The Soludo, Okonjo-Iweala bout

Soludo had written a lengthy and widely disseminated critique of the Jonathan administration’s economic policies in which he alleged that some N30 trillion of the nation’s public finance was unaccounted for. He said that this occurred in the past three years under Mrs Okonjo-Iweala’s watch.  Soludo’s document painted a bleak picture of where he believed […]

Soludo had written a lengthy and widely disseminated critique of the Jonathan administration’s economic policies in which he alleged that some N30 trillion of the nation’s public finance was unaccounted for. He said that this occurred in the past three years under Mrs Okonjo-Iweala’s watch.  Soludo’s document painted a bleak picture of where he believed the Nigerian economy was headed, and itemised a coterie of polices that he said were either wrong or downright fraudulent.  In a response issued in her name but signed by a personal aide, the minister launched into tirade, attacking Soludo’s person and record in office as the worst in Nigeria’s history, similar words she had used on an earlier occasion that involved Soludo’s successor at CBN, Malam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi.  It was not an item-by-item rebuttal to shed light on Soludo’s allegations, which he elaborated upon in a follow-up write-up in response. To the disappointment of many, the minister said she would not join issues with him.
 One of the immediate fallouts of Soludo’s letter was the release by the Presidency of a forensic audit into the accounts of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) submitted to it months earlier.
 A most telling allegation that Soludo made was that it was routine among members of the administration to manipulate data in order to make the economy seem robust, when the reality was otherwise. The issues that Soludo raised may linger for sometime unless a more appropriate response by the government than the one it has given is forthcoming.  This is especially true as both Soludo and Okonjo-Iweala had served at various times, either individually and together, at the apex level of the nation’s economic management team.  
Under a different set of circumstances, Soludo’s main focus, which is the reported haemorrhage of the nation’s public finance, might have been dismissed as the lament of a disgruntled former public officer seeking new relevance, as indeed Mrs Okonjo-Iweala described him. However his allegations are coming at a time the government is seen locally and internationally as operating with a surfeit of credibility deficits.  
Even before Soludo’s intervention, there have been public expressions of concern by the level of sleaze in the petroleum sector whereby the nation neither knows for sure how much oil is produced, nor what volume is sold on a daily basis. By the government’s own admission, as much as over 400,000 barrels of oil is actually stolen daily. The onus therefore is on the government to come clean on the true position. So far, the president has acted as if all is well with the sector. It is not.
What seems to have hit a raw nerve in the administration is Soludo’s mention of a wide variance between Okonjo Iweala’s reading of the Nigerian economy and the daily, biting pangs of economic hardship that many Nigerians actually live with, with no sign of a letup.  Even as the fall in the international price of oil has brought severe constraints on the Nigerian economy, and recovery in the immediate future not certain, the minister flaunts figures that hardly convince anyone but some of her colleagues and administration cronies.  
 What should be a more appropriate response from the government would have covered the issues that Soludo raised, with defendable figures, rather than sweeping them under the carpet, and excoriating the former CBN governor for bringing the complex issues up to the public domain.
With the resumption of the National Assembly, which was on recess when these verbal salvos were being shot, the public expects the issues to be raised for members’ deliberation and possible further action. The 2015 budget exercise cannot be said to be conclusive without adequate reference to these matters that have a direct bearing to the nation’s stock and flow of public funds.