National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP) and the Ruga Settlement Policy of the Buhari Government: An Analysis


Prof. Toba Alabi. tobalabi@yahoo.com


As of 29 May, 2015 when Muhammadu Buhari took his oath of office as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, he announced to the whole world a three pronged policy: economic transformation, fight against corruption and making Nigeria a more secure nation where the Boko Haram insurgency and other threats to peace would be routed out. But paradoxically under his watch, Nigeria has become the poorest nation on earth and the EFCC has become a political tool for subduing the opposition into submission and silence. This is evidently so as it has failed to successfully prosecute any APC member of note in spite of the damming allegations levelled against them. Today, Godswill Akpabio and Gorge Akume are Honourable Ministers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
While the Boko Haram insurgency suffered some initial defeat, it is today a major threat to peace in the north east of Nigeria. What President Buhari did not envisage then was the emergence of the killer herdsmen that killed 3,720 Nigerians in three years of his government. The Amnesty International reported this in 2018. In addition to this, banditry in the north west of the country has held that region captive with staggering human and material losses. Within the past four years the Nigerian economy had entered into a recession.
Why is it that the Buhari government has proven to be incapable of addressing these overwhelming problems that are making a nonsense of its economic and security policies? A plethora of reasons within the miasma of historical, foreign and considerable weak and immense policy somersault. To submit that the woes befalling Nigeria today could be solely and fully laid at the doorstep of the Buhari government would be highly unacademic and terribly subjective. The cumulative years of bad governance and corruption have laid a solid background for social and economic hardship for millions of Nigerians. But despite the dismal performance of the past, the Buhari government could not continue to pass the buck, crediting its disappointing performancs to the previous governments while things go worse by the day and the country becomes the global capital of poverty.
The problems of food insecurity and the attendant food importation; and fuel importation are the most critical issues that have adversely affected the Nigerian economy and if any government is ever going to bring about any meaningful development, these two points must necessarily be the point of departure in any government economic policy. With regard to food security, the Buhari government attempted to boost rice production resulting in a collaboration between Lagos and Kebbi States. But painfully, this attempt was largely vitiated by the activities of smugglers who keep on importing rice into the country with reckless abandon.
As for the issue of importation of fuel, the problem deepened considerably as billions of dollars is still expended yearly on importation of petroleum products into the country. It is indeed very disturbing that it is only Nigeria that imports petroleum products among the OPEC countries. With these two problems still very deep and profound in the country, no one could talk seriously about development in Nigeria as the foundation of economic take off has remained a fleeting mirage.
Still within the framework of the agricultural policy of the Buhari government, and the livestock policy of the government in particular, an analysis would be in order. The first is that the agricultural policy of any government should consist of livestock and crop production. Given the prevailing realities in Nigeria and a history of bloody clashes between the farmers and the herders, there is a need for a balanced, fair and just policy in the country's agriculture. So while the Buhari government is busy trying to improve livestock production in the country, farm crop production must also be given equal attention. Thus far, what has majorly captured the attention of the Buhari government is the livestock in the form of Ruga Settlement Policy and the new  National Livestock Transformation Plan.
In concrete terms what is the National Livestock Transformation Plan? How is it different from the Ruga? The Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo provided an insight into what is National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP) at the Gongoshi Grazing Reserve in Mayo-Belwa Local Government Area of Adamawa during iis launch .
While inaugurating the project he said the plan is designed to run from 2019-2028 as part of Federal Government’s initiative in collaboration with States under the auspices of the National Economic Council (NEC).
He went further to submit that the plan is aimed at supporting the development of Nigeria’s livestock sector and that it is to be implemented in seven pilot states of: Adamawa, Benue, Kaduna, Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba and Zamfara.
According to Professor Osibajo, the plan will be implemented as a collaboration project between the Federal and State governments, farmers, pastoralists and private investors.
“In this plan the State Government or private investors provide the land, the federal government does not and will not take any land from a State or local government.
“Any participating state will provide the land and its own contribution to the project. The federal government merely supports.
