Government Budgets in Nigeria: Who benefits?

The Nigeria government is under a constitutional obligation to make a budget every fiscal year. The budget simply put is a statement of income and expenditure and an indication of the government’s expenditure priorities for the year. The budget is the most important economic policy instrument for governments. It reflects a government’s social and economic policy priorities more than any other document. It translates policies, campaign promises, political commitments and goals into decisions on where funds should be spent and how funds should be collected. A well-functioning budget system is vital to the formulation of sustainable fiscal policy and facilitates economic growth. In Nigeria, our economic problems are exacerbated by the weak budget systems in all tiers of government and faulty budget choices.

While a government’s budget directly or indirectly affect the life of all its citizens, frequently poor people are affected the most. They are harmed the most by weak economic growth and high inflation. The current well-being of the poor and their future prospects also can hinge on expenditure decisions in areas such as health and education. Even when funds have been allocated to poverty reduction programmes, weak expenditure and programme management, and the lack of political power among the poor, can mean that the money never reaches the intended beneficiaries. This has been our lot in Nigeria.

The budget system and process in any country are central in determining the extent to which it has an open, democratic and participatory system of government. In Nigeria, the general absence of information on budget issues, particularly in accessible, non-technical forms, has seriously hindered the efforts of national and local organizations and other stakeholders to participate in the discussion on the distribution of public resources.

A rights based approach to budgeting involves making budget provisions with a view to realizing the constitutional human rights commitments and for the fulfillment of the commitments made by Nigeria under various international human rights treaties. The Nigerian government has not adopted this approach yet.

Every year, Nigerians hear of trillions of naira budgets by all tiers of government. But at the end of the year, our people are always at a loss as to where the monies were invested. Budgets that were described by government in laudable terms usually end up resulting in decreased standard of living for the average Nigerian. Accusations of disregard for the budgets, late passage of the budgets, selective implementation of budgets, and late release of the capital votes have been the norm among the actors in the legislative and executive arms of government and other stakeholders. The fact that government budgets in Nigeria have consistently failed over the years, seem not to be in contention. One assumes that the fundamental question we need to ask ourselves is; why have government budgets in Nigeria continued to fail?  Our ability to find sincere answer to this question is a major step in any genuine effort to improve the standard of living of our people. One is of the opinion that the main reason for the (s)election of political office holders in Nigeria, is to enact and implement four budgets, one for each of the four years they will be in office. The appropriation act is an act that must be enacted every year. With the exception of the appropriation bill, all other bills under the consideration of the legislative houses are essentially incidental and can be delayed for as long as the legislators wishes. They may even decide not to pass such bills into law within their legislative term, as had happened to the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill at the National Assembly (NASS) within 1999 to 2003, and what is likely to happen to the same bill in the same NASS within 2007 to 2011, if current indication is anything to go by. This is just to emphasize how important the budget is, as provided for in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in reality. Unfortunately not many of us ordinary Nigerians understand and appreciate the close relationship between the government budgets and our standard of living. The truth is that each budget that fails reduces further our standard of living. The earlier we realize this, the better for all of us. We must also understand that there is something we, the ordinary Nigerians, can and must all do in our little corners and spheres of influence to improve the budget outcome. We can intervene as individuals or groups, like town unions, trade associations, sociocultural associations, political parties, community-based organizations (CBOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) etc.

For us to meaningfully engage with the budget process, we need a basic understanding of the budget cycle, which consist of the major stages or events that are part of making decisions about the budget, including implementation and assessment of those decisions. 

The budget cycle usually has four stages which include; Budget formulation, when the budget plan is put together by the executive arm of government; Enactment, when the budget plan is debated, altered, and approved by the legislative arm; Execution, when the policies of the budget are implemented by the government; Auditing and assessment, when the actual expenditures of the budget are accounted for and assessed for effectiveness. Each of the stages creates different opportunities for the participation of the people. During the formulation of the budget, groups can release analyses on issues known to be under consideration, or that they believe ought to be priorities, with the hope of influencing the budget being formulated. There might also be opportunity for the groups to establish informal lines of communication with the officials of the executive arm of government. The budget enactment stage typically is when public attention on the budget is supposed to be the greatest and information about the budget should be made most broadly available. It is during this stage that groups have the best opportunity for input. Since public discussion of and interest in the budget are typically at their high point when the executive presents its budget to the legislature, this creates opportunities for groups to get media coverage for their budget analyses. These analyses and testimony at budget public hearings can influence the debate in the legislature and highlight important issues about the impact of the budget proposal on the group or the poor as the case may be. At the budget execution stage, groups can insist on an effective and transparent monitoring system that promotes adherence to the budget and reduces mismanagement or corruption. Also groups may engage in some monitoring activities. For instance, they can focus on whether the amounts set aside for specific projects, such as a road, hospital, school, or market, have been used for the intended purpose. They can also assess the quality of the job done and the spending to see if the policy goal associated with the budget allocation are being met, and if public funds are being used effectively. The auditing and assessment stage present a great opportunity for groups to obtain information on the effectiveness of particular budget initiatives. It is as well an opportunity to advance accountability by assessing whether the legislature and executive arms respond appropriately to the findings of audit reports. When available in a timely manner, audit reports often document a litany of misappropriation, mis-expenditure, mal-expenditure, and procurement irregularities. Groups should do well to spread such information widely and use it to advance budget reforms.

Overcoming the problems of our malfunctioning budget process and poor budget management systems in Nigeria requires that we identify and repair the weak link in the budget process. These elements of a sound budget system must be kept in mind; there should be a legal framework to define institutional roles and responsibilities, including checks and balances; we must insist on a comprehensive budget that captures the totality of government’s financial operations; there should be accurate and timely information and projections; and a process that is both transparent and allows for meaningful participation by the legislature and the people. Adoption and sincere implementation of these cross-cutting elements is the best way forward for Nigeria. God help Nigeria.

Jude Ohanele

+2348035927419

johanele@yahoo.com     

Citizens-Legislators Engagement: Where is Nigeria?

AGENT OF DEMOCRACY

Citizens-Legislators Engagement: Where is Nigeria?

The active participation of the citizenry in the act of governance is most defining and very essential for the survival, entrenchment and growth of democracy. A government without the active involvement of the citizenry cannot be said to be democratic. A look at the definition of democracy as the government of the people by the people and for the people shows that the people are at the body and soul of any democratic government. It therefore follows that any government that operates essentially to the exclusion of the people can be anything but a democratic government.

Since the advent of quasi-civilian rule in Nigeria in May 1999, there has been an evolution of a political system that has aptly been described by one catholic priest as “government of the people by the parties for the politicians.” One cannot agree more with this clergy man. His assertion is in consonance with the ongoing exclusion of the people from governance and decision making processes at all levels of government in Nigeria. All decisions are made by a few individuals who claim to be representing the people and their interest, without the courtesy of any form of consultation with the people they claim to represent. This near total exclusion of the people in decision making, including the election of their political leaders and representatives, has remained the greatest impediment to the democratization of Nigeria since 1999.

The legislature is the arm of government at the federal, state and local levels that has power to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the nation. Section 4; sub-section 1 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states “The legislative power of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be vested in a National Assembly for the Federation which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” Section 4; sub-section 6 states “The legislative powers of a State of the Federation shall be vested in the House of Assembly of the State.” 

More than 9 years after the return of Nigeria to this civilian arrangement, there is still a predominant opinion across the nation that most of the legislative houses at the various tiers of government are yet to come to terms with the demands of their arm of government and the expectations of the populace.

Experiences from around the world shows that peace, order and good governance cannot be attained in any society where the citizens are not deeply involved in the process of making and enforcing the laws and regulations that directly or remotely affect them.

The current situation in Nigeria  is that there is little or no participation of the citizens in the activities of the legislature. It is therefore not surprising that after these 9 years of further experimentation with civil rule, our people’s standard of living is now worse than it was before May 29^th 1999. We have performed badly and/or below expectation on all indices of socioeconomic development. It is most shameful that this woeful performance is our lot despite the enormous income that accrued to the nation’s treasury from the sales of crude oil in the period under review. This period can at best be described as a dark period of missed opportunities in our effort to develop as a nation.

It is to be noted with regret that this period of missed opportunities is the remote cause of the various crises and threats of crises in present day Nigeria. The Houses of Assembly in the states of the federation were mostly inefficient and ineffective in the performance of their legislative function of making laws for the peace, order and good governance of the States. The abysmally low standard of living of those of us in the South East and the near absence of social and economic infrastructure in the zone, despite the sustained jumbo allocation of funds from the federation account to the 5 states in the past 9 years clearly demonstrate this. The legislators representing the people of the South East at the National Assembly also have little or nothing to show for their period in the National Assembly as is evidenced in the aforementioned low indices of development. This sorry state of affairs is essentially the result of the lack of connection between the citizens and the legislators who claim to be representing them.

It is therefore imperative that a regime of healthy and effective citizens-legislators engagement must be facilitated and encouraged by all stakeholders in the South East to prevent the missing of more opportunities and to kick-start the redevelopment of the zone. For optimum and maximum impact, the relationship between a legislator and her/his constituents should commence before elections. All aspirants vying for legislative positions should help to facilitate and attend town hall meetings and other consultative gatherings where the aspirants and the people will be able to exchange ideas on issues as prioritized by the people. 

This will give the aspirants the opportunity to intimate the people on the methods and ways they intend to address the issues, if and when they are elected into the legislative positions.

Upon election and assumption of the legislative position, the legislator should approach all legislative functions and duties in full consultation and collaboration with the people for efficient and effective representation. There must be periodic and regular constituency meetings at which the legislator will brief the constituents on the activities and programme of the legislative house, her/his activities in the house and request for the involvement of the constituents as the case may be. At these meetings the constituents will have the opportunity to ask questions and make contributions on the issues as it affect them, all in a bid to engender proper representation. This is a very serious and strategic meeting and not an occasion for dancing, sharing and eating of rice, as part of our emerging culture of celebration of failure or at best nothing, as is the case at the moment with the effort of a few legislators to organize a caricature of a constituency meeting in different parts of the zone. In addition to the regular meetings, emergency meetings should be called when the need arises to make sure that the people are not left behind even when emergency decisions are to be taken in the legislative house. The legislator should inform her/his constituents of dates, time, venue and themes of public hearing sessions in the legislative house for their maximum participation. It is also essential that the legislator should establish a functional Constituency Office in the constituency to facilitate on-going communication and consultation between the legislator and constituents within the interval between the meetings. The legislator should encourage free flow of information in both direction between her/him and the constituents. In practical terms, the functional phone number(s) and email address of the legislator should be in the public domain. 

It is interesting to note this; it was reported that on the average, American Senators spend 80 days each year in their home states, while Congressmen spend 120 days in their home districts. They interact and attend to the need of those they represent. President Barack Obama of the United States of America was until recently an American Senator. While x-raying his political profile prior to his election as president, Eli Saslow, Washington Post staff writer, stated that Obama “traveled to Illinois 39 times in the first nine months of his term to host town hall meetings with constituents …..” That comes to an average of four meetings every month.

It seems to me that this appears to be a clear demonstration of a deep commitment to the people he was representing then. One hopes we can appreciate and learn the lessons inherent in this.

This pro-people, citizens-legislators engagement is a core prerequisite for the passage of good bills and motions in the various legislative houses and their effective subsequent enforcement and implementation when signed into laws or adopted respectively. The people would have bought into the laws and motions and see them as their laws and motions, and hence contribute to the desired ease of enforcement and implementation respectively. We must all realize that the core essence of legislation is to improve the standard of living of the citizenry. God help the South East.

Jude Ohanele

+2348035927419

johanele@yahoo.com 

Citizens-Legislators Engagement: Where is Nigeria?

AGENT OF DEMOCRACY

Citizens-Legislators Engagement: Where is Nigeria?

The active participation of the citizenry in the act of governance is most defining and very essential for the survival, entrenchment and growth of democracy. A government without the active involvement of the citizenry cannot be said to be democratic. A look at the definition of democracy as the government of the people by the people and for the people shows that the people are at the body and soul of any democratic government. It therefore follows that any government that operates essentially to the exclusion of the people can be anything but a democratic government.

Since the advent of quasi-civilian rule in Nigeria in May 1999, there has been an evolution of a political system that has aptly been described by one catholic priest as “government of the people by the parties for the politicians.” One cannot agree more with this clergy man. His assertion is in consonance with the ongoing exclusion of the people from governance and decision making processes at all levels of government in Nigeria. All decisions are made by a few individuals who claim to be representing the people and their interest, without the courtesy of any form of consultation with the people they claim to represent. This near total exclusion of the people in decision making, including the election of their political leaders and representatives, has remained the greatest impediment to the democratization of Nigeria since 1999.

The legislature is the arm of government at the federal, state and local levels that has power to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the nation. Section 4; sub-section 1 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states “The legislative power of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be vested in a National Assembly for the Federation which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” Section 4; sub-section 6 states “The legislative powers of a State of the Federation shall be vested in the House of Assembly of the State.” 

