PRIVATIZATION AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA: A CASE STUDY OF NIGERIA’S POWER SECTOR.

BY

ERUNKE CANICE ESIDENEREG. NO. NSU/SS/013/MSC/06/07

RESEARCH THESIS

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE AWARD OF MASTERS OF SCIENCE (M.Sc) HONOUR DEGREE IN PUBLIC POLICY

ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, NASARAWA STATE UNIVERSITY, KEFFI.

SUPERVISOR: MALLAM YAHAYA ADADU

DECEMBER, 2008.

i

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that this research thesis on Privatization and National

Development in Nigeria: A Case study of the Power Sector has meet

the requirements for the award of M.Sc (Hons) Degree in Public

Policy Analysis, of the Nasarawa State University, Keffi.

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Chairman, Supervisory Committee Date

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Research Supervisor Date

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Head, Political Science Dept. Date

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Internal Examiner Date

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––External Examiner Date

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Dean, Postgraduate School Date

ii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this research work in its original form has been

carried out by me, Erunke Canice Esidene with Registration Number

NSU/SS/MS.c/013/06/07 of the Department of Political Science,

Faculty of Social Sciences, Nasarawa State University, Keffi.

–––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––Erunke Canice Esidene Date

iii

DEDICATION

I humbly dedicate this research work to God Almighty for His mercy

and the strength he has given me to carry out the study. Enough

respect goes to all lovers of democracy, good governance, peace and

stability across the world.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to thank God Almighty for this work. My humble

acknowledgment goes to my mum, Mrs Elizabeth Erunke, my Sweet

heart Blessing, and my little baby God Favour Erunke. I am sincerely

indebted to my friend, Austin Mbogo, Emeka Wogu, Bello

Babanuma, Mr Usman Abu Tom and all my Senior colleagues in

Political Science Department. I wish to recognize Master Beshiru Abu

for his computer skills and that he has put in this work to make it a

success.

May I specially acknowledge my HOD and Dean of Social Science

Faculty Assoc. Prof. S.A. Ibrahim, Mallam Yahaya Adadu, my erudite

supervisor. He has been of immense contribution to the success of this

research. May I recognize specially our vibrant academic gurus in the

Political Science Department, Dr. S.M. Omodia (Phd), Dr. Abdullahi

Yamma (Phd). This feat is not complete without mentioning my

overall mentor, Prof. Inno Ukaeje, Prof. Sam Amdii, Dr. Jibril

Abdulmumin, and Alhaji Modibbo may God shower his blessing on

all of you. And may he keep you in all you do. Amen!

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page--------------------------------------------------------------------- iCertification------------------------------------------------------------------- iiDeclaration--------------------------------------------------------------- ---- iiiDedication-------------------------------------------------------------------- ivAcknowledgement---------------------------------------------------------- vTable of Contents------------------------------------------------------------ viiList of Acronyms ------------------------------------------------------------ viiiAbstract----------------------------------------------------------------------- ix

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION1.1 Introduction/ Background to the study------------------------------------ 11.2 Statement of the Problem--------------------------------------------------- 51.3 Research Questions--------------------------------------------------------- 61.4 Research Objectives--------------------------------------------------------- 71.5 Research Methodology------------------------------------------------------ 71.6 Scope and Limitations------------------------------------------------------- 81.7 Research Hypothesis--------------------------------------------------------- 9

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Privatization ------------------------------------------------------------------- 102.2 The Concept of Development----------------------------------------------- 112.3 Privatization and Commercialization in Nigeria------------------------- 152.4 Privatization, Liberalization and National Development--------------- 172.5 The Concept of Underdevelopment---------------------------------------- 212.6 The Concept of Economic Growth----------------------------------------- 232.7 Privatization and Liberalization in Global Perspective------------------ 242.8 Privatization of Enterprises in Nigeria ------------------------------------ 282.9 Accountability in the Power Sector and Nigeria National

Development------------------------------------------------------------------ 30

vi

2.10 Privatization of PHCN and National Development in Nigeria---------- 362.11 Challenges of Power Generation and Nigeria’s Socio-Economic

Development------------------------------------------------------------------- 412.12 Nigeria’s Power Sector Reform --------------------------------------------- 512.13 The Alternative Energy Option---------------------------------------------- 532.14 Theoretical Framework------------------------------------------------------- 55

CHAPTER THREE3.1 Research Methodology------------------------------------------------------- 613.2 The Study Population--------------------------------------------------------- 613.3 Sampling Techniques--------------------------------------------------------- 623.3.1 Stratified Sampling----------------------------------------------------------- 633.3.2 Simple Random Sampling--------------------------------------------------- 633.3.3 Cluster Sampling-------------------------------------------------------------- 643.4 Research Instrument and Delimitation------------------------------------- 643.5 Method of Data Analysis----------------------------------------------------- 65

3.6 Quota Sampling--------------------------------------------------------------- 65

3.7 Purposive or Judgemental Sampling--------------------------------------- 65

CHAPTER FOUR4.1 Data Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation--------------------------- 664.2 Testing of Hypothesis-------------------------------------------------------- 794.3 Discussion of Results--------------------------------------------------------- 824.4 Conclusion/Inferences--------------------------------------------------------- 82

CHAPTER FIVE5.1 Summary ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 835.2 Conclusions--------------------------------------------------------------------- 855.3 Policy Recommendations----------------------------------------------------- 85

References/Bibliography------------------------------------------------------ 88

vii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

PHCN: Power Holding Company of Nigeria

PWD: Public Work Department

NESCO: Nigerian Electricity Supply Company

ECN: Electricity Corporation of Nigeria

NDA: Niger Dams Authority

NEPA: National Electric Power Authority

IMF: International Monetary Fund

WB: World Bank

SAP: Structural Adjustment Programme

NEEDS: National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy

GNP: Gross National Product

MDG: Millennium Development Goals

ICPC: Independent Corrupt Practices Commission

EFCC: Economic and Financial Crimes Commission

AR: Aso Rock

ND: National Development

NIPP: National Integrated Power Project

NDPHC: Niger-Delta Power Holding Company

AIT: Africa Independent Television

NASS: National Assembly.

viii

ABSTRACT

Nigeria’s public policy thrusts over the years towards the socio-

economic and political growth, development and sustainability of the

system is largely bereft with abject lack of direction and vision.

Hence, this research attempts a plethora of Privatization and National

Development vis-à-vis Nigeria’s power sector reform. The thesis

argues that social responsibility is an integral aspect of good

governance and must be so guided with caution in the management of

the affairs of Nigeria’s public space in relations to the welfare of the

people at large. The submission of this research is that the present

administration’s bid to restructure the power sector does not seem to

have the required answer to incessant power outage in Nigeria.

Hence, the nuclear energy option remains the available mechanism

for effective and efficient power supply in Nigeria. The research sums

up with conclusion and policy recommendations for improved

performance of the already comatose power sector in Nigeria’s

Fourth Republic and beyond.

ix

CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION/ BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

The Nigerian political economy is bereft with abject lack of policy

focus, development, progress, stability, efficiency, accountability,

participation and responsiveness on the part of state actors in the

socio-economic scheme of things. This is against the backdrop of poor

governance arising from lack of political will by the elite or ruling

class who have literally sabotaged the ailing Nigerian economy to a

stand still. Inspite of very many economic measures put in place to

cushion the harsh realities of our time, the various policies of

government have grossly remained at the level of rhetorics without

corresponding outcome. Consequent upon the foregoing, there seem

to be no closer remedy geared towards revamping the Nigerian

chequered economy, while infrastructures are decaying, value

orientation of both the elite and the governed are diminishing at an

alarming rate. Corruption through the art of siphoning billions of

public funds meant for major infrastructural development (including

the embattled power sector) are diverted into private pockets with

impunity. All of these clearly define the sorry state of the present

Nigerian economy as part of the problems of underdevelopment.

Things however, are falling apart in the affairs of governance in the

Nigerian state while the centre can no longer hold. However, it is

interesting to note that one of the most critical aspect of good

governance and social responsibilities on the path of the state system

is the provision of goods and services as well as ensuring efficient

1

service delivery of such existentials for the overall interest of its

people. However, the capacity and the capability of the nation-state to

cater for the teeming population clearly defines who gets what, when

and how. At the same time, the majority interest becomes the core

priority of government and its agencies in the distributive processes of

the wealth of nations. However, such acts of distributive policies

would only enhance the quality of lives of the people only through

such measures that fosters equity, fairness, national integration, peace

and tranquility, distributive justice, to mention but a few. The

aforementioned therefore becomes a veritable instrument for national

cohesion, stability and cooperation, socio-economic and political

growth, development and sustainability. All these are crucial as they

are critical in policy frameworks of nation-states in the present era of

globalization. Policy objectives of a nation-state directly or indirectly

affects the direction of its internal and external growth and

development. Thus, the Nigerian privatization policies as it affects

power sector reforms is a function of its socio-economic and political

growth process. While this assertion is true, the policy and policy

directions of government shape as well as reinforces the level and

direction of change in the Nigerian political system as a whole.

Privatization of the Nigerian power sector constitutes an all-important

area of government economic reform strategy aimed at propelling

Nigeria’s growth to greater heights in the 21st century and beyond.

The thrust of this thesis is to expouse on the concept of privatization

and its impacts on the Nigeria’s power sector as well as examine the

2

various situational constraints that follows such policy actions in

relation to the overall well-being of Nigerian citizens. The thesis also

considers the nuclear energy option as a veritable means of

sustainable power generation and distribution in Nigeria.

For the purpose of clarity, there is the need to trace the ecology of the

Nigerian power sector from history and examine how it became

transformed to the present status of Power Holding Company of

Nigeria (PHCN) today. The history of the Nigerian power sector is as

old as colonialism itself. Power generation in Nigeria could be traced

as far back as 1896 with the installation of the pioneer power station

in Lagos under the auspices of the then Public Works Department.

The process of transmutation then continued via the activities of

stakeholders in the sector, namely, the Lagos State Municipal

Authority. However, the emergence of the Nigerian Electricity Supply

Company (NESCO) latter in 1929 witnessed an extension and

diversification of the power sector through the construction of the

famous Kurra Falls near the present Jos, capital of Plateau state.

The establishment of the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria in 1951

marked a turning point in the power supply process in Nigeria with

the first capacity generation to the tune of 132kv watt. Late in 1962,

the Ijora power station in Ibadan was also put in place to enhance

further generation in Nigeria.

3

It is interesting to note that the Niger Dams Authority was established

in 1962 with the mandate to further develop and enhance the

hydropower potentials of the country. However, the merger between

the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria and Niger Dams Authority gave

rise to the abrupt change of nomenclature to the contentious National

Electricity Power Authority (NEPA) in 1972 (Cole, 1972).

Interestingly, however, the enabling Decree No. 24 of 1972 gave the

necessary impetus to the merger of both the ECN and NDA, the

essence of which the procedure defines the critical economic,

technological and social development of the Nigerian state as a whole.

From the foregoing, therefore, electricity consumption in Nigeria has

become one of the most crucial indices of growth, development and

sustainabilities of both government institutions and the people at

large. Thus, a deliberate and carefully planned effort by government

to institutionalize a good maintenance culture, due process, efficiency

and productivity in the power sector informs the present attempt to

relieve the pressures on the public sector, and hence place the

responsibilities of generation and distribution of energy in private

hands. The primacy of this research therefore highlights key areas of

concern aimed at revitalizing the ailing power sector for an enhanced

socio-economic growth, development and sustainability of the

Nigerian economy, in all its ramifications (Ekpo, 1997).

4

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The relevance and usefulness of any piece of research is determined to

a large extent by its ability to address fundamental problems of

society (Nigeria inclusive). Thus the Nigerian electricity dilemma

during the post-colonial era has been a major constrain to socio-

economic and political development and sustainability. Thus, abject

lack of electricity supply has largely institutionalized the culture of

absolute poverty, deprivation, want, unemployment, high cost of

generating sets, crippling of infant industries, down-turn of medium

and small scale enterprises, corruption, ineptitude, inequality, lack of

transparency and accountability, lack of responsiveness, money

laundering, total blackout, high maternal and infant mortality, lack of

economic growth, development and sustainability, sudden change

from public sector to private-sector driven economy with its attendant

consequences, to mention but a few. The fundamental questions to ask

for the purpose of seeking answers or solutions to the problem under

review are: why has Nigeria not been able to solve her problems of

persistent power outage while she is busy brandishing her big-brother

status before other African countries like Niger, Togo and Benin?

What positive impact can privatization of the power sector bring to

the Nigerian economy? Why is there lack of participation of Nigerian

citizens in the privatization exercise? Why has the privatization of the

power sector being skewed towards the interest of few wealthy

Nigerians to the detriment of majority of the Nigerian masses. What

could be the environmental effect of nuclear energy option adopted by

Mr President and why? Why has there been massive cases of

5

vandalization, illegal connection, theft of PHCN power installations,

corruption and the like? Why is it that there is absolute lack of faith

and hope on the current investigation on the power sector by

Nigerians? what is responsible for lack of public participation, among

others. These are major problems demanding solutions as far as this

study is concerned. It is in the interest of the aforementioned that the

research is focused, hence, geared towards the possibilities of

enhancing power supply to all Nigerians in the 21st century and

beyond.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

For the purpose of this study, the following set of research questions

will be considered:

1. Does privatization of Nigeria’s power sector impact positively on

national economic development?

