How Many States Do We Need?

Following a meeting of National Assembly members under the umbrella ‘Forum of the National Assembly for the Actualisation of State Creation’, Senator Ayogu Eze was quoted in the media saying, "…….. And all of us agree on one thing; that there can be no constitutional amendment in Nigeria without state creation”. The Senator was even confident that these states could be created before the next general in 2011, which means people can contest elections in the new states. What an ambitious statement to make!

The Speaker of the House of Representatives Hon. Dimeji Bankole, has also played his own part in the recent call for state creation. Firstly, we were told that the Hon Speaker broke down in tears as agitators for the creation of Ijebu state from the present Ogun State stormed the House to press home their demand. Secondly, the Speaker was reported to have told the delegation agitating for the Edu State that ”If it was up to me right now, this moment, this minute and this second, I would call for the creation of this state. This is the most enthusiastic, largest ever contingent that will come and ask for a state”.

Most Nigerians get very emotive when the issue of state creation is discussed, and I understand the reason for this. This is mostly common among minority ethnic groups who feel marginalized because they see state creation as a way of addressing the inequality and injustice in the system. Whilst this may be true, I do not think it will provide a lasting solution to the inherent problems in our federal structure. I consider the “pseudo-federalism” to be the major cause of the marginalization of ethnic minorities. But as the agitation for state creation continues to gather pace, there are important questions which remain unanswered.

First it was General Yakubu Gowon who on May 30, 1967 announced the creation of 12 states from the then four regions in a bid to frustrate Chief Odumegwu Ojukwu's efforts to reap the benefits of his declaration of the Republic of Biafra three days earlier (May 27, 1967). General Murtala Mohammed who succeeded Gowon in 1976 created additional seven states, bringing the number of states in Nigeria to 19. General Ibrahim Babangida (1985-1993) created additional 11 states in 1991 while General Sani Abacha added six more state, bringing the total number of states in Nigeria to its present 36. We will however note that no additional state was during the civilian regime between 1979 and 1983.

History has shown that the rationale for state creation by the military was to appease certain ethnic groups. Unfortunately, the same thinking exists today among our politicians. But in a country of 140 ethnic groups how many states will we need to appease everyone? The situation is bad enough with 36 states. How can the reason for dividing state into two be because the state has not been divided into two since 1976.

Also, on what basis is a state considered viable? Is the economic viability of the state based on projected revenue allocation from the Federal Government or ability to generate sufficient “internal revenue” through taxes etc.? According to figures contained in the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) annual report for 2008, the state with the highest internal generated revenue is Lagos with N139.2 billion, followed in distant second by Sokoto with N34.8billion in 2008. According to the report, the IGR by 36 states and FCTA was N441.1 billion representing 1.8 per cent of national gross domestic product (GDP).

Let’s take the situation for the proposal to create Edu State from the current Niger State as an example. The proposed Edu state is considered long overdue because of its population of 2.1 million and the landmass of 76,000 square kilometres. However, the CBN report noted Niger State as one of the states heavily reliant on federal allocation. Now tell me how can the creation of Edu state from a state that his heavily dependent on federal allocation be economically viable? We may in fact acsk ourselves, if Nigeria as a country itself is economically viable. Of what benefit is a state of 2.1 million people? We all know the so-called federal allocation is intrinsically linked to proceeds from “volatile” crude oil sales.

Creation of states just to appease ethnicity without regards to its long term economic viability should not be encouraged. It is time we start looking beyond tribal lines on issues that affects us as nation. Section 8 of the 1999 Constitution is very clear on matters of state creation. As easy as it may look, the process is very laborious and I will be really surprised if state creation can be achieved by any civilian administration. Even if federal lawmakers are successful in their quest for state creation, the decision will still need to be subject to a referendum. How anyone thinks this can be done before the 2011 elections beats me imagination.

There are fundamental problems with our Constitution that needs to be addressed as matter of urgency. The only way to address ethnic marginalisation is through establishment of sound democratic principles, and promotion of true federalism. Honourable members of the national assembly should focus on issues that will help build democratic institutions that will outlast political generations. These issues are more important than state creation at this present time.

The nation is in dire need of legislations to support a reformed electoral system. Nigeria needs a change in constitution that will entrench “true federalism”. We need legislation that will support and encourage good governance. We need a constitution that will support and encourage genuine separation of power. We need legislation that will promote accountability and transparency at all levels.

We are not interested in a constitution review that is wholly dependent on state creation! We are not interested in manipulation of our constitution to suit individual political aspirations!! We are not interested in a constitution review that will allow perpetuation of kleptomaniacs in power!!!

British Parliament - The Nigerian Perspective

The last few days has really been sad for democracy. Earlier in the week, I criticised Nigerian legislators for their ineptitude and lackadaisical attitude they have shown recently in carrying out their statutory responsibilities – all at the expense of the Nigerian taxpayer. On the other hand, the British Parliament is trying very hard to restore its moral integrity following series of allegations bordering on corruption and fraud. Some members of the British Parliament (cabinet Ministers inclusive) are now being subject to all sorts of public ridicule because of their expenses claims. The subject of controversy in Westminster relates to the ‘second home allowance’ worth up to £24,000 (for MPs representing seats outside London) and incidental expenses allowance worth up to £22,000, which is aimed at costs incurred in the course of an MP’s duty. Following revelations from Freedom of Information (FoI) campaigners, we now know that some MPs have being abusing their privilege as Parliamentary members when it comes their expenses claims. So far, none of the MP have been found guilty of any wrongdoing, however the allegations in the media borders seriously on fraud and corruption. It is therefore not surprising that people are now questioning MPs moral authority.

I find this issue worrying for two reasons. Firstly, the British democracy that prides itself on transparency and integrity is now subject of financial sleaze. This sort of allegations does not help a country that is arguably one of the biggest exporters of democratic values. A democratic institution that should be setting high moral standards for a nascent democracy such as ours is now enmeshed in series of allegations of fraud and corruption. One question I have asked myself is, how will the British Home Secretary - who has been accused of ‘flipping’ her home address in order to exploit the system - tell Mr Aondoakaa to deal with corrupt Nigerian politicians? Anyway as the Yorubas say, “Ko si bi ti ise o si”, meaning “the grass is never greener on the other side”

The second reason, which I find more worrying, is the attitude and response of some Nigerians to this issue. Instead of learning from these unfolding events, some are busy using it to rationalise the endemic corruption in the Nigerian society. Some are busy saying, “after all corruption is not limited to Nigeria”, or that “Nigeria is not the only the corrupt nation in the world”. I totally agree that corruption is not peculiar to the Nigeria democratic institution alone – hence the Yoruba adage. But we wouldn’t do ourselves any justice if we continue to pursue such lines of argument.

Based on my own personal experience regarding fight against corruption, I have more faith in the British democratic system than the Nigerian system. I’m confident that if any MP is suspected of engaging in any wrongdoing, he would be charged to court and probably sent to Prison. British Ministers and Parliamentary backbenchers have jailed in the past, so it is nothing new. You will all remember Jeffery Archer and Jonathan Aitken. However let’s ask ourselves, how many Senators or House Reps members have been charged to court and convicted in the history of Nigerian politics. What happened to the likes of Adolphos Wabara, Ghali Nabba, and Bunmi Etteh? These were people who had serious allegations of corruption hovering over their heads. Their tenure as leaders of the legislative assembly was ensnared in sleaze.
As far as British politics is concerned, I’m confident that the MPs are fully aware that they are not above the law. Their cases do not need to be referred to any ‘special’ anti-corruption agency. The Metropolitan Police is enough to deal with such MPs. Also, the Prime Minister or Justice Secretary does not need to set up an ‘Investigation Panel’ with an 8-week ultimatum to look into such matters. In the British society, these are matters for the Police to deal with. So what I am saying, we can always trust the British system that the law will take its course.

We also need to appreciate the transparency in the British democracy. Let’s remember that information on the MP expenses were obtained through Freedom of Information Act. The FOI Act was passed in November 2000 by the British Parliament and it gives people a right of access to information held by public bodies. The range of public bodies covered by FOI can be very wide. The legislation represents the foundational right-to-know legal process by which requesters may ask for government held information and receive it freely or at minimal cost.. One can therefore say that the Parliament is now a victim of a legislation, which it passed. I do agree and that is the way it should be. Legislators should be enacting laws that are based on national interest and not personal. In Nigeria, the FoI Bill has been going back and forth between the legislature and executive in the last 4 years or so. For me, this issue reinforces the urgent need for the passage of the FoI Bill in Nigeria.

Our democratic institution lacks any form of transparency. Thank God for technology and the internet news media, who have been successful in revealing some of the scandals in our democracy.

For now we can all sit back and make mockery of the British Parliament. At least we know what the British MPs are claiming in expenses/allowances, and efforts are now being made to correct the system. The question is, what about us?
Food for thought………………..

The Cost of Democracy

Is the taxpayer getting value for money from the current democratic structure? Are our elected politicians offering the taxpayers value for money? Should we outsource the nation legislative function to the private sector? Or should our elected politicians’ salaries/allowances be performance related? While some of these questions may sound trivial, these were some of the thoughts going through my mind over the last few days. It was reported in Thisday newspaper recently that about 17,500 public officers at all tiers of government draw N1.21 trillion allowances every year from the public coffers. This amount represents 93 percent of the N1.3 trillion that it costs the economy to retain their services every year. The balance of seven percent or N90 billion represents basic salaries payable to these public officers. To put this in context, it means N1.3 trillion is paid out to maintain 0.0125% of the nation’s population! Whilst the newspaper provided a further breakdown of how much is paid out in salaries and allowances to all tiers of government, this piece focuses on the legislature.

According to the newspaper, the 469 federal law makers (109 senators and 360 members of the House of Reps) cost the nation over N76 billion yearly salaries, allowances and quarterly payments. The breakdown shows that senators account for about 21 billion or 28 percent of the amount while House of Representatives take up the remaining 72 percent or N54 billion. We now know that each member of the 54 standing Senate committee receives a monthly imprest of between N648 million and N972 million per year, while, a member of the lower legislative chamber receives N35 million or N140 million as quarterly or yearly allowances.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I find these figures mind blowing. It even became harder for me to reconcile these figures when I read in the Tribune Newspaper that only one bill - the 2009 Appropriation Bill - had been passed by the lawmakers five months into 2009, and that they passed only four laws in the 2008 legislative session. And these were my reasons for the questions in my introduction. Based on these performances, I will be interested to know any legislator who can justify these salaries and allowances. I also don’t think these current salaries and allowances are sustainable in the long term.

As you all know, the legislature is a type of representative deliberative assembly with the power to create and change laws. The main job of the legislature is to make and amend laws. In presidential systemof government, the legislature is considered a power branch which is equal to and independent of the executive. Members of the legislature are also expected to hold the executive accountable on matters that affect their electorates.

However, the Nigerian legislature is at odds with the functions of a modern democracy. Instead of holding the executive branch accountable for its actions, our lawmakers collude with them to loot the treasury. The ineptitude of the National Assembly is also not surprising, considering that most of these legislators don’t even understand their responsibilities. Our legislative assembly brews one of the highest level of mediocrity. In order to feed their greedy and kleptomaniac tendencies, they jump up for joy when Appropriation Bills are debated because it gives them opportunity to ‘load’ the national budget.
The nation expects more these lawmakers. Paying federal legislators N76 billion per year in salaries and allowances without commensurate performance is not acceptable by any standard. As I said earlier, we may be better outsourcing the function of the legislators to the private sector. I don’t expect that any company executive will be paid N140 million in allowances without delivering on company target.

I agree that politicians must be well paid to prevent them from being corrupt. However, political office should be seen as service and not short cut to riches. Salaries and allowances of elected politicians can never be at par with the private sector. And if any politician thinks it should, he might as well pursue a profession in the banking or oil and gas industry.

I have had the opportunity to live in two western democracies in the last 10 years, and I have met elected Members of Parliament in these countries. The members of parliament make themselves very accessible to their constituents. They have an obligation to make representation to government on behalf of their constituents on issues that affects their welfare. They operate a well staffed constituency office, and it is mandatory that they attend to their constituents on certain days of the week. Now tell me, how many legislators in Nigeria have an office in their local constituency? It is a well known fact that most of legislators when elected move permanently to Abuja. Even though they are paid an allowance to maintain a constituency office they never do. They only return at the end of their term to seek votes for re-election. What is the function of legislator who cannot fight for his constituents? We read everyday in the media how local community are being exploited by state agencies. I read a story about some local residents who were asked by PHCN to pay for an electric transformer to be replaced! In a civilized society, these are issues elected legislators should be fighting.

The present crop of legislators seems to have lost their heads. Instead of charting a new course which will help strengthen our democratic structure, they embarked on silly and grandiose goose chase, probing all sectors of the economy. No wonder why they have only managed to pass four bills in the last 18 months at cost of almost N76 billion per year. If the N1.3 trillion spent yearly on public officers is invested in the nation’s infrastructure, I’m in no doubt that the nation will be better off.