Nigeria@52: No funds for infrastructure, but politicians’ pockets deepen
A lot has changed in Nigeria in the past 52 years, one of which is the cost of governance, which has skyrocketed.
LEKE BAIYEWU writes that suggestions for
a return to the slim structure of the First Republic have not gone down
well with some operators of the system
Nigeria is a country with a population
of about 167 million, according to the National Population Council. The
significance of this is that it has many mouths to feed as well as huge
infrastructure to provide: schools, vast network of roads, hospitals,
pipe-borne water, funding of education among others.
Unfortunately, the country has huge
infrastructural deficit, which has negatively impacted on its economic
and social development. Keen observers of the country’s affairs have
attributed this sorry state of affairs to corruption and the large size
of government.
For instance, the Federal Government has
a 42-member cabinet, with each of the 36 states of the federation
producing at least a minister in accordance with the 1999 Constitution.
Besides, it has a bicameral legislature,
with the Senate having 109 members, and 360 lawmakers in the House of
Representatives. Each lawmaker is entitled to have at least five
legislative aides – all paid by the state.
The upshot is that the country spends
about 78 per cent of its annual budget on recurrent expenditure, thereby
leaving a little above 20 per cent for capital expenditure or
development.
Given the economic challenges facing the
country and the need to reorder priorities some have canvassed the
reduction of the size of government. Such cost saving measures, critics
say should include restructuring of the bloated civil service and
tinkering with the presidential system because of its expensive nature.
About three weeks ago, Senegalese
parliament approved the scrapping of the country’s Senate in response to
its economic challenges.
Apparently, Senegal is to save about 8 billion CFA francs ($15 million) for the country to manage the impact of deadly floods.
In a joint session with the lower House,
two-third of the lawmakers approved the suppression of the Senate “with
immediate effect.”
Earlier in the year, Nigerian lawmakers
had reportedly jacked up their quarterly allowances from N15m to N27m;
and from N42m to N45m for each member of the House of Representatives
and the Senate, respectively.
In summary, the 360 representatives will spend N38bn, while the 109 senators will spend N19.62bn annually.
Regrettably, these hefty sums were far
above the remunerations prescribed by the Revenue Mobilisation
Allocation and Fiscal Commission, the only body empowered by the
constitution to fix the salaries and allowances of public officials.
Conversely, while the lower House in
Senegal was trimming its expenditure, members of the House of
Representatives in Nigeria reportedly launched fresh moves to increase
their quarterly allowance by N7m. This means that the N27m they earn
quarterly as allowances would be jerked up to N34m. This is aside the
N5m medical expenses and insurance budget for each of them.
While President Goodluck Jonathan in
January announced reduction of government expenditure by cutting the
salaries of executive officials by 25 per cent, salaries and allowances
of legislative officials were exempted. Added to governance high cost
are frequent foreign trips by public office holders. The President
promised reduction of this to the barest minimum is yet to be seen.
Apparently, impressed by the Senegal’s
prescription, a former governor of Lagos State, Bola Tinubu, had at a
forum on September 18 called for the scrapping of the Senate.
He said Nigerians should take a step
towards reducing the cost of governance rather than complain about it.
He argued that the House of Representatives was preferable to represent
the people, since its members are closer to the grassroots.
He said, “We have kept complaining about
the cost of governance and the recurrent expenditure. But we have never
examined the structural problem of even the constitution that we are
operating.
“Why do we need two Houses of the
National Assembly? The House of Representatives, representing the
smaller constituencies, is enough in the same number of population. Why
not get rid of the Senate for a slim and better legislative activity?
Let us start examining that.”
Expectedly, senators spurned the idea,
stating that Tinubu was not realistic. Last week, Senator Thompson
Sekibo, laughed derisively at the suggestion and said, “Scrap the
senate? Except of course he is calling for the scrapping of the
legislature as a whole, in which case, he will be talking of another
form of government, not democracy.”
Similarly, the Senate leader, Senator
Victor Ndoma-Egba, said, “The Senate is a representation based on
equality. If you scrap the senate, then you have denied the minorities’
proper representation.
Further, in the bureaucracy, interest
groups are spiritedly working to kill the Steven Oronsanye’s report,
which recommended the scrapping and merger of some government agencies
and department.
It would be recalled that the Governor
of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Sanusi Lamido, had in 2010 expressed
worry about the burden national legislative arm placed on Nigeria’s
economy. He has expressed his fears that the country might not realise
its Vision 20:2020, due to its high recurrent expenditure.
He also said, “If you look at the
budget, the bulk of government spending is recurrent. That is a big
problem. Twenty five per cent of overhead of the Federal Government goes
to the National Assembly. We need power; we need infrastructure; so, we
need to start looking at the structure of expenditure and make it more
consistent with the development initiatives of the country.”
Critics of the Assembly’s expenditure
have queried if the performance of the government is worth the huge
amount spent in running it.
It would be recalled that the 6th Senate
passed a mere 91 out of the 514 bills introduced in four years. Of the
number, only 130 bills passed the second reading; 458 got the first
reading, while four bills were negative.
Comparing the current federal executive
council and the legislature with what the First Republic had, a former
governor of the old Anambra State, Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, described the
current system as too expensive.
“For the cabinet, there was a
recommendation in the 1994/95 conference for having three ministers from
each of the geopolitical zones; that made up 18. Today, we have over 40
members of the cabinet.
“In the First Republic, our legislators
were on part-time and not full time, and they did not make rules for
their allowances. Today, we have heard a lot of legal and illegal
allowances, which have made the legislature expensive.”
Ezeife, who was an adviser on political
matters to former President Olusegun Obasanjo, called for the conversion
of the geopolitical zones into federating units to reduce cost of
governance. He, however, added that where a unicameral legislature is to
be adopted, the lower chamber should be scrapped.
Ezeife said, “We are spending
extensively too much on recurrent, leaving behind little for capital. I
learnt that our recurrent expenditure is now about 80 per cent. The
situation of the country is like a farmer sleeping during the planting
season. Ours is expensive legislature and we must do something about it.
“Let us convert the geopolitical zones
into federating units and have a legislature that has equal number of
representatives from the regions. We should do away with the House of
Representatives and maintain the Senate.”
In his submission, Prof. Pat Utomi,
attributed the excessive cost of governance in the country to the
selfish interest of politicians, to whom the government had become a
source of livelihood.
He said, “The current cost of governance
is the highest I have ever known of in the nation’s history. Those in
power find it convenient to enlarge the government to create more jobs
for the boys. I do not think we should have ministers from every state
but so many people hang on the government to get something.
“The cost is double; the money going out
as recurrent expenditure and the adverse effect on the execution of
capital projects. You cannot but say politics is everything today. So,
many people are dependent on the government and politicians. Our country
is full of people who look for something to take from being in
government.”
Utomi added that the information usually
released by the government on its expenditure did not reflect the true
nature of its finances, while disclosing that there was a time the
recurrent expenditure was about 96 per cent under a former president,
even when the monies were borrowed.
“It all started in 1999, since then I
have always advocated a unicameral and part-time legislature. This, I
have tagged: ‘Citizen Legislature.’ The full-time we have now is not
representing the people; the representatives are disconnected from the
people.”
According to Utomi, a professor of
political economy at Pan African University, Lagos, an average man on
the street, who knows how the masses feel, will make better laws than
the elite, who live in Abuja and do not know the feelings of the masses.