2. What is the extent of civil society participation in the privatization of

Nigeria’s power sector?

3. What are the global implications of privatization of Nigeria’s power

sector?

4. Has the efficiency of Nigeria’s power sector any link with

privatization and divestiture of the sector?

5. Is the lack of competition and enabling environment in Nigeria

responsible for the poor state of power supply?

6. Privatization of Nigeria’s power does not imply express national

development in Nigeria.

6

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Essentially, this research attempts to produce a theoretical explanation

of the privatization policy in relation to Nigeria’s power sector and

how it affects national development. The following research

objectives shall be considered:

i) To clearly define the relationship between privatization and the socio-

economic well-being of the Nigerian society.

ii) To fully understand the major challenges on the part of the Nigerian

power reform as well as define appropriate measures out of the

dilemma.

iii) To ascertain the environmental cost implications of privatizing the

energy sub-sector in relation to the Nigerian political economy.

iv) To examine the implications of the global dynamics of privatization,

deregulation and di-vestment policies in Nigeria and Africa at large.

v) To evaluate the efficacy and commitment of the present

administration in her bid to probe public power funds that are being

misappropriated by public officials in Nigeria.

vi) To examine the environmental impact of nuclear energy option in an

attempt by the federal government to profer lasting solution to

epileptic power supply in Nigeria.

1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Thus the researcher adopts the use of both primary and secondary

sources of data for a better understanding of the issue being

7

researched. Primary sources of data therefore includes the use of

questionnaires and observation as well as face-to-face contacts with

the respondents. The secondary source of data collection for the

research involves the use of information sources to include, among

others, government publications, journals, periodicals, research

papers, magazines, papers presented on similar topic by scholars, to

mention but a few. This is to enhance the efficacy of the study. The

result of the sample will also be subjected to further empirical test

through the use of chi-square, goodness-of-fit to enhance viability and

scientific outlook of the research.

1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

This research seeks to look at the policy underpinnings of

privatization of Nigeria’s power sector and its implications on the

nation’s development process within the Obasanjo’s regime (1999 –

2007). Essentially, Nigeria’s socio-economic policies in the 21st

century attaches primacy to the issues of privatization, liberalization,

divestment and deregulation which are concepts and practices akin to

the Bretton wood system of the IMF/World Bank. Thus, the thesis

exposes the researcher into further evaluation of the aforementioned

as well as assessing the level of significance on the political, socio-

economic and cultural lives of the people and the Nigerian nation

state.

8

By extension, however, the limitations and constraints of this study

encountered are enormous. Of utmost importance is the time factor,

finance, inadequacy of documented materials for research, to mention

but a few. All these are major encumbrances on the path of the

researcher in the process of carrying out this onerous task.

1.7 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

The following hypotheses were drawn to guide this research.

1) There is a relationship between national development and

privatization of Nigeria’s power sector.

2) Privatization of the power sector does not have the potential of

enhancing efficiency of power supply in Nigeria.

All the above mentioned hypotheses shall be tested through the use of

quantitative analysis to accept or reject them.

9

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 PRIVATIZATION

The concept of privatization is multidimensional in outlook. In the

first place, privatization could be used to mean the tendency where

government shares are sold to private investors. This definition means

that such government enterprises and its ownership are now being

transferred to individuals while government only step aside as a

regulatory agent (Pan Africa Summit, 2000). By extension therefore,

the concept of privatization does not in anyway suggests outright sale

of government property per se. It however partially removes

government from the scene as rightful owner while at the same time,

ensuring government’s regulatory roles to check abuses of the market

focuses (Wogu, 2007).

Going by the foregoing analysis, it is the opinion of the researcher to

add that there is therefore a moral linkage between the concept of

privatization and national development. However, the concept of

development here can be said to be a vague concept. Privatization

therefore may not necessarily enhance socio-economic development.

Development in this sense, can be used in its actual sense to refer to

individual human and societal growth, progress, increased skills,

sustainability, high standard of living, low death rate, high level of

literacy, absence of diseases, low crime rate and absence of

10

corruption. (Usman, 2003) Development at the national level portends

capacity utilization and institutional building, structural

differentiation, nation-building practices, better and sustainable socio-

economic policy options. This appears to be the actual linkages

between the privatization policy and national development in Nigeria.

Similarly, the researcher is here left with no option than to emphasize

that privatization is an adaptation of liberalization. The two concepts,

however, are mutually reinforcing, liberalization in its real sense

therefore could mean some level of openness, removal of obstacles,

restrictions, excessive tariff and regulation. Therefore, we can also say

that a liberalized economy is an open economy, free and competitive

economy where everyone is at liberty to compete in a free market

system aimed at profit maximization (Cook and Patrick, 2000).

2.2 THE CONCEPT OF DEVELOPMENT

Development has been interpreted in different ways by different

people. However, this study embraces both traditional, dependency

and the contemporary or new development thinking.

By extension, traditional development means the capacity of national

economy, whose initial economic condition has been more or less

static for a long time, to generate and sustain an annual increase in its

Gross National Product (GNP) at a fairly progressive level (Todaro

and Smith, 2003). However, to this researcher, development within

11

this context is purely economical and the economic index as above

may not necessarily reflect the living conditions of the people in

Nigeria’s privatization process. It is the conception of this researcher

that the benefits of privatization policy in Nigeria should extend to all

segments of the society. This process is referred to as trickle-down

effect. Besides, development by implication can only be given the

rightful coloration in terms of change, new innovation and meanings it

brings to the lives of the people (Rogers, 1969).

Going by the foregoing analysis, development can be used as a

synonym of westernization. This means for a nation-state to subsist, it

must therefore embibe the cultures and traditions of the western

capitalist worlds of Europe and America. In the light of the above,

Ake (2001) pointed that development is modernization and the latter

is equal and proportional to the former. To Ake (2001), development

is an off-shoot of capitalism and the two concepts are mutually

reinforcing. Thus we can clearly see from his school of thought that:

… In its most common form, modernization theory posits an original state of backwardness or underdevelopment characterized by, among other things, a low rate of economic growth that is at least potentially amenable to alteration through the normal process of capital. This original state of backwardness is initially universal. According to the theory, the industrialized countries have managed to overcome it. All the other countries could conceivably overcome backwardness too it they adopted appropriate strategies… (2001:18).

12

From the foregoing, it can be deduced that development can be made

possible through the replication of western paradigm of socio-

economy development. But the gap in this literature as it relates to

Nigerian privatization process is that virtually all economic measures

used in developing countries are merely packaged and delivered to us

from the West. And these packages are alien to African cultures and

practices. Therefore, the options can scarcely find a fertile ground to

subsist in the African soil. Therefore, privatization, inspite of its

seemingly relevant postures, may not yield the required results in

terms of national growth, development and sustainability.

However, the disappointing performance of most Third World

countries of Africa, Asia and Latin American may well suggest the

move towards a new thinking of development practices. This is to say

that mere increase in per capita income without a corresponding

equity and fairness in the distribution of socio-economic good could

bring about disparity, poverty, disease, hunger, illiteracy, high level

social malaise, exam malpractice, corruption in both high and low

places, epileptic power supply and gross indiscipline in the Nigerian

system as a whole (Ake, 2001).

These phenomena can aptly be described as growth without

development which shows that every other approach to national

development is traditional and fall short of acceptable standard of

socio-economic development thinking. Hence there is every need for a

shift in paradigm in order to properly address development problems

of Third World countries.

13

According to Seers (1969):

The questions to ask about a country’s development are therefore: what has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all three of these have declined from high levels, then beyond doubt this has been a period of development for the country concerns. If one or two of these central problems have been growing worse, especially if all three have, it would be strange to call the result ‘development’ even if per capita income doubled (1969:32).

From the above excepts, development therefore means the welfare,

equality and sustainability of the people at large. Thus, the meaning of

development is one that makes people the target or end of

development. Development is thus the process by which people create

and recreate themselves and their life circumstances to realize higher

levels of civilization in accordance with their own choices and values

(Ake, 2001). From this context, development can be seen as

multidimensional process involving major societal changes in terms of

social structures, popular attitudes and national institutions, as well as

the acceleration of economics growth, the reduction of inequality and

eradication of extreme poverty.

Conversely, Rodney (1972) sees development from the point of view

of the individual in terms of skill acquisition and development,

increased capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline,

14

responsibility and material well-being. At the societal level,

development entails the ability of man to take his destiny in his own

hands. Therefore, development means an overall social process which

is dependent upon the outcome of man’s effort to subdue his physical

or natural environment. Conversely, development at whatever level of

analysis precludes unequal relations and contact between the forces of

capital and peripheral nation-states. This is the result of dependency in

Third World today. Of course, this is the direct consequences of

numerous austerity measures adopted in undeveloped world including

the emerging trends of privatization policies, (Offiiong, 2003).

2.3 PRIVATIZATION AND COMMERCIALIZATION IN

NIGERIA

Privatization and commercialization are popular elements in the

process of deregulation in Nigeria. The two concepts are however,

more specialized processes of government disengagement from those

economic functions which it now undertakes but which can be more

efficiently carried out by others, in the case of privatization (Olaghore,

1991). Similarly, commercialization connotes the differences between

ownership and dependency because government retains ownership but

severes the umbilical cord of dependency so that the enterprises can

operate commercially without any subvention from government

(Olashore, 1991).

15

In the past, privatization and commercialization has become very

critical socio-economic indices for growth, development and

sustainability in Nigeria. There is therefore a fair amount of consensus

that the oil boom of the 1970s injected the confidence into the public

sector about its central role in economic management. This new

philosophy of the oil boom era was encouraged by the fact that

indigenes were generally capital deficient and could not afford to

invest adequately in most industrial ventures. These inadequacies left

the commercial sector largely in foreign hands, making the

indigenization programme inevitable if Nigerians were to have

meaningful role in the economy. To those in charge in those times,

government had an obligation to hold a stake in trust for the people of

Nigeria.

As critical and well meaning as the foregoing may have been, the

participation of government in the economy took on a life of its own.

Government itself participated in all kinds of ventures including steel

production to road haulage, clearing and forwarding services as well

as importation and distribution of consumer goods (Olashore, 1991).

Shortly after the oil boom flopped, the burden of funding the public

sector became too much for government. Therefore, there was the

need to reduce the burden of dependency by the companies and

parastatals of government on the public purse, and the desire for

increasing efficiency by government-owned companies whose

inefficiency was causing government much embarrassment and

costing the public much money in losses, led to the consideration of

privatization and commercialization. However, an enabling Decree to

16

this effect did not come into place until 1988. Speculation gave the

impression that ideological and regional balance considerations may

have had the effect of delaying movement on privatization and

commercialization. The ideological issue was played up by those who

saw a cleavage between the haves and there have-nots with the haves

supposedly waiting on the wings to buy up for their personal gain, that

which belongs to all Nigerians. Government must, therefore, have felt

the need to proceed with some caution on the subject allowing a

process of information dissemination to help prepare people for the

reality of the need for privatization and commercialization which has

become part of Nigeria’s political economic index to date.

2.4 PRIVATIZATION, LIBERALIZATION AND NATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

Privatization, liberalization and national development are concepts

that cannot be treated in isolation. Privatization and liberalization

therefore are more or less development strategies imbibed by nation-

states to enhance the growth, stability and progress of their home

countries. As earlier mentioned in the preceeding chapters, to

privatize means to reduce government involvement in the

management of socio-economic affairs of a nation-state. By extension

therefore, the implication of this is to free up resources for private

ownership while government serve as regular or watch-dog.

Liberalization therefore appears to have the same connotation with

17

privatization as the former is aimed at opening barriers to foreign

investors who may be willing to invest (Olewe, 1995).

From the foregoing, there appears to be a linkage between

privatization, liberalization and national development because the

effective administration of privatization could in some respect bring

about change, progress, development and sustainability in the overall

socio-economic spheres of lives. Privatization and liberalization and

its policy directions therefore must be people-oriented, guided by

sound moral judgement and ethical conduct, good political will,

transparency and accountability, responsiveness, participation and

democratization. All these variables have the capacity and potentials

of kick-starting an oiling economy like those of Third World countries

(Nigeria inclusive) (NEEDS Document, 2004).

By any standard, to privatize therefore means to try to avoid economic

waste, corruption and mismanagement creation of job opportunities,

encouraging foreign investors, among others (Okigbo, 1986). This

researcher if of the humble opinion that the Nigerian privatization

process may not yield the desired expected results in terms of national

development. This is owing to the fact that the managers and actors of

the state seem to lack focus and direction in the privatization policies

in the country. The staggering revelations in the Obasanjo’s Fourth

Republic where billions of tax payer’s money have been cornered to

18

families and friends in political business; sumptuous contracts offered

to bidders without proper inspection, among others as is being

revealed in the current and on-going investigations by the National

Assembly of Nigeria. All these are major set-back on Nigeria’s path to

greatness. All these are artificial creations that may hinder the

realization of Nigeria’s vision 2020 as being conceived by the Yar’

Adua’s administration.

Consequently, the concept of national development according to

Arvinal and Everett (1989) is a widely participatory process of

directed social change in any given society intended to bring about

both social and material advancement including greater equality,

freedom and other valued qualities for the majority of the people

through active participation and greater controls over their

environment in all its ramifications. With specific references to the

emerging economies of Third World, Olewe (1995) has documented

that development-centered programmes and policies designed in these

economies are aimed at achieving higher incomes and living standards

through industrialization and modernization, expansion of social

services and cultural activities, full exploitation of human and material

resources among others.

