by FUNMI KOMOLAFE
Mali,
Bamako is regarded as one of the
poorest nations in Africa. It was therefore no surprise
that it was chosen as the African venue of the World Social Forum; the first to
be held in Africa. The Forum was attended by over 20,000
delegates from over 230 countries. They all had a common view to express, “ The Alternative to Neo-Liberal Economic Policies”. Their
message was clear and loud, ““ Another World is
Possible””. Participants were largely non- governmental organisations,
trade unions, youths, women, the aged, and other
segments of the civil society. The participation of the Nigerian media and
trade unions was facilitated by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
This report gives an insight into deliberations at the World Forum and the
expectations of delegates.
THE economy and its effects have been the central issues in the last
one week. In Davos, Switzerland, proponents of
capitalism, including the Bretton Wood Institutions —
the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organisation
- meeting under the umbrella of the World Economic Summit (WES), deliberated on
how to further build capital for the good of the people . In Bamako,
Mali, another group under
the auspices of (World Social Forum, WSF) Africa Group, also met to demand “ Another World”. To the latter group, neo-liberalism has
not been of tremendous benefit to the people. They were therefore unanimous in
their call for “ Another World” that emphasises “
justice, fair trade, decent jobs, inclusion of the civil society in governance,
etc”. Incidentally, both groups
expressed support for anti-corruption and good
governance. The WSF, however, pointed out that some neo-liberal policies indeed
encourage corruption and bad governance.
New Partnership for Africa’s
Development ( NEPAD) has failed us- Africans
African delegates including participants from Nigeria at the
Bamako parley took a second look at NEPAD and noted that the objectives of
NEPAD which was initiated by Nigeria and South Africa include the “ promotion of the private sector as the leading factor in
socio-economic development, promotion of free trade by calling for market
access to industrialised countries, and integration
of continental economies into the global economy” .
The WSF noted that previous economic development programmes such as the Lagos Plan of Action and the African
Charter for Popular Participation called for the “
integration of African economies, cooperation with other Third
World countries and collective self-reliance as the basis on which
to approach the world economy”. The African civil society, in pointing out the
limitations of neo-liberalism, identified “ consistent decline in profits of
the capitalists, closure of plants as attempts are made to limit capacity utilisation, an unusually large number of unemployed
workers, an explosive growth in indebtedness on the part of Third World
Countries”, as the evidence of the failure of the neo-liberal policies.
The views expressed in Bamako
are a sharp contract to those of the economic team of President Olusegun Obasanjo that foreign
investment would boost jobs and that down-sizing of the Nigerian civil service
would make it more efficient. The WSF was held at a time that finance minister,
Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala,
has been commended for her role in Nigeria’s
debt cancellation by the Paris Club. But the Altenative
to Neo-liberalism in Southern Africa (ANSA)dismissed
neo-liberalism on the grounds that the much talked about globalisation
is a “myth”. ANSA’s position, supported by Nigerian
delegates, was that “ contemporary globalisation is
part of the strategy of trans national corporations backed by the military
political and institutional including the World Bank, World Trade Organisation, the International Monetary Fund and the
G8" all constituting the empire.
To us in the African continent, ANSA noted “capital led-globalisation
is even at the root of the crisis in Africa. Poverty has
not only been entrenched but it has also deepened, and the gap between the rich
and the poor has increased”. Rev. Fr. John Patrick of the Justice, Development
and Peace Commission in Nigeria
described neo-liberalism as a religion with a god called PROFIT.” In the opinion of his organisation,
“ Everything is sacrificed for that god to survive.
Those who believe in liberalism put in place policies that would meet the goals
of the god called PROFIT. The organisation noted that
the Federal Government had continuously left the civil society out of the
national budget as a result of which provisions of the budget have always been
to the disadvantage of the people. It noted that government would rather
involve business men and women under the umbrella of the Organised
Private Sector , describing neo- liberalism as ““ a
jungle where the fittest survive””.
Apparently making reference to policies of the Federal
Government such as privatisation of public
enterprise, sale of government houses, commercialisation
of education, the organisation said what Nigerians,
indeed Africans, need is “ a system that guarantees us a right to education,
health, etc”. To another official of ANSA, “ IMF has
got Africa to reduce tariffs on trade and impossible
taxes on the people. The World Bank/ IMF failed to ignore capital flight by
multi-nationals”.
Economic dependence
Professor Yash Tandon,
a political economist from Uganda,
pointed out the contradiction in the pronouncement of African Heads of State.
His words, “ African Heads of State call for
liberation but they also call on the IMF for economic dependence. How can that
be possible?” Generally, participants expressed concern about measures such as
road tax and increase in VAT which the Federal Government plans. In their view,
these measures would further impoverish the people.
So, who benefits from the neo-liberal policies? Some
participants identified South-Africa as the new imperialist in Africa
with the trans-national business investment which is usually at a high cost to
citizens of the host countries. Corruption and good governance in Nigeria
was the focal point at the forum. Participants acknowledged the role of the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC) but
they summed Nigeria’s
efforts this way: “It goes beyond that”. Tadon
identified three types of corruption as, “the use of state power for personal
gains, use of financial power to corrupt the state and systemic corruption”.
