Paying lip-service to housing

It is also sad that even where a previous administration laid a sound foundation for decent housing for Nigerians, subsequent policy inconsistency or insincerity end up killing the initiative. A good example for this policy inconsistency was the fate that befell housing policy after the death of the late General Sani Abacha. During the Abacha […]

It is also sad that even where a previous administration laid a sound foundation for decent housing for Nigerians, subsequent policy inconsistency or insincerity end up killing the initiative. A good example for this policy inconsistency was the fate that befell housing policy after the death of the late General Sani Abacha. During the Abacha administration, his then minister of works and housing, Alhaji Lateef Jakande, initiated a 25,000 housing projects per state of the federation as a major first step to tackling the challenges of housing in Nigeria.

This laudable initiative came at a time the so-called National Housing Insurance Scheme was unable to produce any impact. According to the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), 10 years after the housing insurance scheme was introduced, not a single worker was able to build a house of his own under the over-hyped programme. In fact, the scheme existed mainly on paper, despite the noises made about it.

However, with the direct intervention of the late Abacha regime, housing took a front burner. With the execution of the Gwarinpa Housing Estate, which was intended to address these challenges and bring down the cost of accommodation, Nigerians had for the first time seen a practical demonstration of sincerity and political will to deal with the issue of shelter. Described as the largest single housing project in sub-Saharan Africa, the Gwarinpa housing estate remains an enduring legacy of the Abacha regime.

Unfortunately, due to our culture of abandoning good initiatives, Nigeria has fallen far behind in the commitment to addressing the challenges of providing shelter to Nigerians. Despite the introduction of the so-called public/private sector partnership to provide housing, the policy is practically benefitting only the rich while the average citizens continue to regard housing as a pipe dream for the rest of their lives.

It is not realistic for the government to detach itself completely from the responsibility of providing housing for ordinary Nigerians. The government should not abdicate its social service responsibility in this regard. Instead of sustaining the sound housing policies started by Abacha, the Obasanjo administration abandoned the initiative and threw Nigerians to the wolves under the so-called public/private sector partnership. How many ordinary Nigerians, including civil servants, can afford the so-called houses built under this partnership? This partnership has not in any way reduced the cost of accommodation in Abuja and elsewhere in Nigeria. In fact, the cost of accommodation has forced many ordinary civil servants to seek accommodation 50-60km away from their work places.

One would have expected the former Obasanjo administration to continue the housing policy from where Abacha stopped. Instead, his administration introduced the poorly implemented policy of monetisation, which saw the sale of federal government houses to the highest bidders. Civil servants who couldn’t afford to pay for their houses automatically lost them to the highest bidders outside the civil service. Contrary to the expectation of Obasanjo, the policy had not eased accommodation problems. It complicated it instead.

The most ridiculous aspect of it was Obasanjo’s decision to sell the Apo legislative quarters to the lawmakers at throwaway prices as low as N15 million for a house, which should have been sold at N20 million to N50 million. It was the biggest rip-off on Nigerians. Politicians are not civil servants and their tenures are not permanent. It was, therefore, indefensible selling government houses to them when they are on a part-time assignment. Many of them resold the houses at 80 to 100 million naira at public expense. Even the late President Yar’Adua had attempted to reverse this scandalous sale of federal houses to the lawmakers but he caved in due to political pressure.

Ill-thought-out policy reversals are responsible for killing many good projects in Nigeria. The idea of killing the good legacies of previous administrations is primitive and short-sighted. One cannot explain why any sensitive government should abandon the provision of housing for the people in the hands of market forces. Provided a policy is good for the society, it doesn’t matter which administration initiated it.

In his zeal to destroy anything good initiated by others before him, former President Obasanjo cut off his nose to spite his face. When the late Abacha regime started the 25,000 housing projects in each state of Nigeria, many Nigerians had thought it was not possible. The Gwarinpa housing project is a standing tribute to Abacha’s legacy. His death, however, had set back these laudable projects. Unfortunately, their continuation was sacrificed on the altar politics.

With consistency and sincerity, Nigeria could have covered a lot of grounds in the implementation of housing projects by the government to ease accommodation difficulties for majority of Nigerians. Rent payments virtually wipe out the total annual earnings of workers, majority of them on fixed incomes. Can a country progress when the whims and caprices of leaders become the official policy? Substance is more important than form. It doesn’t matter whether Abacha was a military ruler or not; what matters instead is the usefulness or relevance of the projects he started. Should a subsequent government kill those projects out of pure desire to obliterate his legacy? Unless leaders put the higher interest of Nigeria above personal interest, the country will pay costly price for such naivety.

Adegbenro, an estate agent, wrote in from Wuse II, Abuja.