“It is a plan that hopes to birth tailor made ranches where cattle are bred, and meat and dairy products are produced using modern livestock breeding and dairy methods.
“This solves the problem of cattle grazing into and destroying farmlands. It ensures a practical response to the pressures on water and pasture by forces of climate change,” Osinbajo said.
Osibajo also noted that the plan was designed to provide modern meat and dairy industry and in some cases integrated crop farming.
He also differentiated between the Plan and Ruga thus: “I wish to emphasise that this is not RUGA. Because the idea of RUGA settlements launched by the Ministry of Agriculture created a problem when it was perceived as a plan to seize lands to create settlements for herders.
“RUGA was not the plan designed and approved by the governors and the President rightly suspended the implementation, ” Osinbajo said.
According to him the NLTP was endorsed by all governors and could only be implemented with the full participation and consent of the governors and the people of the state. He also said no state would be forced to participate, adding that Adamawa had chosen to begin the implementation of the plan.
He noted Adamawa state experienced several crises on account of clashes between herders and farmers resulting in the destruction of lives and property.
He also observed that the introduction of the livestock transformation plan was a win-win for the state and its people, and would provide a basis for peaceful coexistence, jobs for many and a mechanism for resolving disputes.
Under this Plan, the Federal Government will provide eighty per cent of the funds while the counterpart funding of twenty per cent will be provided by the states. On paper, this policy looks very good but then, there are some crucial points to note. The first is that the policy is still an offshoot of a paralyzing centralism and pseudo federalist framework that has been foisted on Nigeria by the fraudulent praetorialism that has been the bane of endogenous development of the regions, freedom from the debilitating renter economy of which hydro carbon has taken the commanding height of the economy; and the observance of true federalism which is a sine qua non for peaceful coexistence in a stunning diversity of ethnicity, religion, regionalism, culture, language and history.
Secondly, and as earlier stressed, agriculture has two basic aspects - livestock and crop production. Thus far, the government has overwhelmingly concentrated on livestock almost to the total neglect of the farmers. In order to prevent an accusation of bringing in the Ruga policy by the back door, the government must embark on similar policy that will benefit crop production across the country.
Thirdly, the implementation of the policy is prone to abuse by the governors who are even likely to endanger national security by their recklessness and indiscretion. The position of the Bauchi Governor, Mohammed Bala, on this plan is a most dangerous one that does not have respect for Nigerian borders and the country's immigration policy. I would like to quote extensively how Akinkotu reported the response of this Governor during an interview on a television programme to the new plan.
Mohammed Bala on the National Livestock Transformation Plan of the Buhari Government
"Fulani herdsmen from Chad, Niger and other neighbouring countries will benefit from the National Livestock Transformation Plan, the Bauchi State Governor, Bala Mohammed, has said.
Mohammed, who was a guest on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily on Monday, said since Fulani herdsmen are nomadic, it would be inappropriate to deprive them from benefitting from the livestock plan just because they are not from Nigeria.
The initiative will be 80 per cent funded by the Federal Government while the states would provide 20 per cent counterpart funding and the grazing land.
The governor, whose state is among those that will be part of the initiative, said Fulani exist in many countries across Africa and share a brotherhood which transcends boundaries.
When asked how the government would ensure that only Nigerians benefit from the livestock plan, Mohammed said, “I think there is a lot of mistrust and misconception as regards the Fulani man. The Fulani man is a global or African person. He moves from The Gambia to Senegal and his nationality is Fulani.
“As a person, I may have my relations in Cameroon but they are also Fulani. I am a Fulani man from my maternal side, we will just have to take this as our own heritage, something that is African. So we cannot just close our borders and say the Fulani man is just a Nigerian.
“In most cases, the crisis is precipitated by those outside Nigeria. When there is a reprisal, it is not the Fulani man within Nigeria that causes it. It is that culture of getting revenge which is embedded in the traditional Fulani man that attracts reprisal.”
When asked if it was right to allow foreigners to benefit from Nigerian taxpayers’ money, the governor said it was proper.
 September 16, 2019 Eniola Akinkuotu, Abuja
From the foregoing, it is very clear that if this policy is implemented as prescribed above by Bala Mohammed, it would be tantamount to not only the implementation of the controversial Ruga policy but also a dangerous 'Fulanisation' of Nigeria, an emerging dangerous concept in the Nigerian security sector and within the broad framework of strategic studies.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why El-rufai Is Angry With Tinubu: Nigerian Governors' Forum Chairmanship

Tinubu: Our godfather produced Buhari, show what you’ve done – Yoruba youths blast El-Rufai

Again, Gunmen Abducts Four, Kills One In Chikun Area of Kaduna State.