Let me make some comments on economic reforms. I teach a business environment course that focuses on the economic, political, and social environment of business. These days, we also include legal/regulatory, technology, and global environments.
A critical and illuminating part of the course content is country studies and policy comparisons. Four country studies have made an everlasting impact on me over the years: the reforms of Deng Xiaoping in China in 1978; Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore in 1965; the Indian reforms under various leaders from the 1990s; and Margaret Thatcher’s reforms in Britain.
None of these reforms were easy. None lasted just one year. Many of them were accompanied by quite some pain, but in all cases, they were very successful. The success we see today in all these places was the outcome of these processes of reform being executed with discipline and endurance.
In China, millions had died in famines and the cultural revolution under Mao’s communism, and communism had failed in economic terms, so the Chinese populace had no alternative but to embrace Deng’s reforms, which he called a “socialist market economy.”
In Singapore, the country looked like a doomed nation—no natural resources, no visible economic potential, and no global strategic importance. Even the leaders of Singapore, including Lee Kuan Yew, assumed the country could not survive on its own economically and sought a federation with Malaysia! Malaysia rejected Singapore regarding it as a liability!!! Only then did Lee Kuan Yew, after weeping, accept the challenge of leading his people to development. And see how, after three decades of hard work, he has succeeded.
Read also: Shock therapy? Tinubu’s economic ‘reforms’ lack a human face
In India, the country had been derided as a country with “the Hindu rate of growth” by the West, not more than 2 percent or so under its socialist economic policies. Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao commenced reforms. Ghandi paid with his life.
The voters changed from party to party, but whichever party they turned to, India’s elite had arrived at a consensus in favour of the same reforms. MORE OR LESS THE SAME REFORMS WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO CARRY OUT! Indeed, in all four countries I’m discussing, the reforms were very similar to each other and to what we are trying to do!
Read also: Economic Insight: Learning from Argentina: Painful economic reforms shouldn’t burden only the poor
My last case study is Thatche’s reforms in the UK, such as privatising the inefficient and loss-making British Airways, British Telecoms, the rail system, and the mines and embracing a competitive market economy. Thatcher’s reforms are still the structural pillars of the British economy today. Those reforms were painful, and there were protests, but the people and their leader endured, and Britain has been better for it. Do you remember the mine workers’ strikes led by Arthur Scargill?
Reforms are not a cup of tea, and they don’t succeed in 1 or 2 years, especially in our case where we have allowed the rot to go so deep!!! There are mistakes that may have been made and enhancements that can and should be made, but if we endure and succeed, it will be for our good. Leadership is critical, but if we retreat from the difficult road, we will have suffered for nothing.
Agbaje posted this on his Facebook page, where most of the audience accepted his push for reform but were unpersuaded about the sincerity of the government by living in opulence while asking the people to tighten their belts.