More than 9 years after the return of Nigeria to this civilian arrangement, there is still a predominant opinion across the nation that most of the legislative houses at the various tiers of government are yet to come to terms with the demands of their arm of government and the expectations of the populace.

Experiences from around the world shows that peace, order and good governance cannot be attained in any society where the citizens are not deeply involved in the process of making and enforcing the laws and regulations that directly or remotely affect them.

The current situation in Nigeria  is that there is little or no participation of the citizens in the activities of the legislature. It is therefore not surprising that after these 9 years of further experimentation with civil rule, our people’s standard of living is now worse than it was before May 29^th 1999. We have performed badly and/or below expectation on all indices of socioeconomic development. It is most shameful that this woeful performance is our lot despite the enormous income that accrued to the nation’s treasury from the sales of crude oil in the period under review. This period can at best be described as a dark period of missed opportunities in our effort to develop as a nation.

It is to be noted with regret that this period of missed opportunities is the remote cause of the various crises and threats of crises in present day Nigeria. The Houses of Assembly in the states of the federation were mostly inefficient and ineffective in the performance of their legislative function of making laws for the peace, order and good governance of the States. The abysmally low standard of living of those of us in the South East and the near absence of social and economic infrastructure in the zone, despite the sustained jumbo allocation of funds from the federation account to the 5 states in the past 9 years clearly demonstrate this. The legislators representing the people of the South East at the National Assembly also have little or nothing to show for their period in the National Assembly as is evidenced in the aforementioned low indices of development. This sorry state of affairs is essentially the result of the lack of connection between the citizens and the legislators who claim to be representing them.

It is therefore imperative that a regime of healthy and effective citizens-legislators engagement must be facilitated and encouraged by all stakeholders in the South East to prevent the missing of more opportunities and to kick-start the redevelopment of the zone. For optimum and maximum impact, the relationship between a legislator and her/his constituents should commence before elections. All aspirants vying for legislative positions should help to facilitate and attend town hall meetings and other consultative gatherings where the aspirants and the people will be able to exchange ideas on issues as prioritized by the people. 

This will give the aspirants the opportunity to intimate the people on the methods and ways they intend to address the issues, if and when they are elected into the legislative positions.

Upon election and assumption of the legislative position, the legislator should approach all legislative functions and duties in full consultation and collaboration with the people for efficient and effective representation. There must be periodic and regular constituency meetings at which the legislator will brief the constituents on the activities and programme of the legislative house, her/his activities in the house and request for the involvement of the constituents as the case may be. At these meetings the constituents will have the opportunity to ask questions and make contributions on the issues as it affect them, all in a bid to engender proper representation. This is a very serious and strategic meeting and not an occasion for dancing, sharing and eating of rice, as part of our emerging culture of celebration of failure or at best nothing, as is the case at the moment with the effort of a few legislators to organize a caricature of a constituency meeting in different parts of the zone. In addition to the regular meetings, emergency meetings should be called when the need arises to make sure that the people are not left behind even when emergency decisions are to be taken in the legislative house. The legislator should inform her/his constituents of dates, time, venue and themes of public hearing sessions in the legislative house for their maximum participation. It is also essential that the legislator should establish a functional Constituency Office in the constituency to facilitate on-going communication and consultation between the legislator and constituents within the interval between the meetings. The legislator should encourage free flow of information in both direction between her/him and the constituents. In practical terms, the functional phone number(s) and email address of the legislator should be in the public domain. 

It is interesting to note this; it was reported that on the average, American Senators spend 80 days each year in their home states, while Congressmen spend 120 days in their home districts. They interact and attend to the need of those they represent. President Barack Obama of the United States of America was until recently an American Senator. While x-raying his political profile prior to his election as president, Eli Saslow, Washington Post staff writer, stated that Obama “traveled to Illinois 39 times in the first nine months of his term to host town hall meetings with constituents …..” That comes to an average of four meetings every month.

It seems to me that this appears to be a clear demonstration of a deep commitment to the people he was representing then. One hopes we can appreciate and learn the lessons inherent in this.

This pro-people, citizens-legislators engagement is a core prerequisite for the passage of good bills and motions in the various legislative houses and their effective subsequent enforcement and implementation when signed into laws or adopted respectively. The people would have bought into the laws and motions and see them as their laws and motions, and hence contribute to the desired ease of enforcement and implementation respectively. We must all realize that the core essence of legislation is to improve the standard of living of the citizenry. God help the South East.

Jude Ohanele

+2348035927419

johanele@yahoo.com