THE failure of leaders of Group of Eight (G8) major industrial nations to deliver on a 2009 pledge in L'Aquila, Italy, to raise more than $20 billion to improve food access to Africans is obviously disappointing. Sceptical civil societies can be excused their anger over the group's fresh vow to lift about 50 million poor in the continent out of poverty by promoting investments in sustainable agriculture. The civil societies' anger that the G8 has been making unfulfilled pledges in the past, issuing communiqus without concrete action is understandable, although it is also logical to rationalise the leading nations' inaction by recent challenges confronting most economies. What point, therefore, is the G8 making with repeated unfulfilled promises'Nigeria and other developing countries stuck in the poverty bracket should not allow their disappointments to becloud their sense of self-actualisation. They do not have to wait for the G8 or any other aid-professing groups to address their crippling poverty challenges. For instance, so much can be done with re-orientation of values and good governance in many of the naturally endowed, so-called poor states where corruption is pervasive, amid stunted growth rate.The G8 had targeted 50 million poor people over the next decade, to 'launch a New Alliance for Food and Security Nutrition to accelerate the flow of capital to African agriculture, scale new technologies and other innovations that can increase sustainable agricultural productivity and reduce the risk borne by vulnerable economies and communities'. Civil society represented by ActionAid USA senior policy analyst had logically argued that though the initiative may have offered 'warm words' on food security, it 'failed to make a categorical pledge to simply maintain L'Aquila levelfinancial commitments going forward'. The interpretation is that there is no consideration for inputs of those directly concerned, while it may have sidelined women smallholder farmers who are vital to food security in Africa.Globally, poverty is massive and pervasive, a bewildering paradox. Nigeria not being immune to the scourge, any attempt by the government or its officials to wish it away is idle, far from reality as the scourge is antithetical to the country's aspiration. Successive administrations have come far short of expectations in promoting food security or reducing poverty.Remotely, the country's dependence on oil as a major revenue earner has dangerously shifted focus from the mainstay decades ago ' agriculture. The leadership consistently mouth slogans of working towards food security, while corruption, like poverty, remains a massive, recurring decimal. But corruption anywhere goes with a cost: mass poverty, which has afflicted more than half of the country's growing population. The Federal Government has a duty to put the country on the road to sufficiency, just as other levels of government need to place premium on agriculture to boost employment, among other benefitsUNICEF, an important organ of the United Nations has warned of a stark dichotomy of wealth and poverty in the country in the absence of progress in poverty reduction. The admonition is timely. Where an economy cannot meet the basic needs of the people, the country slips to danger. Such disparity between growth of GDP and increasing poverty is an indication of skewed distribution of wealth.According to the 2007 Human Development Index report, Nigeria ranks 158 out of 177 countries, a significant drop from 151 in 2004. Curiously, national statistics indicate that poverty is on the decline. By inference, progress towards meeting the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of eradicating poverty and hunger by 2015 is slow. This could be traced to insufficient investment in infrastructure, poor governance and corruption.Various interventionist programmes of governments have failed; a commentary on the flawed implementation or commitment of the initiators. The operators struggle with the NEEDS (National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy), which has been domesticated at the state (SEEDS), and local government levels (LEEDS). The more recent SURE-P, the Subsidy Removal Programme has not fared any better.Despite the failure of leadership, efforts to improve quality of life in the country must subsist. Giving up would worsen the situation. There is need for constant reappraisal of strategies to create employment, especially for the youths. To succeed in this, power supply must be given a new lease of life. Government should seek better utilisation of resources and conscientious commitment to development projects.To guarantee the quality of life for the citizens should not be negotiable. With the resources at their disposal, Nigerians should not have any business being consigned to interminable poverty. But only a focused leadership can free the people.
Click here to read full news..
