Opinion

As The National Confab Kicks Off: What The People Expect

Published

12 years ago

March 17, 2014

History beckons today
at the National Judicial Institute, Abuja as some 496 delegates converge there for the much-awaited National Conference mooted by President Goodluck Jonathan.
Holding at a time the nation is bedevilled with debilitating socio-economic, ethno-religious and political challenges worsened by the seemingly intractable Boko Haram insurgency that now claims innocent lives on a daily basis, the delegates are expected to proffer solutions that will save Nigeria from the abyss and promote its much-desired unity, peace, progress and development.
Against the backdrop of several unresolved knotty issues and other lessons from past conferences, what do we expect from the delegates this time around?
The Tide Chief Correspondent Calista Ezeaku and photographer Ken Nwi-ueh got some view points.

Mr Onaiwu Emmanuel (oil company). We are recycling the same old politicians. Are they giving us a different thing entirely this time? No. I don’t expect anything different from them apart from their old ways and their old ideas because even from the composition of the delegates, to me, there was an error because the government’s delegates on the list are too much. The percentage is too great. Are they the ones going to represent Nigerians? To me, from the way the government is going about the national conference, I don’t think we are going to get anything different from it.
Those set of people there do not have solutions to Nigeria’s problems because many of them have ruled before. They’ve been in one position or the other. I would have preferred the delegates to be mostly ordinary Nigerians, the traditional class. I know they are represented but their numbers are small. Again, we’ve removed the unity of Nigeria among what should be discussed at the Confab. They should be free to discuss it, whether to remain as a single Nigeria or to go apart.
It does not mean we have to endorse whatever comes out of the conference but our ideas should have been allowed to come out freely. So the conference is just a waste of time, resources and what have you. That is how a lot of Nigerians see it, apart from the political class because it is just an opening for them to make more money. Imagine a past governor going there. What did he do when he was a governor? What is he going there to tell them about his people? He never developed his state, what is he going there to say about his people?

Mr Patrick Owuru ( business man). I will say that the conference seems to be a good idea but the timing seems to be wrong owing to the fact that in less than a year we will be going into elections. So the conference is looking as though it is a ploy to garner support for the present administration, which does not augur well for what the conference is aimed to achieve. The aim of the conference if allowed to go on now will be defeated definitely, because most speakers will be speaking from the political point of view or from the political stand point.
I will urge Nigerians not to expect much from the conference. The outcome of the conference will not yield much since it is not predicated on good premises in the sense that if the conference goes on now and election is just less than a year away, definitely there is no way Nigerians can deliberate and get the unity that the conference is supposed to achieve. We are supposed to put our cards on the table – all the stakeholders, all the tribes, all the sections of the country – we are supposed to talk about the differences we’re having now, which is why people are clamouring for the conference but the timing seems to be wrong.
Another big challenge is the composition of the delegates. The federal government cannot select people for the conference if they want people to present their issues the way they ought to be presented. They should allow the people to participate by selecting who should speak for them. The NBA and other professional associations should have some slots as they do now but in the main composition there should be nationality interest represented. I would have expected that there would have been a mini conference in phases, of different ethnic nationalities from where they will select and articulate what they want to present and probably select those that will go and speak on their behalf. By so doing, we’ll have the generality of interests properly represented in the conference.
So this conference is just one step to the solution of Nigeria’s problems. There might be other confabs in the future. Whatever outcome from this one could help in the composition of future confabs.
Another lacuna is that the conference does not have the backings of the law. So what happens with the outcome of the conference? That’s why I said the timing is wrong. First and foremost, they should have sponsored a bill to allow the conference to hold and whatever decisions reached in the conference should be brought to the National Assembly for ratification and acceptance, then it becomes a genuine document or law of the land. But right now you just go, talk, when you are through what happens next? How do you want to marry whatever you decide with the laws of the land? It’s only the legislators that have such powers. So it becomes another issue. We are trying to solve one issue and probably create nine.

Mr. Legzy Edet ( Businessman). As a Nigerian, I do not expect much from the conference because I see the same faces, the same people, speaking the same way. And you can’t keep doing things the same way and expect a different result. Again, it is always said that majority carries the vote. How are issues concerning the minority groups going to be addressed in view of the composition of the delegates. An issue like resource control, for instance will only likely be talked about by the people from the South South. Are we even ready to speak in one voice? If actually we need those things why should we project the same people we have projected before? They should allow the people to choose who will speak for them. The government compelled us by choosing who goes to speak on our behalf. So I don’t see anything different from what we had before. Some of the people representing us there are people who had the opportunity of changing this region. They had the opportunity, the resources, the power but we didn’t see anything good from them. So, why should we now expect a different thing from them. So the conference is definitely a waste of time and money.

