Properly understood the push for privatization is not about national development but  about the advance of market ideology per se. Its exponents merely rehearse the age long  myths and allure of the market even without proof.  It is a way of life for them. The problem is that ideology  like religion is averse to reason  and that may explain the doggedness of the proponents of  privatization today.
The modern origin of privatization was not rooted in desire to promote development for all  but to weaken the state by selling its asset to enrich a select few- the rich.  It emerged as a conservative tool to fight labour party in Britain and a Republican weapon against the  Democratic Party in the USA. In short  both Margaret Thatcher of Britain and Ronald Reagan were arch capitalist in politics and they saw and used privatization as a political and ideological strategy to advance the capitalist ideology by check mating the state. Their common mantra was roll back the state.
The trouble though is that what was designed as a domestic tool against a rival party and to rubbish opponents in a local contest for power has since been elevated to the status of a global strategy of development for all countries no matter the differences in the prevalent condition of the state concerned- thanks to western press and global financial institutions such as the IMF. If the idea of minimum government makes sense in the USA or the UK today after many years of big government and  heavy participation in economic and other aspects of nation building, it does not in Nigeria where it is ‘yet morn on creation day’.
It is against this historical and ideological background that one can appreciate El- Rufai and others still pushing for privatization today in spite of its dismal failure in the country.  They do so not because of its relevance or evident gains, but because it has been applied and endorsed by the west. They have adopted it as way of life. Otherwise how do we understand the rationale for the call for privatization by the Nigerian elites today after many years of woes with it?
It would be helpful to recall that Governor El Rufai- a former minister, a key exponent of the heavily failed privatization policy of the Obasanjo administration and today a top member of the APC in a public lecture resumed his privatization mission by calling for the ‘ killing of the NNPC before it kills the country’, dispensing with the idea of public ownership and dealing with corruption.
While I wondered whether it was Margaret Thatcher the mother of privatization in England was on stage in Abuja, he left none in doubt that all he cared for was the privatization of any public enterprise and the caging of the state. He lacks faith in public enterprises but unfortunately the privatization he helped to entrench has been an embarrassing failure that brought untold misery to many Nigerians through avoidable loss of jobs thereby deepening unemployment and hardship. Where are NITEL,VON, DURBAR HOTEL? To mention a few of a long list of failed privatized companies in Nigeria?  He feels no guilt. All he cares is just to roll back the state for no just cause.
By now Governor el Rufai ought to know and admit that privatization has been a huge failure and is part of the problems to be solved today and so can not be a solution or the right way forward. As a Governor he needs to be guided by the Constitution and to revise his notes on the appropriate ideology of development for a non-industrialized country such as Nigeria.
As a minister he proved an effective manager of the mechanistic caste who gets things done no matter how difficult. Now as Governor he needs to develop a broader view of life, more appropriate, humanistic philosophy of development for the benefits of all citizens and not just a few rich elites.
He seems to belong to the shock therapy school of thought where the rash actions of leaders normally sap the energy and creativity of citizens through policy of exclusion such as privatization which alienates majority of people and denies their active participation in the development process. It is a sad road once travelled and there is nothing yet to show a change or sigh of hope.
Still he was correct in one aspect: corruption. NNPC oozes. It is today a huge disappointment as haven of corruption and mismanagement. It has been corrupt and poorly managed over time. However, the solution is not in privatization but in changing the management and management style, punishing those who defaulted and training or engaging new hands to perform to expectation. Corruption has been the major problem of NNPC and it has persisted because of weak management system.  Let us kill corruption not only in the NNPC but all over the country.
One of the serious problems of doing business in Nigeria has been legal constraint. Reports say there are many strictures and man made difficulties. These must be removed or simplified to allow easy and free access to the market. The Business space must be liberalized to allow all those who have the means to do oil and other businesses unhindered.
This is why I am not comfortable with the way we treat the phenomenon of illegal refinery today. Though those involved are law breakers, yet they send important message to the effect of the existence of cheap methods of refining oil. Yes arrest them but not only for punishment but also for debriefing for useful lessons. There is the need to identify and improve the simple technology which they use for mass production. It may just be the beginning of a revolution in petroleum production in the country.
The allure of the market is not about to abate within the Nigerian elites. Privatization is sales point and failed public enterprise an excuse or justification for an irrational approach to national development.  All these were clear in the Nation of 20th July 2015 in which Sam Omatseye – a fine writer, top journalist with an influential newspaper, a DAME prize winner ‘for informed commentary’ and one who had studied in Canada and worked long in the USA- the exponent in chief of the market economy made a hard kick against the return of the Nigeria Airways.
More specifically, he does not want state involvement in the National Carrier business for it would mean ‘death in the sky’ and ‘nightmare coming back’.  To him the ‘ Nigeria Airways was a failure and sad reminder of how a government can ruin a great project’.  While there are many failed newspapers without anyone calling for the end of newspaper’s business, he adds: ‘ we have never done it right in this country. This is the age of enterprise and competition’ and what was needed is an ‘enabling environment for the carriers to operate’.  In the typical market style the state is restricted to creating an enabling environment or regulatory role but not doing business.
