Nigeria returned to democratic governance on May 29, 1999. Between then and now, eminent Nigerians, including leaders of thought, former presidents, former governors and top government officials have had occasions to think deeply and examine the cost of governance in Nigeria. They have examined the profligacy in governance and the long retinue of ministers, special advisers, special assistants, and the high cost of maintaining the long list of National Assembly members, states’ assemblies and local government councils. They have also looked at the security votes of the governors and that of the President and come to the conclusion that the cost of Nigeria’s presidential democracy is too high, very unsustainable, and must be reviewed to save the country from financial disaster, bankruptcy and eventual collapse.
The 1999 Constitution must be amended to reduce the size of the federal cabinet to not more than 18 ministers, to be appointed from the six geopolitical zones of the country
A few years ago, then Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria, now the Emir of Kano, HRH Muhammadu Sanusi (11), called for a reduction in the cost of governance in the country. He said, “At the moment, 70 per cent of the Federal Government’s revenue goes for payment of salaries and entitlement of civil servants, leaving 30 per cent for development of 167 million Nigerians. That means that for every naira government earns, 70 kobo is consumed by civil servants.”
Consequently, the government embarked on borrowing to maintain its vast bureaucracy. This requires huge billions of naira debt-servicing cost every year. Indeed, this is no way to run a country, or any economic enterprise for that matter. If anything, it is a prescription for financial disaster and national bankruptcy. The federal and state governments must jointly address the critical problem of overblown bureaucracy at the three tiers of government, and the vastly increased cost of running such a huge bureaucracy on which they are spending up to 80 per cent of their total resources, according to Prof. Anya O. Anya’s committee’s report.
The practical result of this huge cost of governance is that only an average of 20 per cent of the nation’s total financial resources is spent on capital projects. The capital projects are, thus, poorly funded. In most cases, they are abandoned, or uncompleted due to paucity of funds.
This is a prescription for the sustained underperformance of the economy. The situation calls for a comprehensive staff audit and job evaluation to determine the right size for the federal civil service without any adverse effect on efficiency in the service. Indeed, there is a broad consensus across the nation that the size and cost of the civil service is unsustainable and that it should be drastically reduced because it represents a major constraint on the nation’s economic growth and development.
It is a good thing that the executive arm and the legislature at the federal and state levels are actively thinking about economic and political restructuring of the country. So the time is ripe for repositioning the public service at the three tiers of government. In repositioning the public service for effective performance, we, therefore, recommend the following measures for immediate legislation and implementation:
The 1999 Constitution must be amended to reduce the size of the federal cabinet to not more than 18 ministers, to be appointed from the six geopolitical zones of the country. Also, the number of special advisers and special assistants serving in the government must be drastically reduced to a manageable level, while there should be a merger of Ministries, Departments and Agencies to reflect the reduction in the number of ministries to 18.
Also, in addition to the presence of a Fiscal Responsibility Act that seeks to enforce budgetary and fiscal discipline in public expenditure, appropriate legislation should be introduced to limit the size of the recurrent budget so that recurrent budget will never be more than 25 per cent.
The fat pay and allowances of federal and state legislators should be reviewed downwards by at least 60 per cent, while there should be a quarterly audit of all public expenditure by the Auditor General of the Federation. In tandem, the Accountant General of the Federation should be under a constitutional obligation to publish, quarterly, the expenditure of the Federal Government.
The Public Accounts Committees of the National Assembly should also be strengthened to enable it discharge its oversight functions on public expenditure more efficiently, and all the governments of the federation should be made to depend less on the sharing of the federally collectible revenue. Instead, they should rely more on their internally generated revenue. In other words, they should trim their staff strength to what they can pay.
As part of the cost cutting measures, the country should retain bicameral legislature but reduce the number of Representatives by half, and the senators to two
per state.
It is time to make the necessary amendments to the Constitution to save Nigeria from eventual financial disaster and possible national bankruptcy.