Like privatization and liberalization, national development plans are

more or less aimed at achieving qualitative transformation from a

19

particular level to a more desirable one. Thus the transformation

should be rooted in such a manner that the expenditure on national

resources should be able to improve upon the living standards of the

citizenry (Waldo, 1984). As a encompassing project, national

development plan represents a demonstrated commitment of the state

leadership to deploy national resources, human and capital to secure a

better living standard of the people. These is therefore the tendency to

reduce national development plan to or equate same with economic

development. The former however has a larger scope spanning all

aspects of a country’s national lives be they political, cultural or

economic.

Okigbo (1986) wrote that since Nigeria’s first National Development

Plans of 1962, all other plans have largely remained the same

including the latest NEEDS initiatives. However, the process of

preparing national development plan entails the setting of goals and

targets expected to be attained within a specific period of time. The

process also involves the formulation of appropriate policies aimed at

facilitating the accomplishment of stated goals and targets. To this

researcher, one very crucial factor that must be taken into cognizance

during any planning process of development plan in the objective

assessment of resources to be expended on the plan. This is very

important against the backdrop of the fact that insufficient resource

base constitutes a major constraints to the overall realization and

20

achievement of development goals or set targets. National

Development in Nigeria should therefore be pursued with the desired

vigour, coloration and determination as well as sound political will.

This is certainly a way forward in Nigeria’s bid to become the world’s

20th most industrialized nation-state.

2.5 THE CONCEPT OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT

There are different views by different scholars on the concept of

underdevelopment. Rodney (1972) wrote that underdevelopment is

not absence of development. This is because every people have

developed in one way or another and to greater or lesser extent

underdevelopment therefore makes sense only as a means of

comparing levels of development. It is very much tied to the fact that

human, social and economic development has been uneven, and from

a strict economic sense of the word, a section of human race have

advanced further in terms of technology, manpower and wealth for

more than others. This is the direct result of undevelopment.

To this researcher, the main pro-occupation here is with the

differences in wealth between Europe and North America on one hand

as well as Asia, Latin America and Africa on the other.

Comparatively, the second category can be said to be witnessing

misery, dwindling basic social infrastructures, corruption, thuggery,

insecurity of lives and property among other social vices. All these

21

appears to impediments to development. Another critical aspect of

underdevelopment can also be expressed in terms of a particular

relationship of exploitation between, for example, the capitalist west

and the poor nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America. According to

Offing (1980). African and Asian societies were developing

independently until they were taken over directly or indirectly by the

capitalist powers of Europe. The tradition of this level of exploitation

and inequality was further transferred into the very fabric of African

comprador bourgeoisie class. This eventually has been part of us and

hence, there is trickle-down effect on the entire socio-economic

process. Thus, the Nigerian privatization policy is hinged on colonial

mentality that is more or less unacceptable to the people. Privatization

policy at whatever level of analysis in Nigeria is a thing of the few

Nigerian elite at the helm of affairs of governance. The power sector

and its reform strategies have been grossly high-jacked by the powers

that be and the loot unconventionally shared among family and

friends, government acolytes and ‘good boys’ running around for the

incumbent. At the same time designated power sites have been

literally abandoned to their own fate while billions of naira are being

lost without anybody accounting for it. Nigeria however, seem to be

relying on the power-probe panel headed by senator Elumelu as a way

out of this sorry state of the Nigerian power sector in recent times.

22

2.6 THE CONCEPT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH

The contextual issues in Nigeria’s privatization process can be said to

be synonymous with economic growth. The contention here is that

there cannot be privatization without adequate and viable socio-

economic growth. The two concepts therefore are mutually

reinforcing as well as complementing for overall economic

development and sustainability of any society at large. By economic

growth, is meant the ability of any given economy to provide goods

and services, increase human development and capacity, job creation,

poverty alleviation, provision of infrastructures, etc. Broadly

speaking, economic growth occurs as the economy increases its

human and natural resources and plans how to employ them more

productively (Gbosi, 2001).

From the economic backdrop, it is easy to consider the concept of

growth from the level of increase in Gross Domestic Product (GDP),

Gross National Product (GNP) as well as Net National Product (NNP)

respectively. Political scientists however hold contrary views on the

concept of growth. To them economic growth which does not reflect

the interest, aspiration, welfare as well as guarantee the greatest

happiness for the greatest number cannot be called growth in the sense

of the word. This means however, that there can be economic growth

without development and sustainability as in the case of Nigeria (Ake,

2001). Consequently, available data shows that the various macro-

economic policy measures adopted in Nigeria apparently have not

achieved the desired result. Major factors however, are responsible.

23

From all indications, the Nigerian economy is basically characterized

by rising levels of unemployment, high food shortages, inflation,

poverty and hunger, disease pandemic like HIV/AIDS, exam

malpractice, electoral malpractice, high crime rates, prostitution, rape,

child abuse and trafficking, among others. All of these are basic

economic indicators to show that Nigeria’s privatization process is

still a sham and, so, privatization and socio-economic growth are

poles apart in the scheme of things in Nigeria (Ogbosi, 2001).

From the foregoing analysis therefore, it becomes difficult to compare

or rather equate the Nigerian privatization process with economic

growth because within this framework, there can be growth without

corresponding development. The astronomical increase in Nigeria’s

foreign reserve arising from sale of excess crude oil in recent times

have only left more Nigerians in the dark while the rhetorics of Yar

Adua’s Seven-Point Agenda, of which the power sector takes the top-

most priority, is only at the level of policy statement. Nigerians are

still waiting patiently to have such policies translated into creative and

meaningful outcome in the interest of over 140 million citizens.

2.7 PRIVATIZATION AND LIBERALIZATION IN GLOBAL

PERSPECTIVE

Globalization means different things to different people. Privatization

has come to mean the same thing with the concept of globalization.

This is because privatization like, liberal democracy is a gospel of

Europe and America meant to collapse the entire world system into a

24

global village. Thus, the world has now become bigger and complex

in outlook with near free entry and exit in terms of market formations,

fewer barriers, faster and better communications and transport

linkages, freer and easier and more global capital flows, large and

vicious competition for market at both local, national, regional,

international and, in fact global levels (Kande, 2005). Thus

organizations and nations state are constantly repositioning for their

own advantage as product cycles and design cycles have become

shorter bringing about faster reaction cycles.

From the foregoing, privatization and liberalization have almost

become a collective development responsibility of nation-states with

each synchronizing and harmonizing its socio-economic, political and

cultural interests with other nations of the world. The import of the

mutual relationship, to this researcher is largely to share with others

the responsibility for repair and maintenance of building natural

development plans for overall socio-economic growth, development

and sustainability. Privatization and liberalization in global

perspective therefore preoccupies itself with the setting of bench-

marks and the adoption of new innovations and best socio-economic

practices, discipline and the aspirations to kick-start ailing economies

of backward and nations of the world. Globalization and liberalization

therefore is not only an African content. It is a practice emanating

from the West, and then, imposed on undeveloped worlds as a way

25

out of misery. In Africa as a whole, various concerns have been

expressed on anticipated benefits of privatization and liberalization.

Central to this school of thought are questions of ownership, the fate

of labour, the idea of transparency, the socio-economic implications

of these practices and the considerations of social contracts and

responsibility and responsiveness on the part of state actors in the

interest of all and sundry (Wogu, 2007).

However, social science scholars who have professed privatization

and liberalization have equally outlined long term advantages,

particularly in the area of promoting economic growth, development

and sustainability. A critical assessment of this trends of global

dimension could and of course, may subject Third World states on

highly disadvantaged position. Conversely, despite the many sides of

privatization and liberalization as a universal tradition, the issue of

ownership and participation becomes a major stumbling block in the

development concerns of the people of Africa (Ake, 2001). Of utmost

interest to this researcher is that these appears to be gross absence of

any form of mass privatization or capitalization programme anywhere

in sub-Saharan Africa.

It is therefore indisputable that privatization process in Africa, like

those of the European countries of Britain, Germany, Ireland, among

others, have been very slow. However, it is not surprising to equally

26

judge the low level of performance and subsistence of privatization

programme in this part of the world due to general lack of

transparency, low political will, corruption and lack of policy

implementation on a general scale (Erunke, 2007). This scenario

appears to be an existing gap in literature as it concerns privatization

and liberalization in global scale.

Apparently, the European Union appears to have created a single

market for goods and services in the 1990s in principle. In actual

practice, many barriers to cross border transactions have remained in

place (Cole, 1998). A glaring case of cross-border distortions assumes

greater dimensions when one consider the upward and/or downward

swing of global crude oil prices in the international market until

recently where there appear to be sudden skyrocketing of crude oil

prices. The researcher is of the view that while privatization and

liberalization in Europe (especially in such areas as telecom,

education, railway and water supply, among others) and America has

assumed a successful dimensions, African privatization process has

failed (Cole, 1988). For example, the European Union Commission

has vowed to continue to promote access to local loop to force down

call charges and internet costs. This is rather strange in the African

context. Nigeria, for example has restricted its communications

industry to only few companies (MTN, ZAIN, MTEL, and GLO

networks). This largely accounts for why there has been poor network

27

and service delivery in recent times. However, it can be argued that

the liberalization of the energy sectors in Europe has proved

considerately difficult in recent times. However, in 2002, the EU

reached an agreement for full energy liberalization by 2007 which was

a major step forward. Needless to say that EU countries like France,

Belgium, Greece and Ireland, for example, still control about 90

percent of the electricity market (Majone, 2003). These quasi-

monopolies use their dominant position to keep out competitors. It is

rather very doubtful that without the push from the EU, these

countries would have succeeded in opening their energy market for

competition (Majone, 2003).

2.8 PRIVATIZATION OF ENTERPRISES IN NIGERIA

The abrupt sale of public enterprises in Nigeria has been one of the

problems in the Nigerian privatization strategies to date. The way and

manner that most enterprises are sold have been the sources of

contentious debates among scholars. According to Kande (2005), the

problems of privatization in Nigeria is fraudulent and unfair. Thus, the

exercise is bedeviled with lack of proper valuation, incompetence on

the part of the valuers, fraud and high-level lack of technical skills

(2005:56). Similarly, there is also the issue of assets, which in some

instances, are not taken into account in the evaluation process. This

practice is inimical to Nigeria’s economic growth and development.

At the level of the private sector, the process remains inhuman,

28

insensitive, callous and exploitative. There is virtually no safety nets

for employees of such sectors. Thus, many of the private sector

employers neither provide insurance nor social security for their

employees. They do not obey labour laws and therefore sack workers

arbitrarily, for good or bad reasons. Many of them do not have

pension schemes. It can be deduced from the above that the private

sector is a very hostile environment. They do not in some cases permit

their employees to even unionize.

Thus, while inaugurating the National Council on Privatization,

president Obasanjo (as cited by Kande, 2005:57) stated thus:

State enterprises suffer from fundamental problems of defective capital structure, excessive bureaucratic control or intervention, inappropriate technology, gross in competence and mismanagement, blatant corruption and crippling complacency which monopoly engenders. As a result of the foregoing, we are privatizing for the benefit of our economic recovery and benefit of life…. We are not about to replace public monopoly with private monopoly. Rather in our determination to be unyielding and uncompromising in the best interest of this country, we want to remove the financial burden which these enterprises constitute on the public and release resources for essential functions of government (2005:57).

Incidentally, the researcher is of the view that several issues can be

decoded from the policy statement of Mr President. Again, the issue

of morality in the entire exercise comes to the fore as in the above.

The poser therefore is: If government is not trying to hand over the

29

country to a few comprador bourgeoisie class in Nigeria as in the case

of the erstwhile Obasanjo regime, how should it expect the majority

poor and the already impoverished masses of the people to afford

colossal capital and resources needed to acquire such enterprises? If

the government was not replacing state monopoly with private sector

monopoly, why would she not emphasize on private sector expansion

and development of their various business empires instead of buying

over those whose original owner is government? However, the

presidential speech of Nigeria’s Fourth Republic can be reduced to

two critical issues – those of over politicization and poor management

of our national resource endowment. Everything else within the state

derives from the above (Obadan 1913). Indisputably, however, the

plenary speech appears to be shielding the role of government by way

of poor handling and management of state enterprises. Interestingly,

however, the same government and its agencies are involved in or

inextricably constitutes the Boards of management of public

enterprises. So it becomes difficult to justify the position of

government on enterprises failure in Nigeria (Ojo, 1994).

2.9 ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE POWER SECTOR AND

NIGERIA NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

The content and context of national development as it relates to the

Nigerian current trend in the power sector reform strategies is a

misnomer. Incidentally, every national development plans is largely

people-centred geared towards achieving qualitative transformation

from a particular level to a more or less desirable and progressive one.

30

Thus, the same level of transformation is tailored around expending

national resource endowment at the levels of both human and material

dimensions in such a manner that could bring about improved material

conditions for the generality of the citizenry. In a more broader

perspective, national development strategies represents a

demonstrated commitment of the leadership and of course, the

followership, good political will and vision and mission. All these are

necessary variables that could rightly generate the desired results and

dire aspirations for a workable national development index in all

spheres of our national lives, the Nigerian power sector inclusive.

