Inappropriate Call for no Tobacco Investment
The recent call by the group
National Coalition Against Tobacco, asking Governor Fashola to reject the
Tobacco Company’s investment in the State appears misguided and inappropriate.
Whilst many perfectly understand the need to regulate the tobacco sector, it is
also well known and accepted that tobacco is a legal industry and hence asking
them not to interact with government and its agencies is mischievous and does
not in any way affect the drive to reduce tobacco consumption.
Clearly after
several years of concerted efforts by different NGOs, globally, to stop tobacco
consumption, it appears that the strategy applied has had minimal effect and
needs to be changed. Many hard line activists continue to aggressively attack
the industry and hoodwink several governments to legislate the tobacco industry
out of existence, ensuring that governments lose tax incomes as criminals’
smuggling activities continue to fill the void that stringent regulation
creates.
It is worthy to note that a
major tactic of the anti-tobacco advocacy groups is what they call
“denormalisation”, which apparently means to make the various intentions and
activities of the tobacco companies appear abnormal. The aim here, they say is
to dissuade several government agencies or others from interacting with a legal
entity. This is clearly a tactic that is borrowed from many of their parent
bodies from whom they are franchised. Whether this is logical or ethical is a
debate for another day. Obviously, their modus operandis is something that
needs further probing into.
The
motives around NGO work and activism in these parts of the world is indeed
questionable, one begs to demand for more transparency and code of conduct to
guide their utterances and practices. Looking critically at the style of operations,
it appears to twist issues out of context to suit their intentions and go
against the very principles which they ask of the tobacco companies or even
other controversial industries such as the oil industries.
Interestingly,
quite a number of products have come under the scrutiny of the global health
sector in recent times and these include but are not limited to sugar and
beverages. Therefore, one wonders why there isn’t a holistic approach to these
issues, looking at the need to address the health sector as a whole as opposed
to singling out specific industries to imbibe.
These
companies, tobacco et al are the ones that are also trying to invent healthier
consumer appealing products for their customers. I have, therefore, tried in
vain to seek for a concerted effort by these NGOs to look for alternative
options for the tobacco smokers or even push for ways to
educate these consumers of the ills of smoking. Asides from the recent
campaign launched on-line to educate young ones, years of activism have seen
them attacking the big tobacco companies and misrepresenting their every
intention. We have seen changes in these companies e.g. no more bill board
adverts, no more big public events, no TV advertisements and working with local
government agencies(boroughs, councils or counties) to address other
regulatory issues which by the way are often times not mandatory. They,
therefore, must also be extremely stupid if they are really doing most of the
things they are accused of by these NGOs especially seeing that it affects
their reputation.
For
many, who are becoming tired of the “going back and forth” in the tobacco
control bill debate , this over-riding focus of their campaign on the cigarette
manufacturing companies is nothing short of pushing for sensationalism, with
little or no value add to the proposed cause of their campaign.
Is
there any benefit in having tobacco companies, sugar companies around? If they
are not around what will happen? are we, the NGOs attacking them looking at
this side of the story? Where were these NGOs when smuggling was rife in the
country? How many smugglers did they challenge or face in the cause of their
campaigns? How many Nigerians have they educated with the funding they have
received? What other activities do they engage in asides from attacking
these entities? How intensive is it compared to the various on-going campaigns
against cigarette making industries? i.e. how much funding have they put into
helping the smoker quit smoking or even educate the people on making the
right life style choices?
Issues
must be looked at from an holistic point of view , this is the same tactic
employed by the NGOs operating in the Niger Delta for many years, yet the
people are still impoverished. Was problem in the region solely that of the oil
majors operating in the area? what part did the sabotage to the oil pipelines
play in the environmental degradation of the different communities? What role
did the state government have to play in it? How else could the NGOs have
improved the lives of the people by deploying financial resources
into community development and re-orientation than by attacking the oil majors?
We must push for a new era of activism, whilst holding businesses and
definitely not only multi-nationals but many indigenous companies accountable
for their actions, activists for the sake of their prosperity must also address
all other issues which are not as sensational as been on the pages of
newspapers but which can bring about real added value to the lives of thousands
whom they say they are defending. There are thousands of other NGOs
quietly doing their work and making more impact and changing lives and this is
the way it should be.
The
“Delta beyond oil” initiative of Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan is a laudable and
extremely progressive initiative that is expected to drive sustainable
development outside of dependence on oil, this is one that should have come
years before now but thankfully it’s here now and we hope that the vision will
be driven conclusively in a way that will bring about additional value to the
communities of Delta State.
This
initiative is similar to the progressive looking approach of Lagos State.
Activism must be localised irrespective of the models and approach of their
franchised origins in developed countries, localising solutions is the best
approach to solving issues. The fear may be that this form of approach may not
necessarily attract funding but it is really what works at the end of the day
that matters and if it does then it will definitely attract funding.
Localisation
of solutions is the only way value can be generated. And this is the new trend
for many other organisations, asides from the Uduaghan initiative, Tony Elumelu
is also now trending on his model of AfriCapitalism another home grown solution
to indigenous issues. For the government agencies and the legislators that
these activist are addressing, this is the way to go, we must not be hoodwinked
into a venture that is been dictated by foreign organisations who haven’t
successfully implemented it in their own side of the world. We must remember
that our issues are even more complicated here. We don’t have the same type of
enforcement capability that they have or even the type of transparency that
will deter corruption from creeping in, so let’s define our strategies within
our context. Their so called hard funding can be diverted to doing more good
than fighting against companies that if taken out will make the situation
worse.
In
a twisted way, the ethics or principles which are meant to guide these
campaigns looks like they have also been thrown out of the window. In one vein
the NGOs accuse these tobacco companies of recruiting young people, in another
vein they are also using children in their tobacco campaigns, worse still they
accuse the tobacco companies of giving Journalists gifts and incentives, in the
same vein they are complicit in using monetary gains in attempting to seduce
Journalists to influence their writing. What a mess! Where is the red line? and
what is the code of conduct guiding them? With new entrants to the scene in the
likes of CTFK, it seems that the ethics may have completely gone out of
control.
On
a final note: what are secret parties? Are organizations capable of having
secret parties in a civilized environment such as ours? the use of rhetoric and
concepts which are not true of the realities on ground can be deemed to be
mischievous and not befitting of their status. This kind of tactic must change,
it brings no value to the cause and funding received and does not address the
issues which are at the heart of the advocacy.
Governor
Fashola is an intelligent and experienced governor who is aware of all the
issues, his statements were balanced and is accepted by many. This investment
is welcome, what is not welcome is the absence of appropriate regulations and
education of the populace to whom we owe it a duty to support and this is the
issue that must be faced.
Oluwatodun Amosun, Partner, African Center for
Ethics and Good Governance
0 comments: