Cost of Governance: Repositioning the necessities for narrative change
Cost of governance in Nigeria has become topical as a resounding submission since the storm of economic downturn began to record wobbling dimensions. The essential factor of huge investment in capital project has unequivocally been on the top front of calls. The ratio of capital to recurrent expenditures in the Country’s budget has been a red flag to all Nigerians who understand how economy runs to grow viably. The status of resources attracted by overhead cost at the level of 70 per cent of the budget is clearly a predicament that reflects nothing but a settlement for crawling growth. The call to cut down the cost of governance in the Federation has been on the canvassing front as a critical measure to adopt in raising the bar to balance the stretch of overhead with capital expenditure. There is no controversy about the fact that cost of governance in the Federation is encumbered with sapping infusions that are draining resources, which would have yielded more benefits, had they been channeled to capital projects in the Country.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) had recently lamented that President Muhammadu Buhari’s budget on local and foreign travels, meals and refreshments, sitting allowance, welfare package and office building was larger than the allocation to 14 teaching hospitals. SERAP had in a suit filed last Friday by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare and Ms Adelanke Aremo, sought to slash the budget and present a reviewed appropriation bill to the National Assembly, NASS.
According to SERAP, “The government would continue to borrow to fund the country’s budget until there is a substantial cut to the cost of governance. It is in the public interest to stop the government from spending so much money on these items. Persistent borrowing is neither sustainable nor fair to the Nigerian people.”
In the suit, SERAP is, among other demands, seeking “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Buhari to publish spending details on the State House Medical Centre since May 29, 2015.” Also, in the suit with number FHC/ABJ/CS/1361/2021, SERAP is seeking “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Buhari to cut the N26bn presidency budget on local and foreign travels, meals and refreshments, and to send a supplementary appropriation bill to the National Assembly to reflect the reduction. An order of mandamus to direct and compel President Buhari to publish spending details on the State House Medical Center since May 29, 2015, to date; and to redirect some of the money on travels and meals to improve public healthcare facilities across the country.”
According to SERAP, “The huge spending by the presidency is neither necessary nor in the public interest, especially in the face of the country’s dire economic position, the scant allocations to education and health, and the growing level of borrowing by the Federal Government to fund the 2022 budget. The Buhari administration has constitutional and fiduciary duties to ensure a responsible budget spending and the well-being and prosperity of Nigerians. Some of the proposed spendings could be better allocated to improve access of poor Nigerians to basic public goods and services. Government will continue to benefit from the breach of the law, and the proposed spending of N26bn would leave the poorest and most vulnerable people without access to essential public goods and services, and burden the next generation.”
SERAP’s argument had read partly: “Cutting waste and apparently, unnecessary spending would go a long way in addressing the budget deficit and debt problems. Stopping President Buhari from spending the proposed N26bn on travels and meals would ensure that the government is spending the country’s maximum available resources to respect, protect, and promote the rights to basic needs of the poor and marginalized groups. The proposed spending is unsustainable and would take away critical funding to provide access to quality healthcare and education.
“Public officers are mere custodians of public records. Nigerians are entitled to know how the commonwealth is being utilized, managed and administered in a democratic setting. According to reports, the proposed N26bn on travels, meals, refreshments and the presidential wing of the State House Clinic is more than the proposed allocations for ongoing and new projects in 14 teaching hospitals combined. N19.17 billion is allocated to the following teaching hospitals: UNILAG Teaching Hospital—N1.69bn; ABU Teaching Hospital—N2.38bn; University College Hospital, Ibadan—N1.49bn; and UNN Teaching Hospital—N1.38bn. UNIBEN Teaching Hospital—N1.35bn; OAU Teaching Hospital—N1.35bn; UNILORIN Teaching Hospital—N982m; UNIJOS Teaching Hospital—N908m; University of Port Harcourt—N1.14bn; UNIMAID Teaching Hospital—N986m; Dan Fodio University Teaching Hospital—N987m; Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital—N2.49bn; UNIABUJA Teaching Hospital—N1.90bn; and ATBU Teaching Hospital—N947m.”
As forces of strains continue to present entanglements of disabilities against the economy, It has become necessary that the Government in Nigeria become strategic in the approach of piloting the Country. It is essential that political stakeholders begin to streamline their policies and the corresponding implementation, with the realities of political and socio-economic demands in line with the ideological yearnings of the Nigerian people. If in Nigeria, average citizens expect the government to provide them with jobs, it is more important that the government consider reorganising critical structures, such that, in as much as the Government creates amiable environment for private enterprises to thrive, it also at the same time, develops effective system that runs government-owned business ventures; large and virile with standards of efficiency and effectiveness. The existence of such profit-oriented establishments will create jobs for millions of Nigerians who rely on the Government for provision of jobs. The profit accruing from these establishments will go into paying those employed under these ventures, while the Government will be relieved of the burden of using larger chunk of its thin resources to cater for overhead cost. In this case, thousands of Nigerians redundantly attached with government Ministries, Agencies and Departments, can be redeployed productively based on specialisation within these new ventures.
The Government should develop the political will to institute a possible means for pragmatic consideration of the necessary move to place benchmarks on the spendings of officials occupying public offices. This campaign, supported by Nigerians, should give consideration to downsizing the chunk of aides and the unnecessary provisions for juicy and bogus allowances which have been a strong propellant for politics of horror and aggression, on the basis of which many would do beyond the usual just to mount public offices. While there has been reservations on the hostility of the political gladiators in the Country to the idea of cost-cutting by adopting a system that is sustainable, it remains important because the ravages of the prevailing circumstances have posed conditions which make such demands non-negotiable for a change in narrative.
