Underdevelopment, policy somersault, misplaced priority and infrastructural deficit among many other governance inadequacies continued to be the bane of Nigeria’s socio-economic advancement.
Considering the country’s burgeoning population increase, the nation requires infrastructural development in order to achieve an equilibrium. Several years of government neglect and misplaced priorities has placed critical sectors of the economy such as roads, rail, power supply etc in bad shape.
The recent announcement by the Federal Government of the approval of a $1,959,744,723.71 contract for a rail line that would link Nigeria to Niger Republic, in furtherance of the nation’s efforts towards infrastructural development has created some uproars.
The 248-kilometre rail line expected to aid the transportation of crude oil in the sub region, is designed to connect three Northern states – Kano, Katsina and Jigawa states – as well as seven senatorial districts before extending to Niger Republic.
Making the announcement the previous Wednesday, the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, told State House correspondents at the end of the FEC meeting that the money approved for the development of the proposed rail line linking Kano-Dutse-Katsina-Jibia and to Maradi in Niger Republic was inclusive of Value Added Tax.
Despite criticism by opponents of the decision, the government has been silent about critical aspects of the project such as funding, economic viability and benefits to the nation in general. The main opposition party, the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, described the project as, “a misplaced priority.”
We are of the opinion that certain salient questions needed answers to be put forward. To begin with; what is the pressing economic importance or viability of a rail line connecting Nigeria and its neighbours, when several economic hubs across the country could have benefitted more from this kind of project? Could the decision makers have considered what economic and social impact an intra-city rail line in Lagos, the economic capital of the nation could have yielded? The city has for so long battled with congested traffic gridlock that an intervention of this nature would not only have brought relief but have provided another means for the ever-dwindling revenue generation.
The other question we need to ask is; which is the most commercially busy axis in the country that needs rail service? Have we considered the commercial axis which is the Lagos-Benin-Onitsha-Port Harcourt-Calabar corridor? We are of the view that this is one the busiest commercial tracks in the country that would have been given priority.
Another critical question hanging over this project is the mode of finance. Who, for instance, would foot the bill for the Niger Republic part of the rail line? Moreover, is this project within the framework of ECOWAS regional development plans? And is there an international funding for it under any form of international assistance? Or how does the country, already burdened by immense foreign and domestic debt proposed to finance the $1.9bn bill?
In as much as the country needs more opening up in terms of transportation — taking into account the huge cost required in order to embark upon developmental projects such as rail line construction and the precarious financial situation the nation finds itself; government is expected to subject decisions concerning them to critical thinking, so as to obtain the most benefits to the nation and its citizens.
Until convincing answers are provided for these questions, it is our considered opinion that the controversy generated by the project’s announcement has just began and the authority is called upon to assuaged the people’s apprehension and misgivings by opening up on the grey areas surrounding the contract.