Though Omatseye was commenting on the Joda committee report which he said  recommended a ‘ return to the Nigeria Airway model’ and’ the merger of existing carriers under a National Carrier’ yet his love for the market and disdain for state participation was obvious.  His emphasis on ‘enabling environment’, the’ age of free enterprise’ which he said ‘calls for competition…not control’ or monopoly is enough demonstration of this bias. Thus to him the proposed National carrier is ‘a return to the past of failure (and) to stumble twice over a stone is proverbial disgrace’.
Good except he sounds more like Ronald Reagan the father of modern market economy of the privatization fame in the USA. Besides his cherished model has been generously applied but woefully failed the test of development for all in Nigeria. But what were the problems of the Nigeria Airways?  Like El Rufai, Omatseye was right on diagnosis but wrong on prescription. Again corruption tops the list of the problems followed by others such as nepotism, inefficiency etc- all features of poor leadership and mismanagement.
Instead of focusing on how to tackle these management problems, he chose to look the other way. He demonstrated a typical Nigerian malady of knowing the ailment but applying the wrong medicine. In the tradition of the market he resorted to the denouncement of public ownership of enterprises. But like the NNPC, the real problem of the Nigeria Airways was poor management and not form of ownership. And rather than hit the nail at its head, he prefers to throw away the baby with the bath water.
Yet he made a valid point about the need to knock monopoly off our system. Monopoly is bad – be it state or private enterprise. While I support the idea of a National Carrier, I agree with him that there should be no forced merger or preferential treatment- any form of monopoly. Anyone with the requisite ability including the government can set up an Airline business at least to make money and provide jobs. Since the main problem was poor management-a human failure, the best approach is to get the right men and women on the saddle. A clean recruitment process for the best hands from any part of the world is hereby recommended. The habit of appointing mediocre to run our enterprises was largely responsible for their failure in the past.
The benefit of Omatseye’s ‘age of enterprise and competition is doubtful in Nigeria.  For me what is needed today is a new age of meaningful and rewarding development, justice and fair play for all and accountability. The age of enterprise and competition as sold to us since 1980s of which privatization is an essential part has been partial, exploitative, uncaring and inequitable and marked by mass poverty, high level of unemployment and rural neglect in Nigeria.  It has been one where only few- the fittest including the corrupt, armed robber, pen robber, the swindler etc survives.  It is the basis of the nasty culture of celebrating profanity, criminals- murderers, thieves, election riggers etc in the country today. It has been a most unproductive, unprofitable and unrewarding era for majority Nigerians.
In the tradition of the market, Professor Mike Umeadi who lives and works in the USA as professor of Management comes on stage. In a contribution to an NTA Good Morning Show on 20-7-2015, he advanced privatization as way forward for the country. To him ‘if Israel is a start -up Nation… then Nigeria is a land of entrepreneurship’ brilliant and hardworking people and large market.
He said he was speaking from experience having studied in the USSR before relocating to the USA. But he raised more questions than answers. For instance how would privatization now address unemployment, uneven development, rural poverty, infrastructural deficiency etcwhen it failed to tackle them these many years without state participation?
On the whole he left one wondering whether he was Adam Smith reciting a portion of his the wealth of Nations.  Or a stranger in Jerusalem? Otherwise he ought to have been aware that the model he was recommending has been with us since the 1980s but without leading to significant improvement in the quality of life of Nigerians. Is he even familiar with the nature of our problems and the role of the state?
Nigeria is vast land with a huge rural setting requiring great industrial push to main-stream them. The private investor is basically driven by strong desire for profit. Consequently the market focuses on areas with high potential for profit with the least cost. But some of these rural areas are so difficult that many investors would rather turn their attention elsewhere.
In other words while profit making is the main concern of the private investor, nation building is beyond this to areas of collective well- being.
In the circumstance without state participation, how would the village farmers say in Uromi in Edo state or Yahe in Cross Rivers state get real value for their produce?  How do we reduce unemployment, promote export, manufacturing, and plant infrastructure for the collective good of society?  For example Yahe in the S E zone of Nigeria is rich in agricultural produce and need some industrial push.  But the terrains are tough and may not be attractive to the average Nigerian investor even though profitable to do so. Such calls for state intervention.
What is going on? Why are the elites so foreign and remote from the reality of the problem of Nigeria? Have they forgotten that when Adam Smith wrote his book- The Wealth of Nations and advocated free trade he was concerned with the trade problem of his country? And when Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the USA resurrected Smith in the1980s through a program of privatization they were concerned with the peculiar problems of their countries?
Luckily President Clinton rose in America and Prime Minister Blaire stood up in the UK to moderate the extremism of capitalism and socialism of their predecessors by towing the middle course. Each leader recorded unprecedented success in terms of economic growth and development and prosperity for his country. Why are the Nigerian elites so unwilling to learn relevant lessons from history?  Why are they proposing the wrong route and applying inappropriate tools?
The answer lies in their ideological leaning.  What is common to them is love and faith in a market driven economy even if no cogent result. They are driven by market ideology that is unsuitable to our situation. This is perhaps so because of their relationship with the USA- each having lived in the USA and so endeared to its market style. However they miss the point in so many ways. While it is what ideology can do – blind loyalty! we can only ignore their move at our peril.
