Financial Times reportage on Nigerian Economy-Standards are Falling

President Tinubu

Published By: Kazeem Ugbodaga

By Manuel Agbakwuru

Anyone used to the famed subtlety and the etiquette of understatement which the British have since turned to a culture and art form, would see clearly the sheer arrogance and disrespect, bordering on racist condescension that permeated and oozed through the recent editorial of the Financial Times titled ‘Shock Therapy Alone Will Not Cure Nigeria’s Economic Ills’. Such an editorial will hardly scale the barriers of most self-respecting Nigerian online newspaper or even a mere blog, making one wonder how such an uncouth writeup made it into what is otherwise a respected global newspaper which has been in existence since 1888.

I will deal with the core issues in a minute, but first, it is important to consider the many inelegances of said editorial. When a newspaper decides to add its name, and the very integrity of members of its editorial board to statements like ‘(The President) removed a generous fuel subsidy, one of the few benefits citizens receive from their inefficient and corrupt state’ then this gives one cause for great worry. Was the newspaper engaging on a nation’s economy and policies that affect the wellbeing of peoples, or is this another subtle attempt by someone within to slyly vent their innate racist tendencies and entire disregard and disdain for a whole independent nation? That statement is at the same level as the one that was captured in a moment of indiscretion by former British PM David Cameron, as he told Late Queen Elizabeth that he was expecting some ‘fantastically corrupt’ nations at his anti-corruption summit in 2016. Nigeria was mentioned in that statement, too.

The intention of the Financial Times must be questioned, as it approbated and reprobated in a single editorial, when it veered off to lecture the world about how the same subsidies whose removal it had just excoriated in one statement was ‘necessary in correcting the country (Nigeria’s) long-term economic demise… (and was) ruinously expensive…distortionary, and channeling Nigerians’ energies into rent-seeking, smuggling and graft’. Knowing how unproductive the subsidies were, perhaps the FT believes that Nigerians were deserving of economic demise, or rather the people should harangue their ‘inefficient and corrupt’ government and collect subsidies on fuel since it was the only thing they could get? Is that how it is done in Britain and other so-called first world countries? Or perhaps to the Financial Times that is what Africans deserve; immediate gratification and waste, and not a robustly rounded future.

And in another breath, FT skipped financial and economic issues and while dripping with uncharacteristic haughtiness, wrote that ‘Moving to more orthodox policies is vital to reset an economy…where one of the most lucrative industries has been kidnapping’. This statement would have been concerning if it wasn’t a cheap blow of a despicable bully. The point about the need to manage optics, carrying the people along, and so on, could be well made without descending to the gutter and broadcasting for the world that kidnapping takes place in Nigeria. Every country has its own issues and incidences of kidnapping has reduced drastically in Nigeria, even when knife crimes and phone snatching in posh streets have become rife in the UK. There is no point or space here to go into the histrionics of how Nigeria was infiltrated by international terrorists some of whom have backing from some of the most sophisticated nations on earth. All we ask for is to be allowed to solve our own problems without anyone digging into our wounds and infecting them for us.

And what was that talk about corruption? A January 30th 2024 report in The Independent headlines ‘Britain Hits Lowest Ever Score on Global Corruption Index’. Another news item in Central Bylines UK goes ‘United Kingdom Corruption Officially at its Worst in Modern Times’. The Financial Review calls it ‘Chumocracy’, following all the scandals that predated and preceded the Covid-19 pandemic and how multiple billion pounds contracts were awarded to chums (friends) of those in power. Indeed, who is Financial Times to talk about corruption in Nigeria when the UK itself is a global purveyor of corruption, maintaining territories around the world where corrupt money is laundered, tax-free, while London is built on illegal inflows into real estate from all over the world? If Nigeria is deemed corrupt, it must be because there are legacies our people learnt from departing colonial masters. And it is trite to note that as the UK is dropping on the anti-corruption chart, Nigeria is improving; climbing 5 steps as at the same January 2024 above where she was in the same period of 2023. The same Britain is where the son of their former puritan PM Margaret Thatcher, Mark, was arrested in South Africa with his Eton chums, while trying to overthrow a government in Equatorial Guinea in 2004. Only the influence of ‘mummy’ got him out of that pickle. What could be more corrupt than sponsoring a coup or being a business mogul in that vocation? And what effect has several sponsored coups had on the progress of African nations, or a lack of it?