By any standard, Nigeria, the most populous black African country

with an approximate population explosion of not less than 140 million

had under its NEEDS agenda, and in line with the much talked about

Millennium Development Goals (MDG) earmarked monumental

development strategies for an enhanced living conditions of her

people, of which the power sector reform is one. The Nigerian power

sector as a matter of fact, is an indispensable sector the requires

utmost attention in order to be effective and efficient in all its

ramifications. Power, however, is very crucial in boosting business

activities either at the level of individual or government circles

respectively. On the other hand, Nigeria’s fledging democracy may

only survive the test of time thereby enhancing socio-economic

development, growth and sustainability when the fundamentals of due

31

process and the rule of law are duely and systematically followed

(The News, 2008).

Therefore, the on-going investigations by the Yar Adua’s

administration appears to have come as a right step in the right

direction to bring to the fore all tendencies of grafts and corrupt

legacies of the immediate past administration of chief Olusegun

Obasanjo and his cronies in government circles. It is interesting to

note that the various mind-boggling revelations that played out in the

on-going public hearing by the National Assembly of Nigeria to

actually salvage the comatose state of the power sector is of utmost

interest to this researcher and any concerned citizen of this great

country. Thus a close examination of such awkward leadership

tendencies as hypocritical, non-challant, self-aggrandizement,

window-dressing, coverteousness greed etc, are prevalent and, hence

act as necessary draw-backs to our nation’s wheel of progress.

These tendencies are basically characteristic of the Obasanjo’s

administration where sumptuous contracts worth billions of Nigeria

were distributed to both family and friends to the detriment of our

national development plans (The News, 2008).

In one of the most startling revelations, the out-gone CBN Governor,

Prof. Soludo told the Committee investigating the power saga that the

32

Central Bank of Nigeria paid a whooping sum of N917.8 billion on

the power sector contracts. According to him, out of this figure,

N422.2 billion was paid for jobs done locally while N4.2 billion was

equally redressed for items sources abroad (The Guardian, 2008). It

was also revealed that N16.2 billion was paid to a German company

who does not know the road leading to the project site, neither was the

contract supervised and religiously executed (This Day, 2008).

Testifying before the House Committee on Power and Steel, the

former Minister in the ministry and current governor of Ondo state,

Chief Olusegun Agagu shocked Nigerians when he said it was not

within his schedule to know whether companies bidding for contracts

were registered or not (The Guardian, 2008). The humble suggestion

and ample opinion of this researcher is to say very well that any

public office holder who does not know his constitutional

responsibilities may likewise be expressing his share irresponsiveness.

This does not apply in our national development pattern as a matter of

fact.

Giving his own account which rather concealed more than it revealed,

another former Minister of Power and Steel and now present governor

of Cross River state, Senator Liyel Imoke alledged that he had no

knowledge of how some contractors were paid up to 60 – 100%

mobilization fees without evidence of first-phase performance (Daily

33

Trust, 2008). This scenario also is a misnomer and hence suggests

traces of sycophancy at the level of top bureaucracy during the said

period of Obasanjo’s administration. Eventually, however, Nigerians

were not fooled by a team of praise-singers who were literally bought

over within the Abuja vicinity to applaud and distract proceedings to

cover up this singular evil. Incidentally, a close examination of the

testimonies of Nigerian public office holders as above shows clearly

that no body seems to be bothered about the impact of the power

sector scandal and the implications on our growing or dying economy.

There is also a deliberate attempt here to play down the issue and

cover up the roles played by former president Obasanjo in throwing

away huge public funds without due process and accountability and

responsibility. Nigerian public office holders at this level have largely

remained remorseless as a result of the culture of impurity entrenched

and institutionalized by the former administration which is notorious

for this kind of leadership traits. The most critical and dominant

picture of this scenario is that of a bloodiest attempt to conceal

corruption, criminality and executive recklessness, cover-ups, greed,

avarice, self-aggrandizement and convenience at the expense of public

interest. This constitutes a serious setback to overall national

development in Nigeria (Leadership, 2008).

Against all odds, it will be recalled that the emergence of president

Obasanjo through the beginning of the first phase of Nigerian

34

democratic experiment was greeted by higher ethical standard

initiated by the same regime and further transposed into the Nigerian

public life geared towards decapitating and incapacitating the monster

of corruption. This appears to be the background from which the

Independent Corrupt Practice Commission (ICPC) and the twin

Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) were created

with the hope of stamping out corruption in public lives in Nigeria.

Therefore, corruption as one of the impediments that causes Nigeria’s

backwardness thereby distorting national development and the

corresponding regeneration of ICPC and EFCC generates a lot of

enthusiasm and excitements that at least Nigeria has a saint in the

most powerful public office in the history of the country.

From the foregoing analysis, Nigerians are now beginning to

understand why the eight years of democracy under Obasanjo did not

bring any significant improvement in the quality of lives of millions

of Nigerians. Once can as well understand the shortfall and glaring

hypocracy coming in the hills of the so-called anti-corruption crusade

introduced to institutionalize sanity in the same system of wrongs in

Nigeria.

In any case however, the anti-corruption gospel is now facing its own

credibility problem. But will Yar’Adua muster enough courage and

goodwill to investigate his predecessor with the trend of window-

35

dressing scenario we have had in such cases involving past leaders in

this country? Will the powerful political elite in Aso Rock who

probably are partakers in this orchestra ever allow fair-play,

credibility and transparency? Nigerians are however waiting with high

level of enthusiasm to see what the outcome of this current power

probe looks like at the end of the day.

2.10 PRIVATIZATION OF POWER HOLDING COMPANY OF

NIGERIA (PHCN) AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

National development as a concept finds expression in virtually every

facet of our national lives as a nation-state. The Nigerian socio-

political system therefore becomes the centre-piece of development

agenda carried out by government in the interest of the entire

citizenry. Privatization therefore as an appendage of government

policy becomes crucial in any development thinking especially as it

relates to power sector and how the same impacts on the welfare of

the people.

The researcher is of the view that privatization of Nigeria’s power

sector and national development are two sides of the same coin. This

is strictly because of one singular reason that the agenda of privatizing

any sector into private trends is to avoid the ills perpetrated by the

public sector including, among other things, corruption, waste,

mismanagement, ineptitude and lack of will power to control public

36

resources in the interest of public goods. These appears to be the

major reasons for privatization in Nigeria. However, one striking

contradiction is that Nigeria has found it difficult to move on her road

to development inspite of huge sums of money dished out from the

tax-payer’s money for developmental purposes. The question is: who

is actually responsible for this state of affairs? Again, can this scenario

impede or retard developmental efforts in Nigeria? These and many

other questions form part of the discussion to water-down the concept

of national development as it relates to the PHCN in Nigeria.

The contention in this study his that privatization in Nigeria does not

necessarily translate into national development. Privatization and its

twin policies of deregulation and liberalization are worked out in

favour of a few comprador bourgeoisie class. They include the powers

that be namely, government, cronies and acolytes, state machineries

and top bureaucrats respectively. These are major obstacles to

Nigeria’s growth, development and sustainability (The News, 2008).

These agents of government have literally high-jacked the goodwill

and aspirations of public policies and converted the same into private

initiatives in favour of themselves, business associates, their family

and friends at both home and abroad (Erunke, 2007). The afore-going

does not by any standard guarantee accountability, transparency and

probity in the scheme of things. There is therefore no survival and

smooth journey to nationhood. Of particular interest to this study is

37

the probe exercise on the defunct Obasanjo administration which has

given a startling economic development is still far from being

realistic.

Conversely, the first public hearing on allegations of mismanagement

of power funds in 2008 during President Umar Musa Yar’Adua’s

administration according to the then Minister of State for Energy

(Power), Hajia Balarabe Ibarahim was quoted as saying that about

$13.2 billion was expended by the Obasanjo administration between

1999 and 2007, both at the commencement and terminal stages of his

rulership (The News, 2008). Public testimonies accruing to this

deliberations revealed that power contracts award was treated as a

bazaar by the past government. Thus contracts were not only awarded

without observance of due process, but that most of the contractors

pocketed huge sums of money without executing projects for which

the funds were meant to serve (AIT News, 2008). It is also interesting

to note that the chief execute was also directly involved in the award

of contracts without necessarily involving the Ministry of Power and

Steel. There were also contractors who have not bothered to visit the

various sites of their contracts, but have collected billions as

mobilization fees (Oluokun, et al., 2008). An example is the N1

trillion National Integrated Power Project (NIPP) facility embarked

upon by the Federal Government of Nigeria in collaboration with the

states and local councils in 2005 (Amaechi, 2005). To a large extent,

38

the project involves the construction of new power stations, mostly in

the South-South zone. The gas power plant is therefore to be managed

by the Niger-Delta Power Holding Company Plc (NDPHC) including

those of Calabar in Cross River state, Egbema in River state, Sepele in

Delta state, respectively (The News, 2008).

Going by the instance given above, the researcher is of the opinion

that there must have been an act of sabotage by those at the helm of

affairs including state chief executives of most states in the country. A

clear case is the former Minister of Power and Steel, Mr Lyel Imoke.

Olotu (2008) rightly points out that collaboration and sabotage is so

effective so much so that:

… with Obasanjo and Imoke in control, the National Integrated Power Project contracts were handed over to their friends and associates like candies at children’s party. Over 300 contracts were approved, while 340 payments were made (2008:66).

The aforementioned to the researcher is a negation of civilized

practices, due process and the principles of transparency and

accountability. This to a very significance extent does not promote

national development. In a similar development, Abdullahi (2008)

wrote that:

… Nigerians were stunned to learn at the public hearing that despite the payment of about N257 billion, (an equipment of $2.10 billion) to

39

contractors, work has not commenced on most of the project sites. Contractors and supposed supervisors of different projects openly contradicted each other on the existence of certain projects, the contract sum and the extent of work (2008:67).

The episode as captured above is in exhaustive in the explanation of

the level of backwardness, underdevelopment, misery, poverty and

degradation in which the entire Nigerian state has been plunged into.

There is no gain saying that these ugly practices has the potential of

disrupting the plans, policy targets, aspirations, contents and flavour

of Nigerian’s dreams towards a highly industrialized political entity.

There is no doubt that in the midst of epileptic power supply. Major

infant industries will suffer, hospitals will close down and the

equipment kept fallow for lack of power supply; Nigerian youths will

further romans with crime and social vices for lack of employment

opportunity where there no companies to absurb the work force; high

level of exploitation will reign supreme as imported mini power

generators are sold at exorbitant rates by few importers from China

and Japan; many homes are left in stark darkness while Nigerians

cannot relief stress at home after a hard day’s job in the office. All

these are parallel and does not tally with national development,

growth and sustainability. National development must not be tailored

to few rich individuals. National development must be a holistic and

universes concept capable of steering the collective interests of the

40

people without which it is impossible to want to present the on-going

affairs of the Nigerian state as democratic in line with group

aspirations (Obasi, 2005).

2.11 CHALLENGES OF POWER GENERATION AND NIGERIA’S

SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Vandalisation of PHCN equipment and installations for re-circulation

accounts for at least 30% of blackout experienced in Nigeria today.

PHCN has embarked on a massive campaign against the activities of

vandals who perpetrate this heinous acts and cash rewards to those

who watch over PHCN installations to apprehend suspects for

possible prosecution in the law courts. Also eight 4-wheel Isuzu patrol

vehicles fitted with communication equipment has been given to the

Police Anti Vandalism Task-Force. A cash cheque of N5.58 million

was also presented to the Inspector General of Police for paying

allowances and honorarium to members of the task-force. The poor

state of our electrical generating plants across the country, the long

decline in capital investment in the industry and the shortage of funds

to rehabilitate broken-down plants to undertake turn around

maintenance, is the paramount spectre of vandalisation (Tanweer,

1999; Usman 2003, Zubairu, 2002).

Hardly any day, week or month passes without the ugly face of

vandalism being visited on the nation’s already embattled electricity

network. Media reports on this are as frightening. This menace is

another dilemma in the legion of problems and constraints facing the

Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) vested the with mandate

41

to generate, transmit and distribute electricity in the country. The

wanton destruction this is infliction on the entire network system aside

the untold drain on scarce financial resources is better imagined. It is a

nightmare to say the least. Enormous resources have been lost to the

callous acts of vandalism which have since become a social problem

in the country. Several areas and communities have suffered contrived

power failures in the wake of vandalisation of PHCN equipment.

The sequences of such heinous crimes are devastating indeed. In

addition to the huge economic loss the country suffers, while the

damage in terms of both material and human resources is

unquantifiable.

However, vandalism is the product of a complex society such as ours.

The craze for material things and the desperate desire to get rich quick

in a bid to win the material rat race push people to commit all sorts of

offences including vandalisation. Well meaning Nigerians and the

press have at various times spoken out on this ugly phenomenon that

is not only peculiar to PHCN but also to other vital public utilities.

Yet, it is as bad that this is evading meaningful solution. Sadly, vital

components of the Nation’s electricity industry continue to be

vandalized and stolen by hoodlums and their faceless sponsors

(Wikipedia, 2004).

The ugly phenomenon has no doubt compounded our development

problems as the nation continues to witness retarded growth through

mindless pillage in the hands of the culprits. Most of the items so

42

carted away require huge but scarce foreign exchange to procure.

Consequently, the helpless electricity consumers are left to suffer

prolonged period of darkness until the authority manages to come to

the rescue at a much greater cost (NEPA Review September, 2003:57,

Hartman, 1978).

As an important index for socio-economic development and growth,

electricity occupies a central place in modern societies and economies.