Private Sector Not A Haven Of Success
Proponents of privatization in Nigeria often give the impression that the private sector is a haven of business success.  In reality this is far from the truth and thus quite misleading. As shown, failure is not a disease of public sector alone. Organizations often fail because of poor management and not because they are owned by either the state or private investors. As we have seen, corruption, lack of management skills, weak financial strength etc are great obstacle and threat to both public and private enterprises.
It is true that many of the public enterprises in Nigeria failed but their sale was not the best response. Some of them such as NITEL were doing relatively well and thus redeemable. Their problems were largely managerial. As a labour- surplus economy with vast, uneven and highly under- developed rural areas which are far beyond the strength of the private sector, the country lost by selling them.
Nigeria would have been better off managing them with good hands which abound both at home and abroad. A basic problem of the public sector in Nigeria was its poor recruitment system and embarrassing inability to punish evil and check corruption. But with renewed determination, this could have been reversed. It was a big mistake to have sold them
Generally success and failure coexist in both private and public sectors, they walk side by side with each providing insight to understanding the other. To some extent failure is a spur of sort to success.  Business failure is not strange and by no means peculiar to either the public or private sector. It is universal as could be found in the relevant literature.
For instance, en.m.Wikipedia. Org/ wiki list of corporate collapses and scandal, shows business failure dating back to 1494 in Florence through the 17th , 18, 19, 20th century to the 21ST century collapse of Banco Espirito Santo BES on 3rd  August 2014.The business failure cuts across banking, retailing shops ,slavery, colonialism, television, electronics, textiles, steel , accounting and auditing firms, energy, airways , telecommunication etc.
A similar check reveals Business success in the private and public sectors in America, Europe, Asia, and even in Africa. The  success story of Indian Railway Corporation, Singapore Air line, Ethiopia Sugar corporation,  Tanzania National Development Corporation are worthy of note.( United Nations for Economic Development for Africa) Public Enterprises Cologne Germany- the Stadtwerk Koln.
Thus public enterprises are not the problem but their poor management by the elites .How do we empower the ordinary man in the rural areas to escape poverty without state participation? I was happy recently reading Dangote prodding rich men to invest in Nigeria spite of the poor economic climate of the country. Good but how many Dangotes do we have in Nigeria today? Only few, just too few and too insignificant for the enormous task at hand.
This is serious because as Omatseye cited earlier observed, the lack of financial resources has been a major bane of business growth in Nigeria. To this extent those who extol privatization as the way forward miss the point. They are simply preaching wrong doctrine and proffering the wrong solution to the problem at hand. The country lacks the necessary financial strength and even market ethics such as trust; sacrifice etc to play the game as expected. Generally, there appears to be some taints of paranoid or vain obsession in the air in some quarters in Nigeria about privatization.
Truly, Nigeria has been battered by failure and cowed almost to a point of resignation to fate. But it is not an excuse to preach wrong doctrines. The ideal thing is to look for the cause of our collective failure and tackle it. While this requires creative thinking and dispassionate diagnosis for action the impression one gets is one of acute inability to learn the correct lesson from our dismal history of failures – the role of man especially the elite in the failure or success of organizations or nations.
Man is a learning animal. Nigerians especially the ruling elites must learn to find the right way and do the right thing to bring about meaningful development for all. It is no use being slavish to an ideology and it certainly does not help preaching one that had proved barren over the years in Nigeria. So let us restart nation building by doing real development for all -rather than for a few elites. Let’s find what works best and this can be found in creative cooperation between the state and private sector.
Towards this end the government must wake up to its responsibility to the society and this includes investment in necessary and strategic areas of the economy. Nations fail not because governments have done business but because of failure to do the needful for success. In other words they fail because of their persistent inability to mobilize available resources for the collective good of society.
This includes failure to industrialize society, build skills; knowledge and infrastructure, select the best hands for assignments, reward good and punish evil- enforce laws and promote maximum citizenry participation in the development process. As Richard Pascale observed real development or Transformation ‘requires the involvement and commitment of everyone’ but the snag is that only few people are often involved. This is management failure. Privatization worsens the situation. It makes the exclusion of the state from economic activities unwise and ridiculous.
We can do much better because there are better models than privatization of the American type.                     There is the Japanese model or Singaporean or Chinese model to adopt minus the restriction on some areas of trade for the private sector. There is even the lesson from the USA experience of early nation- building  to learn from which according to Historian Remini(2008) saw state’s involvement in banking, industrialization, manufacturing, building of roads, canals, bridges, rail ways- transportation revolution, city development etc. All of these he said made the USA to be the fastest growing economy of the 19th century and a superpower at the close of that century.
For sure privatization is partial and severely limited as model of national development in a none industrialized country with very infantile capitalist institutions. It is not the way forward for Nigeria today. Let us therefore abort the unnecessary conspiracy against state participation in economic activity in Nigeria because it is neither necessary nor even possible for the private sector to do every thing that is required in the development arena of the country.