Cecilia Ibru’s Flippancies

The homely, comely motherly mien of Mrs Cecilia Ibru, Managing Director of Oceanic Bank was violently ruffled last week when she appeared on the hard-hitting British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) programme, ‘Hard Talk’. If you know the elite well enough, you would know that they are a predatory, carnivorous, clannish specie of mammals that hunt in […]

The homely, comely motherly mien of Mrs Cecilia Ibru, Managing Director of Oceanic Bank was violently ruffled last week when she appeared on the hard-hitting British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) programme, ‘Hard Talk’. If you know the elite well enough, you would know that they are a predatory, carnivorous, clannish specie of mammals that hunt in small groups called families; occasionally cannibalistic while almost always devious. They are the ‘They’ in the common man’s usage of common phrases like: “they are selfish”,” they are wicked”, “ they are powerful”, “they don’t like us”, “they don’t care”, “they are insensitive”, “they are terrible” etc, etc.

Indeed, Chief Mrs C. Ibru is not just a member of the Nigerian elite group, she’s a quintessence of it. Her family founded and owns the Oceanic Bank, which is adjudged to be the most capitalized, and one of the fastest growing banks in Nigeria. Her position as MD of the bank competes favourably with her position as the matriarch of the powerful Ibru dynasty, the head of which is Chief Alex Ibru, a former minister with interest in banking, oil and gas, shipping and publishing. By every account Mrs Ibru would make a Dame in Britain, a socialite in America and a Lady everywhere else.

So early last week this super-achieving lucky lady, or lucky super-achieving lady decided to test her clout on the world stage by accepting to appear on the BBC programme, ‘Hard Talk’, which had been known to rattle even steelier males that confronted it. Mrs. Ibru turned out to be quiet a revelation. She came across as someone who is completely ignorant of her own country, or else she understands it so thoroughly that she could, if she is so inclined, be able to find buyers of her own shit in any Nigerian market. Sorry about that, but you see, even late Bola Ige who first suggested that repugnant possibility, could not put it any subtler ( check the introduction to Carl Mier’s ‘This House has Fallen’ ).

Predictably, the issue of corruption was the dominant subject in the program. In his preamble, Steven Suckur, host of the programme was shown rubbing shoulders with Nigerians in a busy Lagos street; as usual, but not without good reasons, he summed up Nigeria as country characterized by “endemic corruption and political failure”.

After the formalities, Mr Suckur dared Mrs. Ibru to take a stand on the April 2007 elections. He wanted to know if his guest shared the (extreme) view of those Nigerians and foreigners who insist that for President Yar’adua to be taken seriously, he must obtain a fresh, credible mandate from the Nigerian people otherwise whatever he does would be dented by the events of April 14/2007. Mr Suckur couldn’t have asked a more delicate question; was he not aware that the private sector, Mrs Ibru’s principal constituency partnered actively with former President Obasanjo to undermine Nigerians at every turn including rigging of elections not only in 2007 but also in 2003? Anyway if his intention was to rattle his guest, he succeeded probably well beyond his expectation. Because Mrs Ibru produced a most unfortunate response. “Rigging” she said “is not peculiar to Nigeria, it happened in the United States…”  Ugh! Even agberos (bus conductors), most of whom live on less than one dollar a day have since managed to cure themselves of such mental debauchery. Mr Sackur then asked the next logical question: if it happens in the U.S. does that makes it right? Mrs. Ibru then went blah, blah, blah.

Next came the inevitable issue of corruption. After playing hide and sick for a while, Suckur asked Mrs Ibru directly if she’d ever had to give out bribe to get things done as she goes about running the ‘most capitalized bank’ in the country. “No” came the prompt reply; and if you are wondering whether she blinked or not, the answer is that she didn’t. Even Sackur was momentarily stunned. When he reminded her that a recent Transparency International (TI) survey on Nigeria reported that at least 40% of those surveyed admitted to giving bribe at least once, Mrs Ibru again produced another masterpiece: “I’m glad that you say 40 percent, and not 60 percent…” Then the Odilli connection came up. To deliver his punch, Mr Sackur took a very long, careful aim. “You are in partnership with the former governor of Rivers state, Dr Peter Odilli. Mr. Odilli as governor once made a budget of about $1.5bn; used about $11 million to purchase cars, $10mn on gifts, bought two helicopters in addition to his own private jet; and yet you are partnering with such a man.” Surely this was enough to make her flinch or falter? But again she didn’t. With a fixed smile, a straight face and a steady voice she responded by saying that Mr Odilli is no longer in power now. With barely restrained impatience Suckur asked her what difference it made whether Odilli is in or out of power now; wasn’t Ibru aware that Odilli is being accused by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of corrupt enrichment while in office? Again the bland smile, again the sheepish insistence that he was now out of office! Ha! Women are really truly coming of age.