Mr Allwell Ene (Journalist). I think the composition of delegates is not fair enough. I don’t think the diverse ethnic groups we have in the country were represented. Many ethnic groups are crying foul of the representation. How many traditional rulers do we have as delegates. Rivers State does not have a single traditional ruler among its representatives. From the whole of South South, we have only two traditional rulers. And if these people are not there, who will speak the minds of their people? It’s not all about gathering people, chosen by the federal government. The way I see this whole thing, it is a federal government selected delegates national conference not the people’s national conference. If it were the people’s national conference, the delegates would have come from the people.
I am not saying the conference should be an entirely ethnic groups issue, but at least all the ethnic groups should have had at least one delegate each. I know all the delegates belong to different ethnic groups but they did not go there on the auspices of their ethnic groups. They went on behalf of one group or the other not on behalf of the ethnic groups. So who is going to speak on behalf of that ethnic groups. Are they going to be heard? No that is why you see people crying foul everywhere. I hope the federal government listens to them and coopts some other ethnic groups into the confab.
From this conference, I expect a misrepresentation of the views of the people. I see a situation where the views of the Nigerian public will be inadequately represented. Don’t forget, what is bringing national conference is our existence. How do we move forward as a nation? Who are the people to decide that? It is the ethnic groups. The conference definitely will trash certain issues. It’s not that the conference will be a total failure but what I am saying is that the conference will fail to address the opinions of the generality of Nigerians because of the mis-representation. So I will advice the federal government to shift the commencement of the conference by one or two weeks to allow the people to go back and work inwardly and choose their representatives, vis-à-vis the ethnic groups.

Msgr Cyprain Onwuli (Priest). As a Nigerian and as a Catholic Priest, I know that it will not be easy for the individual, to carry the day because the government already knows what they are aiming at and what they want to achieve. But it will be necessary for anyone representing the people to really make known the sufferings of Nigerians from different areas of life. Any one representing Rivers State that goes in there to sleep or is just after money that will be given is a fool. He is not representing the Rivers people. Because if we are truthful to ourselves, two third of owners of Rivers State are living below N100.00 a day. And they are the ones producing billions of naira Nigeria is spending. So if anybody representing Rivers State goes to that conference and does not make it known to the people what we are going, what we are suffering he or she is not for us.
One of the issues I will want the conference to address is the issue of resource control. I know those from other parts of this country will not be ready for resource control, but if they can give t hose who are producing the money they are spending 40% of the money, if they can make sure that 40% of what they are generated be expended for the people of the oil producing areas, let them take the remain 60% to other parts of the country. That will be good. But not to carry everything away and the little they will even bring there, they steal away too, both those on the state level and national level. So they have to spend the money budgeted for this state for the people. They have to empower the people. They have to also give us some positions that should be duly our’s in the federal government because we have many educated people who can occupy such position.
As regards the representation for the conference I think what they should have done was to take note of people from different areas of this state. We have the Ogbas, the Ogonis, the Ikwerre, the Etche and other ethnic groups. They should have taken that into consideration in selecting who represents the state. The major thing really is understanding. If you are selected from an area, before you go, there should be some consultations. You bring some people who will advice you, who will tell you of their problems and then you marry all together. In your presentation, you touch most of those important things and make the nation know what your people are suffering.
For the delegates, I want to advise them to be conscious of the unity of this country as they deliberate. The conference should aim at putting food on the tables of the people. There should be justice and equitable distribution of our resource. Let us co-habit and tolerate one another.

Opinion

Time and Season Can Tell

Published

3 days ago

February 16, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”In matters of the heart, seasons expose what emotions try to hide.”

There is a silent crisis unfolding in modern relationships—one that many people endure quietly but rarely articulate. It is the experience of emotional attachment without clarity. Unlike betrayal, which announces itself loudly, or conflict, which forces confrontation, this crisis creeps in softly. It begins with warmth, grows through shared vulnerability, and then dissolves into silence. In my observation, some of the deepest emotional wounds are not inflicted by harsh words or dramatic endings. They are caused by something far subtler: the gradual withdrawal of affection without explanation. Silence in relationships is often mistaken for neutrality, but it is not neutral. Silence communicates—only it does so in a language of confusion. When someone slowly retreats without offering clarity, they leave the other person suspended between hope and reality.