Everything must therefore be done to ensure that the system is

safeguarded against willful damage. The current war against

vandalisation which the federal government in its wisdom is involved,

is appropriate in order to influence a change of attitude in our society.

We commend the quick response and patriotic commitment of the

president to route the vandals. This position raises hopes that with the

co-operation and support of all well meaning Nigerians, the nation

will soon reap the benefits, which will translate into significant

reliability in power supply (NCP, 2003).

Nigeria certainly has a choice to deal with vandalisation and theft of

equipment since much of the nation’s growth will depend on the

sustainance of the electricity industry, the backbone of any nation’s

economy and industrial leap forward (NCP, 2003). Let us consider a

profile of vandalisation power installation in Nigeria in recent times

viz:

43

Summary of most recent act of Vandalisation

S/n Location of Vandalisation

Nature of Vandalisation Cost of Repair

1 Ikeja West-Ayede

330KV line

Towers No. 425 collapsed due to

vandalisation

20,611,815.00

2 Sapele-Aladja

330KV line

Towers 75 collapsed due to fire

from pipeline vandalisation

10,296,300.00

3 Delta – Benin Towers 57 collapsed due to fire

from pipeline vandalisation

Estimated cost

5,000,000.00

4 Jos –Bauchi

132KV line

Towers No. 133-137, 166-170,

177-179, 221-225 and 333-337

vandalised

Estimated cost

14,500,000.00

5 Gombe – Bauchi

132KV line

Towers 474 – 477 were

vandalized

Estimated cost

3,500,000.00

6 New Haven

Nkalagu 132kV line

Towers 72 – 75 were vandalized 7,741, 403.00

7 Delta – Benin Towers 12 collapsed due to

vandalisation and several other

towers and line hardware affected

Estimated cost

56,811,300.00

8 New Haven River

132KV line

Many towers were vandalized.

The vandals cut and carted away

line, hardware

Estimated cost

56,811,300.00

9 Gombe – Yola

132KV line

Towers 24 – 30 vanadalised with

line, hardware cut and carted away

Estimated cost

7,800,000.00

10 Oshogbo

330KV line

Towers 28-30 (Tower 29

collapsed and 28 damaged)

Estimated cost

15,000,000.00

Source: NEPA Review Sept. 2003.58.

44

Obviously however, some of the major challenges in the generation

and distribution of power supply in Nigeria are enumerated as

follows:

1. Illegal connections and overload of network have caused a lot of

damage on supply equipment. PHCN has put in place, field officers to

investigate and to disconnect electricity supply to all illegal

consumers and bring them to book. A massive awareness campaign is

also going on to educate the populace on the ills of illegal connection.

2. Settlement of electricity bills: It is interesting to note that from the

sale of electricity is used to sustain the electricity industry. Some

customers have lukewarm attitude towards settling their electricity

bills. To curb this, the Authority has adapted the use of prepayment

meters, and the grid meeting system in some areas. Nigeria is known

to be the largest purchaser of stand-by generators in world. This

indicates that the ability to pay for regular electricity will pose a

problem once there is constant supply of electricity. Seeing that there

is already a very substantial pen-up demand employing much more

expensive alternatives.

3. Rural electrification: PHCN’s goal of electrification for all is a

challenge the Authority is determined to achieve, hence the current

emphasis on rural electrification. Rural electrification is aimed to the

remote areas in the country.

4. Mounting operational cost of production and distributing electricity

has its own way, weighed down the operation of the Authority. Cost

45

referred to here includes: cost of imported equipment and spare-parts,

cost of overhauling outdated equipment, rising inflation and high

foreign exchange rates. The Government has recently financed the

rehabilitation, replacement and expansions of the Authority’s

equipment and services.

5. Aging equipment: About 13.9% of PHCN’s installed capacity are over

20 years; or 57.1% over 15 years or 79.6% are over 10 years old.

These are impediments to PHCN outputs. The Government has taken

giant steps by funding the rehabilitation and servicing of generating

stations across the country. The recent participation of the

Independent Power Producers (IPP) in the electricity industry would

also boost electricity in Nigeria.

6. Water level: Nigeria has the hydro power generating stations in Kanji

Dam, commissioned in 1968, Jebba built dam, the stream of Kanji and

Shiroro dam was commissioned in 1986. Water level of these stations

determined the extent of generation of electricity. The drought which

occurred on Kanji less than 10 years after construction which was

expected though under probability after about 50 years has become a

source of worry to the Authority’s inability to provide enough power

through the hydro stations.

The Federal Government has sunk huge sums of money into the

rehabilitation of the Nation’s electricity plants. Over N16.9 billion

Naira has so far been provided to the Power Holding Company of

46

Nigeria by the Obasanjo administration, aimed at ensuring an efficient

and uninterrupted power supply in the country while 300 project sites

have been earmarked for construction but for the high level of

corruption scarce leveled against the immediate past government of

chief Obasanjo and his cronies.

It is interesting to note that on the 24/2/2001 NEPA signed a 62

million US dollars rehabilitation contract with Marubeni Corporation

of Japan to reactivate Delta II and III Thermal Power Stations in

Ughelli; Delta state. The company would install six new power-

generating turbines to replace the existing obsolete ones. The new

turbines would have a combined generating capacity of 150

megawatts. Merubeni is currently executing a rehabilitation work on

generating units 6&4 of Egbin thermal power station, Lagos (Ojo,

2002, Onoche, 2002).

Series of plans to deregulate the power sector; the federal Government

is inviting private investors to participate in the country’s power

generation sector. Eight states in Nigeria have indicated interest to go

into Independent Power Production (IPP). The states include Kano,

Jigawa, Osun, Bayelsa, Lagos, Rivers, Ekiti and Bauchi state

(Ohiorhenuam, 2002). The 1st phase of Lagos state Independent Power

Project being provided by US-based Enron Power Company was

ready for commissioning by the end of July 2001.

47

Electricity supply to the country suffered a major set back recently as

the NEPA system collapsed, throwing the nation in to darkness. This

was caused by low Gas pressure to the Egbin power station (Zubairu,

2002). Gas supply to the power station was cut-off when the bye-pass

valve of the gas pipeline failed to open up, thus leading to a cascading

effect on the system, shutting down all the power generation. This is a

major setback to socio-economic development in Nigeria.

The Authority is working tirelessly to ensure that it achieves the

Government target of electricity for all. To ensure this, PHCN will

need to add about 1808 megawatts to the National Grid. The

additional megawatts would be made out of the existing eight power

stations in the country.

The Asea Brown Boveri Limited (ABB) a foreign firm currently

participating in the on-going rural electrification of the Abuja

Independent Power Project (IPP) would inject 450 megawatts of

electricity into the system. Some of the projects the company had

executed in Nigeria include the Osogbo Ife/Illesha 132KV

transmission, 2×30/40MVA312/33KV Ilesha substations amongst a

host of others (Sigmund, 1990).

48

The Federal Government has chosen firms for the first phase of the

schedule 30 megawatts, EPP plant for Abuja. The power project is

being handled by Aggreko International Power Project (AIPP) Plc and

Geometric Nigeria Limited. The project is split between the two firms

both of which are expected to provide 15MW of power each in two

phases expected to run concurrently. The Federal Government has so

far provided electricity for 189 rural areas at cost of 5.6 Billion Naira

since its inception in May 1999. So far, the government allocated 17.6

billion Naira to run power supply 575 of the 774 local Government

Headquarters had been connected to the National Grid (Sunday

Tribune, 2008).

The first phase of the Lagos State initiated Independent Power Plan

(IPP) project expected is to generate an additional 90 megawatts; and

was commissioned in June 2001. The second phase which is 450 MW

gas turbine power plant estimated to cost 630 million US dollars

would soon commence (Sunday Tribune, 2008).

In Nigeria, more and more states and organizations are embarking on

setting up their own Independent Power Plants (IPP), 10 of such are

currently under construction. Some of the new plants which are at

various stages of development include the Enron Power Plant in Egbin

Lagos, the Agip Oji Power Projectd in Ughelli, Delta and Rivers IPP

in Port Harcourt. Others are state sponsored IPP’s being handled by

49

Ondo, Bayelsa, Kano, Kwarak, Akwa-Ibom, Delta and Edo state

(Ohiorhenuam, 2002). PHCN is giving the IPP’s the necessary

support to enable them come on stream. The Authority also offers

necessary technical advice to speed up the job and ensure its success

so that it could stand the test of time. More ways of finding solution to

the power generation, distribution and transmission is however still

being explored (Ojo, 1994).

With impending conditions like the ever-rising consumer debts,

vandalisation of PHCN’s installation, high cost of maintenance,

inadequate gas supply, low water level at the hydro power stations,

high cost of foreign exchange the abysmally low tariff regime, PHCN

has always strived to meet its distribution and marketing of stable

electricity to its numerous residential, commercial and industrial

customers against all odds. In spite of some of its familiar operational

shortcomings, PHCN has made giant strides in the production and

marketing of electricity to the nation and beyond (Odife, 1998). A

principal beneficiary of PHCN’s extended electricity program is the

Republic of Niger under an agreement with Nigerlec (Niger

Electricity Company) that country’s electricity monopoly. Similarly,

in Sep. 1996, an undertaking was signed between the erstwhile

National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) and communaute

Electricque Du Benin (CED), which is responsible for production and

transportation of electric energy in the Republic of Benin and Togo.

50

This problem of finding solution to generate, transmit and distribute

power in the country called for the reform and privatization of PHCN

for an enhanced socio-economic development, growth and

sustainability in the 21st century.

2.12 NIGERIA’S POWER SECTOR REFORM

The power sector is very capital intensive. It is obvious that

Government with its many responsibilities in other sectors of the

economy, cannot fund its development as outlined above. For that

reason, there is genuine need to reform the sector so as to attract and

encourage private sector participating to attract capital to fund the

sector and to ensure a level playing ground for both local and foreign

investors.

The electric power policy statement of government therefore is to

ensure that Nigeria has an Electricity Supply Industry (ESI) that can

meet the needs of its citizens in the 21st century. This in fact will

require a fundamental reform (liberalization at all levels of the power

industry) (NEPA, News, 2003).

i. The Federal Government will therefore provide overall directive for

the development of the electricity supply industry and enabling

environment.

51

ii. Ensure the general consistency of electric power policy with all other

national policies and specifically with other aspects of the energy

policy.

iii. Enact promptly the necessary laws, regulations and other measures

required to support the electricity policy.

It is also expected that Government would have an independent

regulatory agencies, which will be responsible for the issuance of

licenses to companies operating in the electricity supply industry.

Then one can now say that the main aim of the reform and

privatization of NEPA is to reverse the trend that has led to the

present dismal state of electricity supply. The reform however, would

among others:

a) Unbund NEPA along its functional lines into 18 competing Business

Units (Bus).

b) Provide appropriate regulation to ensure industrial growth and safety

in operators by the establishment of an Independent Industry

Regulator (Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission {NERC}).

c) Introduce modern technology into the Nigerian Electricity Supply

Industry (NES).

d) Provide adequate legislation for the operation of NESI).

e) Attract foreign investment and positive re-imaging of NESI.

52

f) With the exception of the transmission/system operations company

privatize the NBUs starting with distribution.

g) Prepare grounds for competition by promoting efficiency and better

management of NESI.

h) Resolve massive and perennial pension funding gaps.

i) Foster a focused development of NESI.

j) Generate employment opportunities (NEPA News, 2003).

The process of sector reform and enterprise restructuring and

privatization is an intricate and delicate one that needs care in

handling. This is a major pathway forward in Nigeria’s quest for

socio-economic and political development in all its ramifications.

2.13 THE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OPTION

One very important phenomena in the Nigerian power reform policies

is the inadequacies and of course, the inability of government to

execute laudable plans that could foster overall socio-economic

development and sustainability. This has largely informed the

adoption of the nuclear energy option by the present administration of

President Umar Musa Yar’Adua in recent times. Thus the intent of

government is geared towards integrated power supply targeted at

producing and acquiring more than 6000, megawatts by the year 2010

(Sunday Tribune, 2008). It can be emphasized here that the National

integrated Power Projects (NIPP) has a benchmark of at least

53

generating, transmitting and distributing adequate power supply to all

nooks and crannies of Nigeria within the shortest limit of time and at

low cost. Thus the power stations under the NIPP agenda includes

Calabar (500mw), Egbema (350mw), Eyaen (500mw), Gbarain

(250mw), Ikot Abasi (300mw), Sapele (500mw), Omoku )225mw)

and Ibom (180mw) respectively (Sunday Tribune, 2008:3).

In any case, however, the possibilities of adopting the nuclear option

as a way of salvaging the Nigerian power sector from total collapse is

of utmost importance to this researcher, and hence, raises a lot of

concerns. It is interesting to state that the adverse consequences of

environmental as well as health hazards posed by the toxic wastes

emanating from nuclear regards leaves much to be desired.

Similarly, contending arguments by nuclear energy experts in favour

of the former is that:

1) The energy produced per amount of material consumed is the highest

available.

2) The cost of nuclear energy is competitive with coal as the major

source of energy used in the world.

3) That uranium, the source material of nuclear energy is readily

available and abundant.

4) That plutonium, a by-product of commercial nuclear plant operation

can also be used as fuel and

54

5) That the amount of waste product produced by the source of energy is

the least of any major energy process (NEPA News, 2005).

