Analysing the potential long-term effects of implementing Oronsaye report on Nigeria’s development trajectory

In a much-needed move to address economic deprivation and hunger in Nigeria, President Bola Tinubu has finally given the green light for the full implementation of the long-forgotten Oronsaye report.

This report, named after the former Head of Service of the Federation, Mr Stephen Oronsaye, was compiled by the Presidential Committee on the Rationalisation and Restructuring of Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions, and Agencies.

Despite being submitted to the government 12 years ago, it had been left to gather dust until now. Back in 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan recognised the urgency of the situation and established the presidential committee, with Oronsaye at its helm.

The comprehensive 800-page report, which was finally submitted in 2012, shed light on the staggering number of 541 Federal Government parastatals, commissions, and agencies, both statutory and non-statutory.

It recommended a significant reduction in the number of statutory agencies from 263 to 161, the scrapping of 38 agencies, the merger of 52, and the reclassification of 14 as departments within different ministries.

This decision to implement the Oronsaye report has brought a glimmer of hope to many Nigerians who have been grappling with economic hardships and food insecurity. By streamlining and rationalising the government’s bureaucratic machinery, the reduction in the number of agencies will undoubtedly lead to cost savings and increased efficiency.

This move is a crucial step towards addressing the rampant corruption and mismanagement that have plagued the country’s public sector for far too long.

However, it is important to acknowledge that the implementation of such reforms will not be without its challenges. Resistance from vested interests and bureaucratic hurdles may hinder the smooth execution of these changes.

Additionally, the government must ensure that the process is transparent and accountable, with a clear plan for the redistribution of resources and responsibilities.

Nonetheless, the decision to finally act on the Oronsaye report is a commendable one. It demonstrates a commitment to tackling the root causes of economic deprivation and hunger in Nigeria.

It is our hope that this long-overdue action will mark the beginning of a new era of efficiency and accountability in Nigeria’s public sector.

The implementation of the Oronsaye report should serve as a catalyst for further reforms, ensuring that the government’s resources are effectively utilized to uplift the lives of its citizens. Only through such bold and decisive actions can we hope to overcome the economic challenges that have plagued our nation for far too long.

In a previous investigation, it was discovered that the government had the potential to save a staggering N241billion if they had only implemented the recommendations.

This revelation came at a time when President Jonathan’s administration aimed to tackle the long-standing issues of inefficiency, duplication, and excessive bureaucracy within Nigeria’s federal civil service.

The report, which gained widespread recognition, presented a unique opportunity for the government to revamp its public service landscape. It was praised for its potential to enhance civil service efficiency, eliminate redundancy, and streamline governmental operations in Nigeria.

Unfortunately, despite expressing interest in implementing the report, the Muhammadu Buhari government failed to bring it to fruition.

However, the Tinubu government has recently announced plans to merge, subsume, scrap, and relocate various agencies, even providing insights into which ministries and agencies would be affected.

At first glance, the Tinubu government’s decision to revisit the report seems the bloated size of its ministries and the increasing number of appointments made by the president since taking office.

While the government aims to downsize agencies, it paradoxically continues to expand its pool of appointees.This situation calls for a creative approach to address the issue at hand. It is crucial for the government to not only focus on reducing agencies but also prioritise streamlining its ministries and curbing the excessive growth of appointments. Only then can we truly achieve a more efficient and effective public service system in Nigeria.

After more than nine months since his inauguration, the president continues to make appointments without considering the need to downsize certain agencies.

While we acknowledge that implementing the report is a step in the right direction, we can only hope that the government is sincere this time. The large cabinet, which goes against the recommendations of the report, does not inspire confidence in their seriousness.

This government must address the perception that positions given out are merely political favours for cronies and supporters. The evidence suggests that the government’s adoption of the Oronsaye report may just be a smokescreen.

In the past nine months, they have created more ministries and agencies than their predecessors, raising doubts about their commitment to streamlining government establishments.The government has been blaming inherited economic challenges for the state of the economy, yet they continue to create new ministries and agencies despite limited resources.

This contradictory behaviour is confusing to those who closely follow their actions. In times of economic downturn, it is expected that the government would downsize rather than create additional financial burdens.

They should also reconsider increasing the retirement ages of public servants.We hope that the government’s recent signal represents a genuine change of heart, leading to a significant reduction in the cost of governance. They should prioritise essential expenses and avoid unnecessary frivolities. It is crucial that they only incur costs that are important and justifiable.

We expect this government to have known that economic downturn ordinarily calls for downsizing and not the creation of additional financial burdens. In this wise, it needs to stop increasing the retirement ages of public servants.

We can only then hope that the current signal represents a genuine change of heart that would see the government drastically lowering the cost of governance by limiting funds for frivolities and ensuring that only important and justifiable costs are incurred.