There is no clear goodbye, no decisive closure—only distance. The unanswered messages. The reduced enthusiasm. The subtle shift in tone. Emotional ambiguity can be more painful than open rejection because it denies finality while sustaining expectation. It leaves the heart in limbo. In today’s world of instant communication and digital closeness, emotional intensity is frequently mistaken for love. When someone gives us attention, listens attentively, checks in consistently, and offers companionship during vulnerable moments, it is natural to assume that something meaningful is forming. After all, connection feels like commitment. But attention is not always intention. Closeness is not always clarity. In emotionally complicated relationships, there is often an imbalance that goes unnoticed at first. One person invests deeply—emotionally, mentally, even spiritually—while the other remains cautiously detached.

The connection may feel mutual, but the level of commitment is not. And when investment is unequal, pain eventually follows. One of the most dangerous consequences of such relationships is how subtly we lose ourselves in them. It does not happen overnight. It begins with small shifts. We check our phones more often. We rearrange our schedules. We replay conversations in our minds. Gradually, our emotional world begins to orbit around one person. Friends grow distant. Personal goals lose urgency. Self-worth becomes tied—quietly but firmly—to someone else’s presence and validation. When that person withdraws, the collapse feels catastrophic. Yet the devastation is not solely because love has ended. It is because identity has been shaken. We are not grieving only the person; we are grieving the version of ourselves that depended on them.

Silence, I have come to believe, can function as a form of power. When one person controls communication through distance—responding selectively, appearing and disappearing unpredictably—they unintentionally gain emotional dominance. The other person is left waiting, interpreting, hoping. They analyze every word, every delay, every change in tone. This imbalance may not always be intentional. Sometimes it arises from emotional immaturity or fear of confrontation. Yet its impact is undeniable. It reveals an uncomfortable truth: emotional availability is not guaranteed simply because connection exists. Chemistry does not equal commitment. Attraction does not equal accountability. With time, I began to understand that not every relationship is meant to last. Some people enter our lives not as permanent partners, but as temporary teachers.

They are not there to complete us, but to confront us—with our vulnerabilities, insecurities, and unmet needs. At first, this realization felt discouraging. It seemed to reduce love to a series of lessons. But eventually, it felt liberating. Emotional loss stopped looking like failure and started looking like revelation. Each experience—especially the painful ones—exposed areas where I needed growth. Where I needed stronger boundaries. Where I needed deeper self-awareness. Boundaries, I have learned, are not barriers against love; they are protections for it. Love without boundaries is not love—it is emotional exposure. Connection without clarity is not intimacy—it is uncertainty. Affection without commitment is not partnership—it is illusion. Healthy love requires mutual understanding, transparency, and intentionality. It demands that both individuals stand on equal emotional ground. Where one speaks, the other listens.

Where one invests, the other reciprocates. Where one withdraws, the other communicates. Time, more than emotion, reveals truth. In the beginning, feelings are loud. They rush, they excite, they overwhelm. But time tests what emotions promise. It exposes inconsistency. It clarifies intention. It separates temporary attraction from sustainable partnership. Seasons, too, teach us something essential about relationships. No season lasts forever. Some bring growth. Others bring pruning. Some relationships stay long enough to build a foundation; others stay just long enough to teach resilience. Neither is wasted. When we accept that relationships operate in seasons, we release the need to force permanence. We stop chasing clarity from those unwilling to give it. We stop romanticizing inconsistency. We stop equating intensity with depth.

Instead, we begin to value emotional safety over emotional excitement. We learn that peace is more sustaining than passion without direction. We recognize that self-worth must never depend on someone else’s attention.In matters of the heart, time and season always tell.They reveal who is consistent and who is convenient. They expose what is genuine and what is temporary. They show whether a connection is rooted in intention—or merely in circumstance. And perhaps the greatest wisdom is this: not every silence deserves to be decoded. Some silences are answers. When we understand that, we stop fearing endings. We begin trusting timing. We stop clinging to uncertainty and start choosing clarity.Because in the end, the heart may feel quickly—but time always tells the truth.

By: Isiocha Kate

Opinion

Why Adaeze Deserves A Second Chance

Published

3 days ago

February 16, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”If performance is the standard, then continuity in Rivers’ health sector is not a favour — it is a necessity.”

When the executive council was dissolved and political permutations began to dominate conversations across Rivers State, one sector stood out in the public debate, Health. In a state where access to quality healthcare remains both a social necessity and political responsibility, performance has become the most persuasive argument. And in those conversations, the name of Adaeze Chidinma Oreh consistently resurfaces. Her tenure as Commissioner for Health was marked not by ceremonial appearances but by visible system reforms that ordinary residents could measure in improved service delivery. From the outset, she placed primary healthcare at the centre of the state’s health strategy, reinforcing the idea that sustainable reform begins at the grassroots. Primary Health Centres across several local government areas witnessed structural upgrades, improved staffing coordination, and better supply chain management for essential medicines.