With the benefit of hindsight, we can rightly say that government

intention towards reawakening the ailing power sector is not a bad

one. However, the environmental and health consequences to

humanity remains a major constraints. Nigeria as a developing

country does not possess the wherewithal for proper disposal unlike

developed nations of Europe and America, Canada, Japan etc. These

countries appear to have the capacity to properly manage nuclear

wastes thereby safeguarding the ecosystem from undue pressure.

Nigeria for example uses nuclear plant in Zaria, Kaduna state.

Although the nuclear energy there is strictly used for research

purposes. It can be maintained here that the used fuel and indeed, all

spent fuel must be returned to China, its country of origin where it

came from (Elegba, 2008). From the foregoing, the fears of the

possible environmental consequences through radioactive and

ionizing radiations are virtually out of place as the Nigerian Nuclear

Regulatory Authorities are combat ready to check the activities of

operations of power stations and major oil drilling and manufacturing

and mining companies alike.

2.14 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

It is interesting to note that the socio-economic and political dynamics

of a nation state is directly or indirectly influenced by the

paraphernalia of government and its policy framework. This to a large

55

extent, guides the economic fortune and direction of the state to the

extent of which a nation becomes great or dwindles due to the

personal whims of state actors involved in the formulation and

implementation process. Consequent upon this therefore, it can be

said that the economies of various countries of the global system have

always been influenced by the position taken by the states in question

in terms of either regulation or deregulation of the economic base of

the society. The import of this position in the scheme of economic life

of any state is buttressed by a particular theoretical analysis.

Drawing from the foregoing, therefore, the underpinning for Nigeria’s

privatization as it patterns power sector can best be analysed using the

elite school of thought as a theoretical construct.

Elitism is a vague concept which has attracted a lot of concern from

scholars in the social sciences in contemporary times. Thus, while an

‘elite’ is a role player involved in the direction and control of a

nation’s wherewithal, resources, persons or groups of people, elitism

on the other hand defines the power configuration and inter-play of

group influence, authority, charisma, egocentrism, selfishness, etc. All

of these characteristics are practically exhibited by the ruling class in

their own selfish interest. Elitism defines alienation, want,

deprivation, poverty, disease, wanton neglect, and above all, the

enhancement, ineptitude, greed, to mention but a few (Schuarz, 1987).

56

By extension, however, the elite school defines a power relations that

seem to exist between two distinct groups in any society. First is a

group of selected few who consider themselves capable and therefore

possess the right to supreme leadership. The second category are the

vast majority of the poorest of the poor or the downtrodden masses

who are destined to be ruled. In this scheme of obvious differences,

one group therefore assumes an upper-most as well as superior

stronghold in the control of the nation’s resources to the detriment of

the others (Ake, 2001). Elitism therefore subscribes to rule of force.

The elite school of thought is largely antithetical to popular views and

best democratic practices. It is a major setback on the road to peace,

corporate governance, ethics, freedom, ethnic strife, electoral

malpractice, macro and micro-economic failures mostly in backward

nation-states of Asia, Africa and Latin America (Ake, 2001). The

context of elitism defines coercion and brutal use of force against

social groups in the society, intimidation, circumvention of constituted

authorities and the outright neglect of the rule of law. This

phenomenon has largely been re-enacted in Nigeria’s privatization

process by the erstwhile Obasanjo administration where billions of tax

payer’s money have been allegedly diverted into private pockets

leaving the economy to suffer (Usman, 2001).

The prevailing consequences of elitism finds expression in group

interaction. These groups are interested in the balancing and limiting

excessive powers of one another in a bid to grab public office. Thus,

the driving force of these elites to interact and confront themselves is

the irrepressible urge in human beings to come to power and maintain

57

the same. So behind the perpetual struggle between elite groups is the

desire to acquire power.

Mills (1956), Lasswell (1965) and Pareto (1993) wrote that the

context of power defines who gets what, when and how. This means

that power is synonymous with coercion and therefore undemocratic

as it is unacceptable. The society should therefore be built around

equity, distributive justice and fairplay, transparency and

accountability as cardinal objectives in the overall process of

privatization either in the power sector or otherwise. This will bring

about the enthronement of responsiveness, responsibility,

accountability and probity in the scheme of things in Nigeria’s Fourth

Republic and beyond.

Morgenthau (1978) wrote that the context of power is synonymous

with state control by a group of selected few. This is different from

the control of nature, artistic medium, language, colour or such

powers over means of production and consumption or over oneself in

the sense of self-control. Power however, means the control over the

minds, self-consciousness and actions or inactions of other men. By

this definition, power therefore becomes political. And politics clearly

defines the authoritative allocation or abduction and hijacking of the

resources of the people as was accentuated in Nigeria’s Fourth

Republic (1999 – 2007). In any case, political power in any nation-

state has a psychological relations between those who exercise it and

those over whom it is exercised. It gives the former control over

certain actions of the latter through the impact which the former exert

58

on the latter’s minds. That impact derives from three sources: the

expectation for benefits, the fear of disadvantages and the respect for

institutions (Lasswell, 1993). Political powers as in the case of the

Nigerian context could be exerted through unpopular orders, threat,

unilateral decision making, glaring connivance with cabinet members

or where this fails, unilateral removal and reshufflement of cabinet

can be effected where necessary. From the foregoing analysis,

political power in Nigeria during the Obasanjo’s Fourth Republic

could be distinguished viz: between power and influence, between

power and force, between usable and unusable power and between

legitimate and illegitimate power respectively. Be that as it may, the

indiscriminate use of brutal force by government acolytes and cronies

was a major setback in the process of democracy and democratization

during the Obasanjo administration.

Significantly, Nigerian elite should exercise political powers with

decorum and self-control, transparency and accountability,

responsiveness and justice in their bid to move the nation forward.

Millions of Nigerians can no longer afford the skyrocketing prices of

kerosene or cooking gas anymore. Nigerians can no longer bear the

pains of having to sleep in the dark where thousands of mega-watts of

power are being expended on neighbouring African countries of

Niger, Togo and Benin and other minor countries without a blink,

while industries have rapidly comatosed in an ailing economy like

ours?

59

The tendency is for the current administration to rid itself of excessive

elite control, scape-goatism, godfatherism and political machinations,

greed, self-aggrandizement, nepotism, lip-service, brutal use of force,

unilateral decisions on sensitive policy concerns that are of national

interest, external control and the like. A logical execution of the above

guidelines would have been enough panacea for an enhanced power

supply in the Nigerian privatization feat while creating meaningful

conditions of living for millions of dying Nigerians in the 21st century.

Any socio-political paradigm devoid of the aforementioned can only

drag the Nigerian economy some twenty steps back into confusion,

socio-economic stagnation, lack, deprivation and backwardness.

Nigeria must move forward in the spirit and expectations of the

Millennium Development Goals (MDG) while we look forward to

becoming the 20th largest economy in less than a decade from here.

For easy understanding of the context of privatization policy and

national development in Nigeria, it is important that we do justice to

certain basic concepts viz: privatization, development,

underdevelopment and national development respectively.

60

CHAPTER THREE

3.1 METHODOLOGY

The foregoing research will adopt the use of data collection from both

primary and secondary sources. In the case of primary sources, data is

obtained through the administration of questionnaire to a household

population as the required target. Similarly, secondary sources of the

research is utilize through the use of materials such as newspapers,

magazines, journals, periodicals and published works by seasoned

authors.

3.2 THE STUDY POPULATION

The population of this research study is going to be put at 100 as a

minimum standard of measurement. The target universe used in this

research comprises staff of the power Holding Company of Nigeria

Corporate Headquarters in Abuja and other subsidiary units and

service centres across Keffi and Abuja respectively. This is however

not exhaustive in the actual sense of the word. Essentially, however,

the research uses statistical analysis as ultimate basis of decision

making through simple percentage error. Survey research

methodology is therefore adopted. The target population therefore

comprises staff of PHCN corporate Headquarters in both Keffi and

Abuja, civil servants, students and the civil population.

61

3.3 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

The research study shall adopt the use of multiple sampling

techniques as method of data analysis. Thus, both random, cluster and

stratified sampling techniques will be adopted. Isaac (2008) wrote that

random sampling involves wide range of choices made by the

individual given that such individuals are faced with challenges of

diversity and heterogeneity in terms of the study population. The

choice of these sampling techniques is particularly adopted to avoid

conclusions that may turn out to be statistically ridiculous. Basically,

the intent also is to eliminate bias because of the complex nature of

the research work.

However, the study makes use of probability and non-probability

sampling techniques as methods of research. probability sample by

definition is the one in which every member of a population has a

known assurance or likelihood of being included in the sample to be

studied (Selltiz, 1974). Non-probability sampling technique is the

reverse of probability sampling technique. Probability sampling

methods therefore includes (1) simple random sampling (2) stratified

sampling (3) systematic sampling (4) cluster sampling. Similarly, non-

probability sampling methods includes quota sampling as well as

purposive or judgmental sampling respectively. We shall explain the

concepts in turn.

62

PROBABILITY SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

3.3.1 STRATIFIED SAMPLING

The assumption underlying the use of stratified sampling technique in

this study is that certain characteristics are likely not to be taken care

of by the chance factor. The research therefore takes note of critical

conditions as being important in the adoption of stratified sampling

method viz: the awareness of different characteristics of target

population, the conviction that such characteristics may not be

adequately represented without stratification and the possible

inclusion of different strata before a reliable generalization can be

made. As a major advantage, however, stratified sampling has the

capabilities of recognizing different groups in the study population.

3.3.2 SIMPLE RANDOM SAMPLING

The use of simple random is equally used in this research study.

Simple random sampling defines a sampling technique where every

members of the population has equal and independent chances of

being selected in the sample to be studied (Black and Champion,

1976). The selection of one person or element therefore does not

affect the chances of another elements being included. The merit of

this sampling technique includes its wide applicability; its

indispensable use by other probability, freedom from unwanted error

and its simple nature for enhanced understanding. Its demerits

63

includes the possibilities of falling into large sample error and also the

possibility of missing out the chances of entering specific samples.

3.3.3 CLUSTER SAMPLING

The objectives of utilizing cluster sampling technique in this research

is critical to the research study. Cluster or area sampling therefore

involves selecting members of a sample in a group rather than

individual element. The implication of this is that members of the

universe are grouped into their various geographical locations,

occupational clusters and religious groups respectively. The merits

include reduction in cost of research and reduction of extremely large

population.

3.4 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT AND DELIMITATION

The researcher adopted the use of research study that is delineated

into sections. The first section (A) takes note of personal data of

respondents including their age bracket, sex, religious affiliations and

occupation. Sections B and C are designed in such a way that

appropriate respondents should be elicited from the population on the

relevance of privatization policy in Nigeria and how it impact on

national development especially in Nigeria’s power sector. From the

foregoing, the samples by numerical strength and other characteristics

refers the composition of the parent population sufficient enough to

represent the total population as well as safeguard undue

generalizations and validity of this research conclusions.

64

3.5 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

The research study uses both statistical and describtive dimensions to

analyse data obtained from the questionnaire. The statistical analysis

is structured along simple percentage error to enhance understanding

and simplification of the research study. Findings of the research is

also added at the end of the data analysis and presentation to enhance

effectiveness in the study.

NON PROBABILITY SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

3.6 QUOTA SAMPLING

Quota sampling as a research method used in this study is geared

towards obtaining the desired number of elements by selecting those

that are most accessible and those that have certain required

characteristics. The objective is to fill a quota reflecting the

population of the universe as used in the research (Champion, 1976).

3.7 PURPOSIVE OR JUDGMENTAL SAMPLING

This method as used in the research involves hand-picking desired

sample elements to ensure that such elements are included. This high

degree of selectivity involved is meant to guarantee that all relevant

strata are represented in the sample. The reason for this choice is

informed by this study to enhance convenience, cost minimization,

representativeness and time maximization.

65

CHAPTER FOUR

4.1 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The topic under consideration is Privatization Policy and National

Development in Nigeria: A case study of Nigeria’s power sector. The

researcher adopted both primary and secondary methods as means of

obtaining data for this research study. As earlier mentioned the

primary source of the research is based on the administration of

questionnaire and observation methods in order to obtain the

necessary data-base for empirical analysis. Similarly, journals, books,

periodicals and newspapers form part of secondary research and data-

base in this study. The purpose of this chapter is to carry out empirical

analysis of the responses elicited from the sampled population.

However, out of 350 questionnaire administered, only 100 was

retrieved. The information in this chapter is therefore premised on the

above percentage. We shall however begin our analysis with the

demographic survey, structured and unstructured questionnaire

samples as follows:

Table 4.1: Age

Variables Population Percentage

15 – 25 20 20%

25 – 35 40 40%

40 – 65 40 40%

Total 100 100%

66

From the table 4.1 above, the age bracket for this demographic survey

varies from 15 – 25 (representing 20%), 25 – 35 (representing 40%)

and 40 – 45 (representing 40%) respectively. The degree of variation

in age suggest that those within the ages of 25 – 35 and 40 – 65 have

the potentials of understanding the policies of participation of

Nigeria’s power sector and it affects their lives even more.

Table 4.2: Sex

Variables Population Percentage

Male 70 70%

Female 30 30%

Total 100 100%

The table above reveals that 70 male respondents (70%) and 30

female respondents (30%) have been reached. The implication of this

finding shows the high level of participation and representation on

policy issues on the part of male than female in Nigeria.