Referring to the incidence in Kenya is tantamount to dog-whistling the violent in Nigeria. Surely FT – as an elite newspaper catering to the needs of elites like bankers and politicians, will not appreciate such dog-whistling to the violent in the UK who could be riled into destructive protests as happened under the David Cameron administration in 2011. The unkind cuts in the editorial flowed on endlessly, with emotive and offhanded statements around ‘soaring’ hunger levels, lack of capacity, and judgmental statements about President Tinubu’s cabinet members. It really looks like the editorial – by its language – was farmed off to a disgruntled and disconnected Nigerian to write – with the typical effusiveness in Nigerianese – without as much as the professional editing that is required to prevent a riposte like mine. What does FT mean by the ‘state’ being implicated in the wholesale theft of oil? Has the FT lost standard so much that lousy, untrue and wildly speculative statements such as that will make it into an editorial?

• Building the Economy through Technology
• We’ve attracted $30bn Foreign Direct Investment -Tinubu
• Tinubu: Nigeria’s economy recording progress, not distressed

Perhaps we should allow the Financial Times stew in its own self-foisted ignorance. Many indices are looking better for Nigeria and will increasingly do so under President Tinubu. Rather than the typical idea of mere cash transfers being pushed by FT and those behind it – and idea which they know to be inflationary and fleeting in impact, but as voyeurs they are not interested in finding real solutions for our issues but just opportunities to laugh and snigger – Nigeria is devising ways in which such monies will be used to power up the agricultural sector for better productivity, food security, and improved nutrition. The Tinubu government is aware of the need for nuanced policies that take Nigeria’s cultural peculiarities into account.

Financial Times cannot cavalierly instruct Nigeria to send cash to wallets of poor people as a surefire way of ending poverty. Nigerians are proud people. They haven’t said they want just cash. Cash to buy what? Food distribution is a valid strategy which cannot be demonized and vilified. The USA and the whole of Europe have laudable food support programmes. A focus on food distribution helps to increase Nigeria’s productivity in that sector and to eradicate hunger. We do not expect FT to know this. And if it did, given the editorial’s language and spirit, the FT is unlikely to advise Nigeria aright. Also, President Tinubu met the tax to GDP ratio at 7% but has now seen to its increase to about 12%, even as no new taxes have been introduced. The president has made clear that he is not here to make the lives of Nigerians harder. As I type, the President has increased minimum wage to make the lives of Nigerians easier, dozens of programs exist to assist businesses, and businesses with turnovers below N25 million per annum don’t pay a dime in taxes. Looked at critically, there are many advantages and incentives people and businesses enjoy in Nigeria that can only be dreamt about in overtaxed and unduly expensive Britain. Even the inequality gap is being bridged because there is better income mobility, and a robust social capital system that can only be imagined elsewhere. FT and their ilk should give Nigeria a break and stop demeaning a struggling nation.

The so-called Editorial ended on a base note, with the editors of FT going for a below-the-belt jab of President Tinubu. All of a sudden, the editorial lost track and forgot its essence as an advisory on the Nigerian economy, into a personal attack on the president. It is doubtful whether a true Brit will descend so low. Therefore, my advice to the FT is that the editorial board should take more interest in writeups about African countries and ensure it meets its very high global standards. Do not consign such editorials to low level staff shorn of maturity, who claim to have affinity or experience about some African country. The maturity for which FT is known must be guarded and projected at all costs.

In spite of the many challenges of Nigeria, citizens trust is growing and will ramp up some more when they begin to see the results of Bola Tinubu’s efforts and their own sacrifices. What we don’t need right now is the destruction of the country which Financial Times has positioned itself behind as an instigator and agent provocateur. It is highly unfortunate that things have turned this way for the respected newspaper. But in spite of FT, Nigeria will move ahead and achieve greatness.

Unfortunately, this editorial has been shared by many Nigerians since it was published, read, digested and believed as if it was the Holy Grail. Nigerians and other Africans are advised to be careful about what they believe and who from. Nigeria is a 63 year old country, soon to be 64, which was granted independence by Britain in 1960. From a historical standpoint and compared with countries that have been around since the 11th Century, honestly, we are not doing too badly. A lot more hard work is required, with great imagination, vision, integrity and unity. Yes, we know we must run faster. Bola Tinubu is a big thinker and can get Nigeria running at the quicker clip that we all deserve. What we don’t need is for anyone to depress us as we solve our own issues, proudly and surely. No one should attempt to take away our dignity. It’s all we’ve got left.

-Agbakwuru, an economist and public affairs analyst wrote from Abuja