He said, “In Africa,
only the first is often talked about but not necessarily the most dangerous”. Privatisation is described as another form of corruption
because “state enterprises are put in the hands of the market to enrich
individuals. Market corruption which has become endemic is strongly embedded”.
Mrs. Abiola Akiyode-Afolabi,
chair of the Nigerian Social Forum, had harsh words for the privatisation
programme of the Federal Government. She said, “We
discussed how privatisation has taken over the whole
of Nigeria and
how that has also caused endemic poverty”. Mr. John Christensen, who commended
the EFCC chairman for a good job, said for Nigeria
to successfully tackle corruption, transparency in the taxation policy of Nigeria
is crucial to the anti-corruption drive.
For instance, in Nigeria,
oil companies have admitted that they cannot disclose the amount paid as taxes
because of secrecy on the subject in their contract. He said, ““ We want a move from non-disclosure of tax information
included in the contract of oil companies . I suspect that Nigeria
loses hundreds of millions every year through tax evasion by oil companies. We
want the accounts to be public knowledge in off shore financial transactions”.
Christensen went on: “What we want to reveal is that
transparency must be complete not partial. Nigeria
is losing a good part of its revenue through evasion of tax off-shore. It is
the biggest form of corruption. Tax information is most essential”. Ms. Aminata Traore noted that the
West is paying lip-service to corruption in Africa. She
said to qualify for debt-relief, African countries must demonstrate good
governance by embracing democracy and anti-corruption by parading corrupt
public officials . She observed that “during election,
leaders denounce corruption but once in power, the system continues as long as
they comply with the requirements of the World Bank, IMF, Britain,
America, the
Paris Club, etc. Her words, “The World Bank tends to focus on petit (small)
corruption such as a policeman demanding bribes but big time corruption is
hardly exposed”.
It was however not all about what proponents of
neo-liberalism would call “rhetorics of the civil
society” as participants at the WSF stated in clear terms the kind of Africa
they would like to have in terms of economic development. The Alternative to
Neo-Liberalism in Southern Africa ( ANSA) forum
articulated strategies for development in Africa having
declared that “neo-liberal free market system cannot solve our problems”. As
alternatives, it was suggested that African leaders should adopt people-led
strategy as opposed to the IMF, World Bank, WTO donor- led and a production
system based on domestic demand and human needs. TheTrade
Union Working Group on International Economics and Regional Integration in West
Africa whose meeting, facilitated by the
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, focused on economic
development in the West African region, suggested physical integration through
infrastructural development in the area of energy, transport and communication.
They also want West African Heads of State to institute “a
common external tariff which permits ECOWAS to better disburse or dispose off/
distribute resources that contribute to the financing of the ECOWAS agricultural
policy ““ in order to boost the economy of the
continent. Ms. Hauwa Mustapha of the Nigeria Labour Congress, who participated in the meeting, said the
group wants West Africans to negotiate as a bloc. Her words: “We see the coming
together within the context of the European Union for West African countries as
strengthening trade within the region”. She explained that the group came to
this conclusion because it has realised that “poverty
cuts across all West African countries . Poverty in Nigeria
is what we see as poverty in Cote” D’Ivoire, Senegal, etc “.
Our Expectations - Organisers,
Stakeholders One of the organisers of the WSF, Mr. Dadie Dagnoko, said some
parliamentarians attended the forum, saying: “We expect them to influence
economic policies in their countries”. To Mrs. Akiyode-Afolabi,
““ The WSF has created a space for people to come
together and speak with one voice to say that they are opposed to
neo-liberalism. Capitalism has not benefitted the
people of the world all over .
We need a new world order, a need a world that guarantees
peace, a world that can put food on our tables, guarantee longevity. That is
the kind of world we want and that can be seen everywhere”. She said the WSF
would be represented at WES in Davos. Makona Lekalakala of South
Africa said, “I expect the forum to be much
more deliberative in terms of strategies . I think
this forum is better off than when we had one World Social Forum because it
will help us consolidate our strategies. We are here to look at this and the
international financial institutions and the role they play because South
Africa is not a sub-imperialist country that
has been used to implement imperialist policies like the New Partnership for
African Development ( NEPAD) which cannot be used to
rebuild or reconstruct Africa”.
To Anthonio Tiyan
of the Ibom Foundation in the Phillipines,
““ the only way by which we can win against globalisation
is for farmers all over the world not just in Asia but Africa, Latin America
etc to come together to fight globalisation and
imperialism”. “ Another World Possible”: This was the message common to all
participants at the WSF forum in Bamako.
It was also the message in Venezuela
in the Americas
where the WSF was also held. But, are the leaders listening? The outcome of the
World Economic Summit would be an indication of the extent to which leaders
have listened to the civil society groups.
1/30/06
Vanguard Media
Return to: Africa News Archives