Table 4.3: Religion

Variables Population Percentage

Christianity 40 40%

Islam 40 40%

Others 20 20%

Total 100 100%

The table shows that the various religious sects including Christianity

has 40 (40%), Islam 40 (40%) and others 20 (20%). The equal

percentage in Islam and Christianity on the privatization process is an

67

indication of equal participation and corporate governance on the

policy concerns of the power sector reform in Nigeria.

Table 4.4: Occupation

Variables Population Percentage

Civil servants 60 60%

Farmers 20 20%

Students 10 10%

Others 10 10%

Total 100 100%

The table above (4.4) has civil servant representation in the survey as

60 (representing 60%), farmers (20%)s, students (10%) and others

(10%). This shows that civil servants are the most affected in Nigeria

privatization process as it concerns the power sector reform, students

and farmers are the least affected largely became of their non-

involvement in the policy process.

SECTION B

1. Are you aware of the current trend in privatization in Nigeria’s power

sector?

Table 4.5

Variables Population Percentage

Yes 45 45%

No 35 35%

Neutral 20 20%

Total 100 100%

68

Table 4.5 shows that 45%, 35% and 20% represents respondents who

are saying ‘Yes’, ‘No’ and ‘Neutral’ as to their awareness on the

current trend of privatization of Nigeria’s power sector. This shows

that more sensitization programme is required to carry the people

along in the power sector reform agenda.

2. In your opinion, is there good management practices in Nigeria’s

privatization programme?

Table 4.6

Variables Population Percentage

Yes 20 20%

No 80 80%

Total 100 100%

The table has 20% of the population who are agreeing with the logic

of good management practices in Nigeria’s privatization programme,

and 80% disagreeing on the notion. This shows that policy makers

need to enhance effective policy management by objective to achieve

desired goals in our power sector.

3. Is the public participation in Nigeria’s privatization programme?

Table 4.7

Variables Population Percentage

Yes 15 15%

No 80 80%

Neutral 5 5%

Total 100 100%

69

This analysis shows that 15% of the population are agreed that there is

public participation in Nigeria’s privatization programme while 80%

disagree. 5% remain neutral. The implication therefore to this

researcher proves that public participation is negligible and does not

represent adequate and democratic outlook in the privatization of

Nigeria’s power sector.

4. Would you say that privatization of power sector in Nigeria has a

global implication?

Table 4.8

Variables Population Percentage

Yes 70 70%

No 20 20%

Neutral 10 10%

Total 100 100%

The figure shows that 70% represents the population who maintain

that Nigeria’s privatization process has a global implication. 2% say

‘No’ and 10% of the population remain neutral. The position of the

researcher therefore is that globalization is privatization and the latter

is the former. Both practices are mere western concepts which is alien

to African political economy.

5. Has the efficiency of Nigeria’s power sector any links with

privatization and divestiture of the sector?

70

Table 4.9

Variables Population Percentage

Yes 45 45%

No 55 55%

Undecided 10 10%

Total 100 100%

The table (4.9) indicates that Nigeria’s power efficiency does not have

a relationship with privatization and divestiture o the sector as 55%

disagree, 45% agree and 10% of the population remain neutral.

Efficiency of Nigeria’s privatization policy is it concerns the power

sector is a function of good political will and building a system of

comprehensive accountability to control corruption pandemic in the

sector.

6. What is the relationship between privatization and national

development?

Table 4.10

Variables Population Percentage

Collective interest 20 20%

Good political will 20 20%

Control of endemic

corruption

20 20%

Public participation 40 40%

Total 100 100%

71

The above table shows that the relationship between privatization and

national development in Nigeria can be enhanced through public

participation with 40%, control of endemic corruption with 20%, good

political will (20%) and collective interest scoring 20% from the

respondents. There is therefore the need for public participation in

Nigeria’s privatization process because the public opinion to this

effect is high.

7. Give your own views on how privatization of the power sector may

not enhance efficiency of power supply.

Table 4.11

Variables Population Percentage

Nigerians are not

involved

40 40%

Politics of elitism is a

wrong step

25 25%

Poor value re-orientation

is prevailing in the

Nigerian system

35 35%

40%

Total 100 100%

From the above analysis 40% of the population agree that

privatization of the power sector may not necessarily enhance

efficiency of power supply because millions of Nigerians are not

72

involves in the process, 25% attribute this reason to policies of elitism

and 35% subscribes to poor value-orientation. 40% is the highest peak

of pubic opinion suggesting that public participation is critical in

public policy survived in Nigeria.

8. What are the necessary options toward solving Nigeria’s power

problems?

Table 4.12

Variables Population Percentage

Adoption of independent

power source

50 50%

The use of nuclear

energy

10 10%

The adoption of solar

energy

40 40%

Total 100 100%

From the foregoing, the necessary option for solving Nigeria’s ailing

power problem includes the adoption of independent power source

(50%) the use of nuclear energy (10%) and the adequate use of solar

energy as an addendum to the epileptic power condition in Nigeria.

However, this study observes that independent power source is

popular with 50% responses. Again, nuclear energy has virtually no

popularity due largely to the hazards it could cause to the

environment.

73

9. Would you say that the on-going investigations on the power sector

would have impact on improved performance of the sector?

Table 4.13

Variables Population Percentage

Elite politics is a barrier 50 50%

Lip services out-weighs

policy action

40 40%

The Nigerian system is

bereft with sentiments

10 10%

Total 100 100%

From above, we can say that the on-going sector probe by the present

regime may not yield the desired result because of elite politics (50%),

lip services taking the place of policy actions (40%) and the sentiment

attached to the probe probably as a result of political differences.

10. Assess the environmental impact of adopting nuclear energy option in

Nigeria.

Table 4.14

Variables Population Percentage

May cause environmental

degradation

40 40%

Health hazards 40 40%

Could further degenerate

into ozone depletion

20 20%

Total 100 100%

74

The analysis as above show that that nuclear as option for Nigeria’s

power sector reform may cause environmental degradation (40%),

health hazards and risks to human, aquatic and terrestrial lives (40%)

as well as enhance the depletion of ozone layers which is a major

factor propelling global warming across the world.

11. What are your reservations for the on-going power probe by the

National Assembly of Nigeria in the Yar’Adua’s Administration.

Table 4.15

Variables Population Percentage

Lack of commitment

manifested in window-

dressing approach to

issues by the powers that

be

40 40%

The syndrome of god-

fatherism may distort

facts

30 30%

Lack of policy direction 30 30%

Total 100 100%

Table 4.15 above shows that the on-going investigations by the

National Assembly of Nigeria lacks commitment manifested by

window-dressing attitude of the Nigerian political actors (40%, the

75

syndrome of godfatherism (30%) and the absolute lack of policy

direction (30%). All these are encumbrances on the path of Nigeria’s

power reform.

12. Suggest a lasting option for solving Nigeria’s power problems in the

21st century.

Table 4.16

Variables Population Percentage

Controlling endemic

corruption in the PHCN

45 45%

The use of alternative

power sources by all

tiers of government/

individual

45 45%

Sound political will 10 10%

Total 100 100%

From the table above, the study is apt in its analysis in line with

devising a lasting solution to Nigeria’s ailing power sector in the 21st

century. Thus 45% of the population are in support of controlling

endemic corruption in the PHCN and enthroning a system of

comprehensive accountability; 45% supports alternative power

sources through the use of water dams and hydro-power stations, the

remaining 10% encourage the institutionalization of sound political

will as a moral value system by Nigeria’s public office holders. These

76

are veritable instruments in the equitable management of policy

framework, not only in the power sector; but also in all factors of our

national socio-economic lives in general.

SECTION C

1. What is the relationship between Privatization and National Development?

Option Population Percentage

Good 40 40%

Not Good 50 50%

Neutral 10 10%

Total 100 100%

The table above shows that the relationship between Privatization and

National Development is negligible as the population of 50 disagree,

40% agree and 10% remain neutral.

2. Do you think Privatization of the power sector could enhance efficiency of power

supply?

Option Population Percentage

Yes 50 50%

No 30 30%

Neutral 20 20%

Total 100 100%

From the table above 50% of respondents agree that Privatization of

Nigeria’s power sector could enhance efficiency of power supply,

30% disagree while 20% are neutral.

77

3. Would you say on-going investigation would have impact on improved

performance of the sector.

Option Population Percentage

Yes 30 30%

No 60 60%

Neutral 10 110%

Total 100 100%

From the above 60% of respondents are doubtful about the on-going

power probe in Nigeria’s power sector by the present administration,

30% agree while 10% are neutral.

4. What do you think is the environmental impact of adopting nuclear

energy as alternative energy option for Nigeria?

Option Population Percentage

Friendly 20 20%

Unfriendly 70 70%

Neutral 10 10%

Total 100 100%

The percentage representation as above shows 70% standing against

the nuclear energy option for Nigeria, 10% agrees that the option is

friendly while 10% are neutral.

5. What do you think about the on-going power probe by the National Assembly?

Option Population Percentage

78

Good 70 70%

Not Good 10 10%

Neutral 20 20%

Total 100 100%

From the table above the respondents in favour of the on-going power

probe by the National Assembly are 70% for ‘Good’, 10% for ‘Not

Good’ and 20% for Neutral.

4.2 TEST OF HYPOTHESIS

In testing hypothesis, the study adopts the use of chi-square (x2)

Goodness–of–fit which will be tested at .05 level of significance. The

reason for this choice is because the data analysis is based on one

variable with many attributes.

Therefore chi-square is represented as

X2 = Σ (O – E) 2 2

Where X2 = Chi-square

O = Observed frequency

E = Expected frequency

HYPOTHESIS I

In testing hypothesis I, table 1.10 will be used as follows:

H1 – There is a significant relationship between privatization and

national development.

79

H0 – There is no significant relationship between privatization and

national development.

The above can be calculated thus:

To get expected = Cumulative observed Number of attributes

= 100 4

= 25

O E O – E (O – E)2 (O – E)2

E20 25 –5 25 1.0

20 25 –5 25 1.0

20 25 –5 25 1.0

40 25 15 225 9.0

Cal= Total = 12.0

df = 4 – 1 = 3

df = 7.815 from chi-square table.

From the analysis, calculated X2 < table calculated; we therefore

accept H0 and reject H1. There is therefore no significant relationship

between privatization and national development.

HYPOTHESIS II

In testing hypothesis II, table 1.11 will be used thus:

80

H1 – There is a significant relationship between privatization and

efficiency of power supply in Nigeria.

H0 – There is no significant relationship between privatization and

efficiency of power supply in Nigeria.

But chi-square (X2) = E (O – E)2

E

where X2 = Chi-square

O = Observed frequency

E = Expected frequency

Expected = Cumulative observed Number of attributes

= 100 3

= 33.33

From table 1.11, it can be calculated thus:

O E O – E (O – E)2 (O – E)2

E40 33.33 6.67 44.48 1.33

25 33.33 –8.33 69.38 2.08

35 33.33 1.67 2.78 0.08

Cal = Total = 3.49

df = 3 – 1

= 2

df = 5.991

81

From the above, calculated X2 < table calculated; we therefore accept

H0 and reject H1. There is therefore no significant relationship

between privatization and efficiency of power supply in Nigeria.

4.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

It seems from the foregoing findings that privatization of Nigeria’s

power sector may be the initiatives of the Nigerian ruling class,

otherwise the elite. The results from the analysis as shown by the

attributes of respondents privatizing the power sector in Nigeria is

devoid of collective interest, public participation and lack of political

will on the part of the ruling class (Table 1.10). Again, table 1.11

shows that efficiency of power supply may be a far – cry largely

because of elitist politics, lack of participation, poor-value re-

orientation and corruption respectively.

4.4 CONCLUSION/ INFERENCES

It appears from the above that privatization of Nigeria’s power sector

may not be an end in itself. It is probably a means to reaching a

desired end. Therefore, efficiency of power supply in Nigeria lies at

the heart of good governance, efficiency, viable government policy

direction, sound moral judgement, distributive justice, equity,

transparency and accountability, commitment, public participation and

the overall national interest, growth, development and sustainability in

the 21st century.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

82

5.1 SUMMARY

This research study focuses on privatization policy and national

development in Nigeria with concerns on the revival of the ailing

power sector of Nigeria’s economy. The study asserts that one critical

aspect of good governance and social responsibility on the path of the

state system is the provision of social goods and services for the

common good of all in the society. The research also affirms that

majority interest as it concerns service delivery in Nigeria’s power

sector should be a core priority of government and its agencies in the

distribution of wealth of nations. This singular act of responsibility

and responsiveness on the part of government vis-à-vis the people

could foster the principles of equity, fairness, distributive justice and

national integration in Nigeria. Besides, Nigeria’s socio-economic and

political stability to a large extent is a function of the well-being of its

citizens as it relates to the provision of social amenities, namely:

electricity, good road network, communications and portable water. In

the light of the aforementioned, electricity appears to be critical in a

nation’s development process. The absence or near – absence of

power has been a major set-back on Nigeria’s path to economic

growth, development and sustainability. This appears to be the core

value of this research study. In spite of tremendous efforts by previous

administration in Nigeria (especially the Nigerian Fourth Republic

83

under the Obasanjo administration) to revamp the dying power sector;

these efforts have relatively proved abortive. The prevailing

conditions with Nigerian 140 million population seem to be growing

worse as people endure black-out day – in day – out with impunity.

