The Chairman of Senators' Forum, Khairat Gwadabe explains why it is 'so difficult' to get popular opinion on the debate on the removal of oil subsidy. Gwadabe talked with Bridget Chiedu Onochie in Abuja. Excerpts:WHAT is the position of the Senators' Forum's on the removal of oil subsidy'The talk on radio or television is about subsidy. It is something dear to the hearts of Nigerians. Some are in support; some are against. So, it is the balance of interest that we go around to hear. We do not only listen to what we hear on radio, we interact with people and we let our costituents know what we are hearing. The advantage is that it is not just a political party that is on this; we are from different parties. We have a rich crop of former senators and we have almost a semi-new Senate. Others are fresh and are just learning the rules.Does the Forum support removal of subsidy'We are still in the process of calling our members and hearing what they have to say. We have not concluded and so we cannot say we are for or against the removal of fuel subsidy. We are not flimsy with what we say.Personally, what is your view on the matter'I don't know whether the popular things that are being said in the media truly reflect what Nigerians feel. I was talking with a truck pusher in the market and he said he did not understand what it was all about. He said he has been hearing people talk about it but when he gets to where people say 'remove it,' he will concur and if he gets to where they are saying 'don't remove it,' he will also agree with them. But having explained the situation to him, he said removing it will affect him negatively because he may no longer get enough customers to carry their goods since their purchasing power could reduce.For us to see the heightened politics about the removal of oil subsidy, we need to take it to the people that need to understand the issue and have their views. I asked a senator from Nasarawa State about the views of people from his area and he said that some villages there have not felt the impact of government and as such, whether they remove it or not may not affect them. The are only concerned about going to farm and they are sustained by their farm produce. The roads to their farms are not tarred and they use motor-bikes. We are still compiling views from other areas before we take a stand.What is the basic idea about forming a Senators' Forum'The Forum is made up of incumbent and former senators. The idea is to protect democracy as we work to strengthen it in that regard. Most democracies, especially those with the presidential system have similar forums. We are also interested in ensuring that democracy reigns in the whole of Africa. The unique aspect of ours is the membership. We felt that non-serving senators will have sense of continuity in the Senate with their experience while incumbent senators will have a rich crop of members to interact with.What can the Forum offer Nigerians that the Senate cannot'The Senate President is the Chairman of Board of Trustees of the Forum. All the former Senate Presidents are members of the board of trustees, chaired by the Senate President. That is the reason I say it is a people-friendly, people-oriented forum.How will your decisions get to the authorities'Who are the authorities' Authorities are of different levels. We have channels, where we reach the different levels of authority or government in this country.Does your Forum intervene in National Assembly matters'Yes. When things are happening in National Assembly, we do speak with them. We do not unduly interfere with their mode of work but we have our positions and we make known what we feel the people are saying about an issue and what they think the people in the Senate should do. So, indirectly, we do bring the voices of the people to bear on our members.How do you think the Forum can take governance to the grassroots'It is surprising that many people still don't appreciate what governance is all about. If we take it a step further, I will say that the process of our democracy and the process through which our elected officers emerge are flawed. For instance, when you want to seek political office at any level, the first thing is to be a member of a particular party. After that, you begin to acquaint yourself with the people. To be a candidate, you have to go through a primary where members of the party will elect you. I remember my experience, the chairman of my ward was a tea seller and I have to recognise him as my chairman. At that level, educated and enlightened people are not interested, they leave it in hands of illiterates and semi-illiterates who determine who wins at the elections. That is why I think the governed are distanced from those that govern them.Shouldn't politicians learn from the past'We are asking the same question. In 2000/2011, the Senate asked that they conduct a proper audit of the civil service so that we know the number and what we are getting. And when they asked for salary increase, we wanted to know how it was going to be spread. Some of us did not support it in the manner it came because the boomerang effect was imminent. Some at that time said that more attention should be on services. In other words, a typical civil servant would have requirements for children's school, transportation, accommodation and health, if we can design it in a manner that all these are provided adequately, you wouldn't be fighting so much for salary increase. What I am saying is that we need to get away from cushioning certain groups with money from the treasury when we can provide for everyone.Comment on the 2012 budgetThe debate on the 2012 budget is still going on and senators have different views depending on the side of the divide they are. Those, who come from the North are excited about the budget because it is rich input for farmers. Those, who come from the area where the girl-child problem exists, are also excited. It did not take care of our complete needs but there is something for everyone. There is a lot for security and some senators feel that too much money is going into that sector and that othr sectors should have been given more. But the sad part in the budget is that the 70 per cent for recurrent expenditure is too high; it is a big burden. The country cannot develop enough with 30 per cent allocated for capital expenditure. It should have been the other way; 30 per cent for recurrent and 70 per cent for capital expenditure.
Click here to read full news..
