The President of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Joe Ajaero, has stated that the labour union would have disowned Peter Obi, the 2023 presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), if he had adopted the policies of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank had he been elected Nigeria’s President.
Ajaero made this statement during his appearance on Channels Television’s The Morning Brief breakfast programme, where he described the NLC’s stance on the removal of petrol and electricity subsidies as “fixated.”
He emphasized that the labour union would strongly oppose any LP President who implements the policies of Bretton Woods institutions that support the removal of subsidies on electricity tariff and petrol.
While acknowledging Peter Obi as the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Ajaero stressed that Obi does not own the NLC or the party itself. He called for a clear separation between the two entities and emphasized that any Labour Party candidate must align with the NLC’s projects and ideologies.
Ajaero asserted that anyone attempting to implement policies contrary to the NLC’s stance, such as those of the IMF and World Bank, would face opposition and disownment from the party.
He stated, “He (Obi) is the presidential candidate of Labour Party but does he own NLC or the Labour Party? Why can’t you separate them? Whosoever is the presidential candidate or official of the Labour Party must buy into our projects. If he says he was going to undertake those policies, let him be elected and try such policies.
“Whether a presidential candidate of a party that Labour forms would dictate for Labour? The answer is known to everybody. The policies of Labour, the ideologies of Labour are clear and we are going to pursue it. If anybody is coming with another ideology, he is going to have it tough with us because that is not what we stand for.
“It (our approach) would have been worse for anybody flying the flag of Labour Party to come and implement these policies, to come and adopt the policies of the IMF and the World Bank. It would have been worst for the person. In fact, we would disown the person, he would be on his own. We have to make this distinction clear.”
