continue Reading

Archives

Categories

Meta

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending