The Nigerian National Assembly today has developed a fairly bad reputation with the public due to criticisms of their perceived selfishness and focus on excessive benefits to themselves. There are concordant claims that in addition to padding budgets, they have been using their powers of oversight to blackmail ministers and heads of agencies for pecuniary gain. The circle must be broken. As the debate and division between the branches of government grow, let’s make the point that the budget is neither for the executive nor for the legislature. The budget is an instrument for the pursuit of the PUBLIC GOOD.
According to a report in yesterday’s Punch newspaper, the emergency Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting last Friday has discovered fresh padding of the fiscal document by the lawmakers. It is alleged that the lawmakers reduced amounts allocated to some major projects and inserted new projects that were not in the budget presented by the Executive. The report insists that: “There are instances, where they completely removed projects and padded the budget by inserting theirs.” The headline news carried by other papers as well is that lawmakers have completely removed the Lagos-Calabar rail project from the budget and replaced it with a combination of the pet projects of some legislators. The Lagos-Kano line has however been maintained according to the report. If this is true, it could be politically explosive. However, there is no evidence that the story is true.
The Constitution is clear that the National Assembly has complete powers to make appropriations without reference to the Executive. Budget estimates submitted by the Executive are basically proposals for the consideration of the Legislature, which has the powers to change them. The problem however is when legislatures remove projects from the budget and replace them with new ones; their acts could throw into chaos manifestoes and party programmes promised to citizens. Even more important is the fact that projects proposed by the Executive have been studied and form part of a broader set of policy propositions for the Executive, and throwing them out of the window could be quite disruptive.
President Buhari is today having meetings in China for the funding of infrastructure projects, including the two major rail lines. If the National Assembly has indeed thrown out one of the rail projects, that would disrupt not just the president’s programme but would also pose difficult political problems. The most serious issue would be that the projects that are inserted by legislators would be most likely individual pet ideas to please a legislator’s constituency rather than fit into a broader national plan. In such cases, the nation loses because the expected impact from the project would be lost and the replacement might not have significant value, except in boosting the egos of the legislators concerned. The Punch report claims, for example, that after playing around with the figures, the new amounts allocated by the National Assembly for the projects can neither complete the on-going projects nor cover the costs of the newly proposed ones. In addition, vital items such as the proposals made for the purchase of essential drugs for major health issues such as Polio and AIDs have been removed by the National Assembly. The real issue is that parliaments are supposed to use their powers of appropriation with responsibility and when they do not, a major governance challenge arises.
In general, Executives the world over prefer pliable legislatures that would rubber stamp policy programmes of the regime without question. Executives in democratic systems come to power with a popular mandate and therefore tend to feel constrained by having to argue with, appeal to, convince and cajole legislatures before they can get their programmes approved. There has therefore always been a tension between the two arms of government based on the assumption of executives that legislatures are obstructive of the pursuit of the popular mandate. Not surprising, legislatures have always had to struggle to carry out their mandate without executive interference. Legislatures however act on the basis that they have the real mandate of their constituents and therefore need no lessons on what the people need.
In Nigeria, however, parties are very weak and are unable to impose the party will on the executive and legislature. In this context, both sides seek to impose their will and their powers. Legislators in Nigeria have grown used to the idea of using their powers to enhance their constituency popularity through adding projects in the budget.
The problem posed therefore is not constitutional or legal, it is a political one. Normally, such issues are negotiated easily because the ruling party would produce both the executive and a majority of legislators, and compromise positions can be negotiated at the level of party programmes and structures. In Nigeria, however, parties are very weak and are unable to impose the party will on the executive and legislature. In this context, both sides seek to impose their will and their powers. Legislators in Nigeria have grown used to the idea of using their powers to enhance their constituency popularity through adding projects in the budget.
First, there is the introduction of constituency projects in which legislators propose specific projects for their constituents, which are implemented by the executives but the legislators get the credit for the projects, and they proudly display on signboards that the projects are their gifts to their constituencies. The second is the significant increase of constituency allowances, apparently to allow legislators respond to regular appeals from constituents for financial help for weddings, burials, ill-health and so on; in addition to other demands for jobs, contracts and every other conceivable request. This is an unfortunate development that we need to remove from our political culture. Third, almost all legislators have developed the more negative attitude of secretly agreeing to the insertion of projects into the federal budget with ministries, departments and agencies in the understanding that monies meant for the projects would subsequently be withdrawn and paid directly to them. It is this third practice that has led to the massive corruption and excessive padding of budgets. The time has come to put a stop to such practices and President Buhari must ensure that his government is not drawn into such destructive practices.
When however legislators put aside the public good and negotiate pecuniary benefits using their constitutional powers as a bargaining tool, they are abusing, rather than exercising, their powers of representation.
It is true that in theory legislatures have the powers of the representative function in democracies that makes them the institution that represents the sovereignty of the people. Indeed, the theory of representative democracy is constructed on the principle of the election of legislators by the people to represent them at the level of law making. It is this legitimacy derived from the electoral process that gives them the power to map and mould the views and concerns of citizens and constituents into public policy. When however legislators put aside the public good and negotiate pecuniary benefits using their constitutional powers as a bargaining tool, they are abusing, rather than exercising, their powers of representation. The Nigerian National Assembly today has developed a fairly bad reputation with the public due to criticisms of their perceived selfishness and focus on excessive benefits to themselves. There are concordant claims that in addition to padding budgets, they have been using their powers of oversight to blackmail ministers and heads of agencies for pecuniary gain. The circle must be broken. As the debate and division between the branches of government grow, let’s make the point that the budget is neither for the executive nor for the legislature. The budget is an instrument for the pursuit of the PUBLIC GOOD.
A professor of Political Science, development consultant and expert, Jibrin Ibrahim is a Senior Fellow of the Centre for Democracy and Development and Chair of the Editorial Board of Premium Times.