Under her supervision, Rivers State deepened participation in the Basic Healthcare Provision Fund, ensuring that federal health allocations translated into tangible services at community level. Health insurance enrolment expanded significantly during her time in office, broadening access to affordable care for civil servants, informal sector workers, and vulnerable populations. Public opinion often cites this expansion as one of the most impactful interventions of her administration. HIV service delivery also experienced notable scaling. More facilities were equipped to provide testing and treatment services, reducing travel burdens for patients and strengthening continuity of care. Her administration strengthened disease surveillance mechanisms, an important safeguard in a post-pandemic era where preparedness is as critical as response.Beyond expansion of services, she demonstrated regulatory firmness. Illegal and unlicensed medical facilities were shut down, sending a strong message that patient safety would not be compromised.

This crackdown on quackery earned her both commendation and resistance, but public health advocates widely supported the stance as long overdue. Emergency medical response systems received renewed attention. Ambulance coordination and referral systems were reviewed and strengthened, improving response time in critical cases. Maternal and child health programmes gained renewed emphasis. Immunisation campaigns were intensified, and advocacy for respectful maternal care became more pronounced within state facilities. Health workers frequently described her leadership style as consultative. Stakeholder meetings were not mere formalities; they were platforms for problem-solving and accountability. She engaged development partners strategically, aligning donor support with state priorities rather than allowing fragmented programme implementation.International partnerships brought in technical assistance, equipment upgrades, and training opportunities for healthcare personnel.

Transparency also became a visible feature of her administration. When misinformation circulated — particularly around admissions into health training institutions — she addressed the public directly, clarifying facts and protecting citizens from fraud. Within professional circles, she was regarded as technically sound, able to interpret data and translate policy into operational strategy. Her public briefings were often data-driven, reflecting measurable indicators rather than abstract promises. The Primary Healthcare Leadership Challenge saw Rivers State earn recognition during her tenure, reinforcing claims of structured reform. Community outreach was not neglected. Rural communities reported increased supervision visits and closer monitoring of local health facilities. Civil society organisations in Rivers State frequently acknowledged improved responsiveness from the Ministry of Health during her administration.

She maintained visible engagement with frontline workers, visiting facilities and interacting directly with staff and patients. Her approach to governance balanced policy reform with human engagement — a combination many observers believe strengthened trust in the health system. Under her watch, health insurance awareness campaigns improved public understanding of pre-paid healthcare models. She supported integration of technology into health administration, enhancing data reporting and accountability systems. Persons living with HIV/AIDS, women in rural communities, and economically disadvantaged families became central to programme targeting. In public discourse, she was often described as performance-driven rather than politically flamboyant. Awards and recognitions followed, but more importantly, measurable system improvements formed the basis of those honours. Healthcare professionals credited her with restoring a sense of direction to policy implementation.

Her tenure reflected continuity in reform rather than abrupt, cosmetic changes. Critics of political reshuffles argue that the health sector, more than many others, benefits from sustained leadership to consolidate gains. Many residents believe that reform in healthcare requires consistency, institutional memory, and steady administrative hands. As conversations around reappointments intensify, health stakeholders continue to emphasise competence over political balancing. In markets, professional associations, and community meetings, her name surfaces in discussions about measurable impact. The argument is less about sentiment and more about outcomes — expanded insurance coverage, improved primary healthcare structures, firmer regulation, and strengthened partnerships. Rivers State’s health sector remains a work in progress, but public opinion suggests that her administration laid foundations that require continuity rather than disruption.

In a political climate where appointments are often influenced by calculations beyond performance, her tenure stands as a case study in technocratic leadership. If governance is ultimately about service delivery, then health remains one of its clearest tests. And if performance, regulatory courage, grassroots impact, insurance expansion, strengthened disease control systems, and improved public trust are the criteria, then let Adaeze Chidinma Oreh be the person.

By: King Onunwor

Opinion

Empowering Youth Through Agriculture

Published

1 week ago

February 9, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”While job seeking youths should continuously acquire skills and explore opportunities within their immediate environment as well as in the global space through the use of digital platforms, government, corporate/ multinational organizations or the organised private sector should generate skills and provide the enabling environment for skills acquisition, through adequate funding and resettlement packages that will provide sustainable economic life for beneficiaries”.