But back to Mrs Cecilia Ibru. For those who have the patience to penetrate her dainty façade, she presents a rare window into the mindset of the regular Nigerian elite. Economists, political economists and historians are in general agreement that economic development is usually spearheaded by the elite class and powered by private capital by whatever means acquired: whether it is stolen public funds or wealth lawfully earned through entrepreneurship. So long as that capital is released into the economy and is controlled by a responsible elite class with the right attitude—education, discipline and patriotism—then it’s only a matter of time before that nation achieves economic development.

This loose hypothesis makes sense especially if applied to some countries in Africa and the Middle East. Oil-rich Saudi Arabia remains economically backward and dependent because its elite class is polarized between a super rich aristocracy and a poorly equipped middle class that is contented with living a highly subsidized good life. By contrast even under unrestrained communist rule the Chinese have developed a strong patriotic fervor, a disciplined attitude and a hunger for self-reliance that was just waiting to explode. Now it is the fastest growing economy in the world, thanks to the gradual introduction of free market policies albeit in a regulated manner.   To be concluded next week

In Nigeria there has been a long unresolved debate about whether a middle class exists at all. Resolved or not, the truth is that every Nigerian knows where he belongs: whether he belongs to the class of the rich, the poor or struggling in between. Although many people are more inclined to argue that a middle class does exist, the very fact that there is a debate about that existence underscores it’s impotence. This explains why after almost 50 years of independence and an estimated revenue of over $300bn, 70 percent of Nigerians still live on less than $400 a year, a doctor-patient ratio of about 1:5000, a literacy level of just over 50% in the most literate part of the country; at 46 years one of the shortest life expectancy periods in the world, a burgeoning crime culture and an educational system that has all but crashed.

This is one reason why President Yar’adua should take advantage of the rare ‘window of opportunity’ as provided by Mrs Ibru. There can only be little debate that in her attitude, aptitude, patriotism, discipline, sincerity—or lack of all that—Mrs Ibru represents a very good specimen of the average Nigerian elite. In his drive to unleash Nigeria’s potential for the short but difficult journey to be among the ‘20 most developed economies by the year 2020’,the President whether he likes it or not will have to rely on opportuned and opportunistic Nigerians such as Mrs Ibru. Yar’adua would have neither the time nor the powers to create his own elite (as Mr Putin is doing now in Russia, and as his predecessor, Obasanjo unsuccessfully attempted to do). His policies, his dreams, his vision, indeed his sincerity of purpose, which is his biggest asset would be at the mercy of an unscrupulous  elite group that places itself and its interest above the nation and its people.

How pervasive this group is, is an academic issue; but that they are powerful is not in any doubt. They control all the major institutions of growth and development—banks and other related institutions. And it is a well known fact that Nigerian banks present a very serious paradox to economists. For instance they declare mega profits regularly and yet no corresponding rise in production capacity, while  poverty level and unemployment keep rising. Nor are they any good at financing enterprises, as evidenced by the number of industries that are folding up.

Thus Yar’adua has a very big task ahead of him. A  few weeks after assuming power the president was reported to have said that ‘rule of the elite is over’. Perhaps he was misquoted or reported out of context, because the Nigerian elites have been an integral part of every government in Nigeria and are poised to remain so. What is practicable is to make the elite—both in the narrow and expanded sense of the word—to, for once refuse to allow the elite to subjugate government to their whims, as has been the case over the years. They should be made to pay their way and to compliment government. As it is a very narrow group has wrecked so many banks and parastatals through unpaid loans, mismanagement and outright stealing; to those people government exist for them and their needs, its resources are not for development but instruments of coercion by which they try to control the rest of the society.

In his own way Obasanjo actually came close to neutralizing such people but along the way vendetta and hubris derailed him. Some of the people that opposed Obasanjo from the northern part of the country did not do so because of any sense of patriotism, or because they felt he was doing any general harm to the region; they opposed him principally because he cut off privileges that they had enjoyed as a birth right for many years. Now they are assembling again around Yar’adua.

His presidency would be defined by his relationship to those forces. At the moment many Nigerians are beginning to warm up to him. But then the sabotage, the smear campaign, the betrayal and the in-fighting have not even begun. For most Nigerians privileges simply don’t exist, what they require is a level playing ground with government as an impartial umpire. This they want Yar’adua to guarantee. And in this so far so good. The trouble is, would the people around him permit him to see the real situation and advise him honestly so that he could respond appropriately? Or would the needs and the desires of the silent majority be determined by the smooth distortions of the so called captains of industry who say what is calculated to please the government for their own end? Has the President found a parallel in the way and manner a certain category of people are praising him now with the way and manner the same group of people were praising his predecessor in the early stages of his presidency?