The Tinubu Tax Reforms Bills debates currently going on across the divides is a beauty of democracy. It is a democracy that people engaged in the debate in a disciplined way, marshalling their arguments, responding to their opponents’ points and bringing passion and patience to a controversial subject.

Yes it's democracy at work that today, the tax bills has become the most debating issue in markets, schools, offices, joints, and across social media platforms. It taught us skills that have been invaluable in our national lives: about the importance of preparation, about setting out key points in a simple and logical way, and about anticipating the counter-arguments.

We also learned that debating was not about winning the vote, but about getting to the heart of the matter. Yes, the vote was about which side presented their facts in the most effective way. But the purpose of the debate was to expose all the vital issues about the tax bills to public scrutiny. Truth was more important than victory.

Promoting debate is not about trying to impose the new Tax Reforms Bills. Debate is the bedrock of democracy in any culture or political system. It is a fundamental part of freedom of expression which is itself recognised world-wide as a basic human right.

To realise the importance of debate we just have to look at the alternative. There are numerous examples in history of autocrats who demand blind acceptance of their rule, brook no criticism, stamp out dissent and lock up opponents. The result is a government that lacks accountability and a system that breeds corruption and resorts to violence.

The alternative is an open society which welcomes and encourages debate as a healthy way to discuss ideas. No democratic government should try to rule without listening to people. Most people expressed concerns about how the policy impact on them and their states.

It is smart politics to hear what they have to say on such issues, invite their ideas and manage their expectations. So the federal government should promote debate about the direction of change and modernisation of these policies.

Debate will inevitably generate opposing views. That is healthy. It creates a constructive tension out of which bold ideas can emerge. And by trying to build consensus and an inclusive process, government can maintain and bolster stability. 

This process will help people to appreciate the full range of factors that need to be taken into account on the issue: maybe the bill is ill-time, maybe it will exercebate the current economic hardship. And in some cases it might lead to those in authority to think again about the course they favour.

For at the heart of the matter is the dictum that it is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debate.