AHEAD of the 7 October reconciliation meeting of the aggrieved
members of the G7 group, who formed the New Peoples Democratic Party
(NPDP) on 31 August, with President Goodluk Jonathan, the Presidency
appears to have come to a conclusion that its relationship with the
group has broken down irredeemably.
Indications emerged at the weekend that the Presidency has started
looking beyond a possible reconciliation with members of the G7
governors and the NPDP.
Sources close to the administration told Sunday Tribune at the
weekend that the posture of the G7 governors had been suspicious from
the start of the peace talks.
They further added that President Jonathan had been suspicious of the
position of the aggrieved NPDP members from the start that the
agitation was fuelled by the bid to stop him from seeking re-election.
“When the president listened to the aggrieved governors at the first
meeting he had with them, it became obvious to him that there were no
fundamental disagreements, but that the target of the agitators remained
his seat in 2015. He, therefore, made up his mind to listen to them as
much as possible and sieve any genuine request if at all,” a source
said.
The source further stated that while the aggrieved governors were
busy pushing out propaganda materials in the press and making frivolous
demands, their posture at meetings with the president remained
different.
Another source stated: “At meetings with the president, you don’t get
to hear all these issues of 2015, but once they leave meetings, you see
different papers postulating on their demands. What really are these
demands? The G7 governors are saying something, but their leader, Kawu
Baraje, is saying a different thing. The president cannot keep listening
to a cacophony of voices whose agenda is clearly designed to derail his
focus on good governance.”
A variety of sources spoken to around the administration, however,
confirmed that the issue is clear on the direction of the NPDP members.
“They want the president’s seat, but the president is not ready to
drop his ambition because of them. They want him to walk away, whereas
they served two terms in their states. There is no point of convergence
on this matter. When they are ready to leave, they will find their way,”
another source stated.
It was gathered that the objective remains how to frustrate
Jonathan’s reelection bid, something the sources said could not be
compromised.
“At the meeting with the president, the G7 tabled four demands and
those are the demands known to the president so far. These include
stoppage of the Economic and financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from
investigating governors, resolution of Adamawa and Rivers PDP crisis,
resolution of the crisis in the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) and
party structures. These are no issues that would warrant formation of a
faction, but the underlining issue, which they cannot say clearly, is
the 2015 agenda. Mr. President cannot wave off his right to a second
term on the basis of all the propaganda,” a source said.
It was gathered that the Presidency had decided to look beyond the agitators and had configured a PDP without some of them.
It was learnt that while the president is disposed to accommodating
two or three of the aggrieved governors, he believes that the others
have no genuine issue to agitate for.
A source asked: “What would you say is the grouse of Sokoto State
governor for instance? What is the real grouse of Jigawa State governor
or that of Niger? These are governors who are in control of the PDP in
their states and they kept talking about control of party structures.
You will notice there are ulterior motives and the president is not
losing sight of that.”
The source said that if the governors continued to prolong the
crisis, the only option open to the PDP would be to apply the stick and
create new party structures in the recalcitrant states.
“The analysis on ground remains that a majority of the aggrieved
governors did not deliver for President Jonathan in the 2011 election.
He lost the presidential primaries and the general election in their
states. So, what is the stake they are laying claim to?”
No comments:
Post a Comment