Consequent upon this, the thesis opens up discussions with

introductory notes and background of the study, problem statement,

research objectives, methodology, scope and limitations, hypothesis

and theoretical framework in chapter one. Chapter two begins with the

review of relevant literature on what social science scholars have said

about privatization, development, national development,

underdevelopment and the global perspective of privatization and

deregulation respectively. Chapter three focuses on methodology with

particular emphasis on the study population, sampling techniques,

research instrument and method of data analysis. Chapter four deals

strictly with data presentation, analysis and interpretation to enhance

understanding of the research study. Chapter five deals with summary,

conclusions and policy recommendations as a way of improving on

the comatose state of the power sector in Nigeria at both present and

beyond the 21st century.

5.2 CONCLUSION

84

The thrust of this thesis is to enhance the generation and distribution

of power supply in the Nigerian socio-economic space. This is very

essential in the development process of the nation as a whole because

electricity supply is relevant in the growth and sustainability of

Nigerian industries, security concerns and also as a source of social

development and good living standard of the people at large. The

expectations of this research therefore is to see a new Nigeria with a

new face of power supply in order to enhance the living conditions of

the people and redeem the nation’s image as the giant of Africa not

only in name but also in deeds and clear manifestation of its social

responsibilities.

5.3 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

The need to restructure the existing order in the Nigerian power sector

is very critical to this research. The import of the thesis therefore is to

proffer solutions to the increasing level of Nigeria’s incessant power

failure. The researcher therefore proposes the following policy

recommendations as a way of salvaging the ailing power sector in

Nigeria as follows:

1) Enhancing adequate privatization policy in Nigeria requires the use of

the instrument of public participation. This will guarantee adequate

representation and democratization of the entire process thereby

giving it a human face.

85

2) Institutionalizing good management culture and practices in Nigeria’s

privatization process. This will enhance conformity and sustainability

of exiting equipment for adequate power supply.

3) Adopting viable economic development strategies that are consistent

with African values and principles instead of importing alien cultures

to Nigeria which is why adjustment policies do not work effectively.

4) Enhancement of the principles of peer-review mechanism on the

power sector through routine checks by officials of the Independent

Corrupt Practices Commission and bring perpetrators of corruption to

justice.

5) Adoption of necessary options order than over-reliance on

government for provision and distribution of power supply in Nigeria.

In this case the researcher is of the view that the use of independent

power source, including, hydropower stations, nuclear reactor,

geothermal as well as oil and gas sources could help solve the

prevailing pressures on the already tensed Kainji and Shiroro dams.

6) The use of nuclear energy option as a way of generating power in

Nigeria is also important. Although extra care should be taken to

86

ensure that the environment, atmosphere, land flora and faunas as well

as water ways are not damaged through harmful emission of gaseous

substances and radio-active materials as well as used fuel.

7) Above all, the on-going power sector probe by the Yar’Adua

administration should exercise decorum, political will, commitment,

justice, equity and transparency in the investigation process. All

manner of window-dressing, solidarity, godfatherism and sentiments

should be divorced from the exercise. While at the same time,

bringing respective culprits who have tampered with power funds to

justice, their socio-economic status in the society notwithstanding.

The above policy guidelines if adequately followed will no doubt

restore sanity, probity and accountability in Nigeria’s bid towards

becoming the 20th largest economy in the world come year 2020.

REFERENCES/ BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

87

Ajakaiye, D.O. (1984). “Economy – Live Effects of Privatization and Re-organizing Nigeria” Public Enterprises: Some Critical but neglected issues. Ibadan, Nigeria.

Ake C. (1981). Political Economy of Africa. London, Longman Publishers.

Ake, C. (2001). Democracy and Development in Africa. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.

Amaechi Nzekwe (2005). No Past, No Present, No Future How Nigeria Underdeveloped. Lagos Peterson Pub.

Black, J. et al (1976). Methods and Issues in Social Research. New York: JN & Sons.

Galal, A. et al (1993). Welfare Consequences of Selling Public Enterprises Case studies from Chile, Malaysia, Mexico and the UK. London: Oxford University Press.

Lasswell, H. (1993). Elites and Society London. Routledge.

Mills, W. (1956). The Power of Elite. New York: Prentice Hall.

Morgenthau, H. (1978). Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. Chicago: McGraw-Hill.

North, C. et al. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, London: Cambridge Press.

Obadan, M. I. (1993). Wither Structural Adjustment Programme in Nigeria. Ibadan, NCEMA.

88

Odife, D.O. (1988). Privatization in Nigeria: Concepts Issues and Modalities, Simsun Adeyemo Press, Lagos, Nigeria.

Offiong, D. (1980): Imperialism and Dependency. Enugu: Fourth Dimension pub.

Ogbosi, A.N. (2001). Contemporary Macro Economic Problems and Stabilization Policies Port Harcourt: Antovic Pub.

Olashore, O. (1991). Challenges of Nigeria’s Economic Reform. Ibadan: Olusanmi Printers.

Olewe, B.N. (1995): Development Administration. Aba: Grace Books.

Olu A. (1988). The Structural Adjustment Programme and Changes in the Structure of Production in Nigeria NCEMA). Lagos: Rotimi pub.

Pareto, S. (1993). Comparative study of Political Elite. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Poter, E. et al (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York. Free Pres.

Rogers, S. (1969). The Political Economy of Third World Countries. London: Oxford University Press.

Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa: Bogle Ouyerture.

Tanweer A. Oct.(1999). Ineffective Privatization of Public Enterprises. The Case of Bangladesh. India: Shazaar Books.

89

Todaro, et al (2003). Political Economy of Inequality. New York: Chess and Baker.

Schuarz, M. (1987). The Structure for Power in America. New York: Holms & Meier.

Waldo, D. (1984). The Administrative State. New York: Holmes & Meier.

Wikipedia 2004. The Free Encyclopedia

JOURNALS Cook P. (2000). The Evaluation and Performance of UK

Privatization. http.iiwww.bricoun.org/ governance/briefing/iss2int.htm.

Ekpo, A.H. (1997). “Public Policy Private Sector and Development Evaluation from Nigeria”. A Journal of Humanities, vol. 1, No. 3. Nov.

Jones, M. (1991). “The Road to Privatization” Finance and Development”. Vol. 28, No. 1, March.

Obasi, I.N. (2005). “The Nigerian Bureaucracy under the Obsanjo Administration” in Gana A.T. & Omelle Y.B. (ed), Democratic Rebirth in Nigeria 1999 – 2003. vol. 1.

Ohiorhiemam, J.F.E. (2002). The Poverty of Development: Prolegomenon to a Critique of Development Policy in Africa: Annuals of Social Science Academy of Nigeria 2002/2003.

Ojo, M.O. et al, (1994). Journal of Economic Management. Vol. No. 1 (Ibadan).

90

Okigbo, P.N.E. (1996). “New Strategies for the Future Growth of the Nigerian Economy”, Nigerian Journal of Policy and Strategy.

Olabide, M.D. (2002). Benefit Analysis Approach to Valuation and Pricing of Privatization Decisions: A Proposal for Nigeria, Africa Economic Analysis.

Otive, I. (2003). Privatization in Nigeria Critical Issues of Concerns to Civil Society, Social Economics Initiative (SERI), Lagos. Public Enterprises Re-organization in India; The content process and the Internal Labour Markets in India. CODESRIA

The Presidency 2002. Bureau of Public Enterprises: Seminar Proceedings of Nigerians in Diaspora Organization Inc. (NIDO) Professional Convention, LaGuardia, New York, April 27, 2002.

SEMINAR PAPERS Elegba, S.B. (2008). Nuclear Energy in an option for Power

Generation and Economic Development. The Guardian, Wednesday 14, June.

El-Rufai, N.A. April (2002). The Nigerian Privatization Programme – The Journey so Far. A paper presented at Transcorp Hotel, Abuja, May

Erunke, C.E. (2007). Privatization Policy in the Power Sector: A German Experience, being a Paper presented at Public Policy Analysis Seminar NSUK, 2007, May (Unpublished).

Erunke, C.E. (2005). Democracy and Good Governance in Nigeria. A Case study Obasanjo’s Fourth

91

Republic, being a project work submitted to the Department of Political Science, Nasarawa State University, Keffi. (Unpublished).

Majone, G. (2003). Deregulation, Liberalization and Regulatory Reforms in European Union. Mexico: A Seminar Paper presented at the 5th Global Forum on Reinventing Government, Panel on Deregulated Government, Mexico 3 – 7.

Pan African Summit, Nov. 2000.

Seers, D. (1969). “The meaning of Development” Paper presented at the Eleventh World Conference of Society for International Development. New-Delhi.

Stambuli, P.K. (2003). Developing “Free Market Economics in Africa. University of Cretel, Rythmnoz, Greece (Unpublished).

Wogu, C. (2007). Privatization in the Education Sector: The British Experience, being a Seminar Paper presented at NSUK, June (Unpublished).

NEWSPAPERSDaily Trust: “N21 Billion Ghost Contracts Found in PHCN” 2008,

March 13. vol. 8, No. 64.

Leadership: “New Facts Links Obj, Gbenga”. 2008, April I, No. 636.

NEPA Review Dec. 1999. Understanding NEPA.

NEPA Review Oct – Dec (2002). The New Shape of NEPA and the 2002 Project Plan.

92

NEPA NEWS Aug. & Sept. (2003). Federal Government Raises hope New Power Station.

NEPA Transformation Newsletter. Transforming NEPA for the Future. vol.00002, (2003).

NEPA Transformation Newsletter. Transforming NEPA for the Future vol. 0003, (2003).

NEPA NEWS July, (2003). Army Assures NEPA over Electricity bills. Protection of Facilities.

NEPA NEWS Jan – Feb. (2004). Unbundling Guarantees Financial

and Administrative Autonomy.

Nzekwe, A. (1993). Can Nigeria Survive. Jos Tran-African Links.

Sunday Tribune, (2008).

The Guardian: “$6.26 paid to unknown forms for Power Projects”

2008: Marh 18.

This Day: Power Probe: House May Order Okonjo Iweala’s Arrest”

2008: March 14. vol. 13 No. 4710.

The Guardian: “EFCC Begins Probe of Obasanjo, others” 2008,

March 27. vol 25, No. 10 683.

The News: “How Obj Ruined Power Sector”, 2008, March 31.

The News: Probe of Obj’s Government Beings: Privatization Deals,

Power & Oil Sector under Scrutiny”. 2008, March 24. vol.

30, No. 11.

Usman, S. (2003). Privatization: progress Prospects in the Post Express.

93

DOCUMENTS

National Council of Privatization 2001. Electric Power Sector Bill

National Council of Privatization 2001. Electric Power Sector Bill

National Council of Privatization 2001. National Electric Power Policy

National Council of Privatization. National 2002. Telecommunication.

National Council of Privatization. Privatization Share 2003 Purchase Loan Scheme (PSPLS) Information Handbooks

National Council of Privatization. Privatization Monitor (Jan – March 2001) BPE Re-Assure Workers.

National Council of Privatization. Privatization Handbook (May, 2000) Imperative of Privatization.

National Council of Privatization (2000). Bureau of Public Enterprises “Fourth Pan-African Privatization Summit held International Conference Centre Abuja, 19-22 November, 2000 (The Full Proceedings.

National Electric Power Policy Oct 2001. Electric Power Sector Reform Implementation Committee.

National Electric Power Authority Annual Report and Accounts (2002) Report.

INTERNET

94

Cook, P. (2000). The Evaluation and Performance of UK Privatization. http.iiwww.bricoun.org/ governance/briefing/iss2int.htm.

Zubairu, M. (2002). Privatization in Nigeria: The efficiency and Fiscal Argument Maiwada@hotmail. Cm.

Faculty of Social Sciences

95

Department of Political ScienceNasarawa State University, Keffi

QuestionnaireDear Respondents,

I am a student of the above institution undergoing a research on Privatization Policy and National Development in Nigeria: A case study of Nigeria’s Power Sector. This questionnaire is intended to seek your views on this topic for the purpose of research studies. I therefore solicit our cooperation as you respond to the questions I shall administer to you. Your responses will be treated with the utmost confidentiality it requires. Thank you.

Yours Sincerely,

Canice E. Erunke.

SECTION A1. Age: 15 – 25 25-35 40 – 66

2. Sex: Male Female

3. Religion: Christianity Islam Others

4. Occupation: Civil servants Farmers Students others

SECTION B1. Are you aware of the current trend of privatization in Nigeria’s power

sector? Yes No Neutral

2. In your own opinion, is there good management practices in Nigeria’s privatization programme?

Yes No

3. Is there public participation in Nigeria’s privatization programme? Yes No Neutral

96

4. Would you say that privatization of power sector in Nigeria has a global implication?

Yes No Neutral

5. Has the efficiency of Nigeria’s power sector any links with privatization and divestiture of the sector?

Yes No Undecided

SECTION C1. What is the relationship between privatization and national

development?(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Do you think Privatization of the power sector could enhance efficiency of power supply? Yes No Neutral

(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What are the necessary options to solving Nigeria’s power problems?

(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Would you say that the on-going investigation on the power sector would have any impact on improved performance of the sector? Comment.Yes No Neutral

(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

97

(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. What do you think is the environmental impact of adopting Nuclear energy as an alternative option for Nigeria. (a) Friendly (b) Unfriendly (c) Neutral

(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. What do you think about the on-going power Probe by the National Assembly?

(a) Good (b) Not Good (c) Neutral

(a) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(b) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(c) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Suggest a lasting option for solving Nigeria’s power problems in the 21st century.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

98