The Governor of Rivers State, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, recently urged youths in the Rivers State to take advantage of the vast opportunities available to become employers of labour and contribute meaningfully to the growth and development of the State. Governor Fubara noted that global trends increasingly favour entrepreneurship and innovation, and said that youths in Rivers State must not be left behind in harnessing these opportunities. The Governor, represented by the Secretary to the State Government, Dr Benibo Anabraba, made this known while declaring open the 2026 Job Fair organised by the Rivers State Government in partnership with the Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association (NECA) in Port Harcourt. The Governor acknowledged the responsibility of government to create jobs for its teeming youth population but noted that it is unrealistic to absorb all job seekers into the civil service.
“As a government, we recognise our duty to provide employment opportunities for our teeming youths. However, we also understand that not all youths can be accommodated within the civil service. This underscores the need to encourage entrepreneurship across diverse sectors and to partner with other stakeholders, including the youths themselves, so they can transition from being job seekers to employers of labour,” he said. It is necessary to State that Governor Fubara has not only stated the obvious but was committed to drive youth entrepreneurship towards their self-reliance and the economic development of the State It is not news that developed economies of the world are skilled driven economies. The private sector also remains the highest employer of labour in private sector driven or capitalist economy though it is also the responsibility of government to create job opportunities for the teeming unemployed youth population in Nigeria which has the highest youth unemployed population in the subSahara Africa.
The lack of job opportunities, caused partly by the Federal Government’s apathy to job creation, the lack of adequate supervision of job opportunities economic programmes, lack of employable skills by many youths in the country have conspired to heighten the attendant challenges of unemployment. The challenges which include, “Japa” syndrome (travelling abroad for greener pastures), that characterises the labour market and poses threat to the nation’s critical sector, especially the health and medical sector; astronomical increase in the crime rate and a loss of interest in education. While job seeking youths should continuously acquire skills and explore opportunities within their immediate environment as well as in the global space through the use of digital platforms, government, corporate/ multinational organizations or the organised private sector should generate skills and provide the enabling environment for skills acquisition, through adequate funding and resettlement packages that will provide sustainable economic life for beneficiaries.
While commending the Rivers State Government led by the People First Governor, Sir Siminilayi Fubara for initiating “various training and capacity-building programmes in areas such as ICT and artificial intelligence, oil and gas, maritime, and the blue economy, among others”, it is note-worthy that the labour market is dynamic and shaped by industry-specific demands, technological advancements, management practices and other emerging factors. So another sector the Federal, State and Local Governments should encourage youths to explore and harness the abounding potentials, in my considered view, is Agriculture. Agriculture remains a veritable solution to hunger, inflation, and food Insecurity that ravages the country. No doubt, the Nigeria’s arable landmass is grossly under-utilised and under-exploited.
In recent times, Nigerians have voiced their concerns about the persistent challenges of hunger, inflation, and the general increase in prices of goods and commodities. These issues not only affect the livelihoods of individuals and families but also pose significant threats to food security and economic stability in the country. The United Nations estimated that more than 25 million people in Nigeria could face food insecurity this year—a 47% increase from the 17 million people already at risk of going hungry, mainly due to ongoing insecurity, protracted conflicts, and rising food prices. An estimated two million children under five are likely to be pushed into acute malnutrition. (Reliefweb ,2023). In response, Nigeria declared a state of emergency on food insecurity, recognizing the urgent need to tackle food shortages, stabilize rising prices, and protect farmers facing violence from armed groups. However, without addressing the insecurity challenges, farmers will continue to struggle to feed their families and boost food production.
In addition, parts of northwest and northeast Nigeria have experienced changes in rainfall patterns making less water available for crop production. These climate change events have resulted in droughts and land degradations; presenting challenges for local communities and leading to significant impact on food security. In light of these daunting challenges, it is imperative to address the intricate interplay between insecurity and agricultural productivity. Nigeria can work toward ensuring food security, reducing poverty, and fostering sustainable economic growth in its vital agricultural sector. In this article, I suggest solutions that could enhance agricultural production and ensure that every state scales its agricultural production to a level where it can cater to 60% of the population.
This is feasible and achievable if government at all levels are intentional driving the development of the agricultural sector which was the major economic mainstay of the Country before the crude oil was struck in commercial quantity and consequently became the nation’s monolithic revenue source. Government should revive the moribund Graduate Farmers Scheme and the Rivers State School-to-Land agricultural programmes to operate concurrently with other skills acquisition and development programmes. There should be a consideration for investment in mechanized farming and arable land allocation. State and local governments should play a pivotal role in promoting mechanized farming and providing arable land for farming in communities. Additionally, allocating arable land enables small holder farmers to expand their operations and contribute to food security at the grassroots level.
Nigeria can unlock the potential of its agricultural sector to address the pressing needs of its population and achieve sustainable development. Policymakers and stakeholders must heed Akande’s recommendations and take decisive action to ensure a food-secure future for all Nigerians.

By: Igbiki Benibo