Thursday’s decision of the two chambers of the National Assembly to extend the implementation of the capital components of the 2023 main and supplementary budgets to December 31, 2024 is raising questions.
The extension followed the request by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to both chambers of the National Assembly.
It would be recalled that the National Assembly, in December 2023, extended the implementation period of capital component of the budget for that fiscal year from December 31, 2023, to March 31, 2024. It similarly extended the lifespan of the N2.17 trillion 2023 Supplementary Budget, which was passed in November, 2023, following a request by President Tinubu.
Both the Senate and the House of Representatives further extended the implementation period for the budgetary appropriations from March 31, 2024, to June 30, 2024, on the 19th and the 20th March, this year, respectively, following another similar request from the president.
The request for another extension of the implementation of the capital component of the budget is coming a few days to the June 30 implementation deadline earlier approved by the National Assembly.
Again, the president is about to submit another supplementary budget to the parliament by next week.
Daily Trust Saturday reports that with the extension of the three other appropriation acts, Nigeria will have four budgets running concurrently.
Dust at House of Reps over multiple budgets
Unlike the seeming smooth sail at the Senate, which considered the president’s request after an executive session, Tinubu’s proposal caused a heated debate at the House of Representatives, forcing Speaker Abbas Tajudeen to move the House into an executive session before the lawmakers approved the request.
Earlier, the president’s letter requesting the extension of the implementation of the capital components of the budget was read by Speaker Tajudeen, after which the executive bills were introduced.
However, when the Leader of the House, Prof. Julius Ihonvbere moved for the second reading of the bills, the House Minority Leader, Kingsley Chinda, raised concerns over the request for extension of the two budgets.
Chinda, while voicing opposition against the request, said it will be morally wrong for the country to be running three to four budgets concurrently.
“We are aware of the importance of the implementation of capital projects and we know what capital projects can do in the lives of our people.
“But the application for extension of the 2023 Appropriation Act is also coming with the request to extend the life of the 2023 supplementary budget. We are also expecting the 2024 supplementary budget.
“A situation where we may have four budgets running concurrently is a bit of a problem. I will suggest that the House leader (Ihonvbere) step this bill down. Meanwhile, the projects that were not completed in the 2023 budgets can be transferred to the 2024 supplementary budget,” he said.
Former leader of the House, Alhassan Ado Doguwa, in his contribution, also supported the position of the minority leader, saying, while it may be legally right, it will be morally wrong to have three budgets running at the same.
He said, “Whatever we are doing, we must be accountable to the people. Each and every member here is representing a community and when we are discussing matters of budget, we should call a spade a spade. I agree with the submission made by the minority leader.
“This has nothing to do with (being a member of) the (ruling) APC. It has never happened. When you have something coming unexpected like this, then we should expect that people will ask questions whether overtly or covertly.
“Even if it is legal, it is unexpected; we have two budgets and a supplementary budget. It is legal but that moral aspect, for us as a House, I will appeal we allow this to go for now but the message has to be sent that the government should do the needful”, Doguwa said emphatically.
Speaker Tajudeen, while intervening, appealed to members to support the extensions, saying most of the items on the supplementary budget were security related issues.
Despite his pleas, majority of the lawmakers appeared not comfortable with the request for extension of the budgets as they kept on shouting “No!”No!
Following that development, the Speaker asked that the House enter into an executive session for members to iron out issues before resuming consideration of the bills.
Arising from the executive session, the House dissolved into the Committee of Supply to debate the various clauses in the bills, all of which were carried.
Subsequently, the House reverted to plenary where the bills were read for the third time and passed.
Meanwhile, questions have continued to trail the running of multiple appropriation laws in the country.
It’s abnormal – BudgIT
Commenting on the development, a civil society organisation known as BudgIT, whose primary goal is promoting transparency in governance and fostering active citizens engagement with institutional reforms and equitable society, condemned the plan by the federal government to concurrently implement four national budgets in 2024, as an “anomaly with no precedence”.
The organisation’s Country Director, Gabriel Okeowo, said this on Friday in a statement, faulting the proposed elongation of the implementation period for the 2023 approved Budget and 2023 Supplementary Budget from the proposed termination date of December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024.
He recalled that the 2023 Approved Budget of N21.83 trillion, signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari in January 2023, was designed to run for 12 calendar months from January to December, as is the practice globally.
The BudgIT boss said that in addition, while the 2024 Appropriation Bill was being drafted, the 2023 Supplementary Budget of N2.17 trillion was passed by the National Assembly, and assented to by President Tinubu, barely two months before the end of the 2023 fiscal year.
“For a brief period, Nigeria returned to the January-December budget calendar in 2019, but retrogressed from the 2020 fiscal year. From 2020 to date, the federal government has routinely extended the implementation period for the capital budgets beyond 12 calendar months, a practice that negates the principle of annuality of public budgets.
“The National Assembly had initially extended the implementation of the 2023 Approved Budget and 2023 Supplementary Budget to June 30, 2024, and now to December 31, 2024. If allowed to be implemented, the practice would convert Nigeria’s annual budget into a biennial one, a practice neither provided for by the 1999 Constitution, nor the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2007”, Okeowo said.
He said more worrisome is that the federal government is currently drafting another 2024 supplementary budget, which it intends to implement alongside the 2023 Approved Budget, 2023 Supplementary Budget and 2024 Approved Budget, thereby resulting in the simultaneous implementation of four budgets, an “anomaly with no precedence.”
He said, “Standard practice should be that projects not catered to within a fiscal year are rolled over to the budget of a new fiscal year. The concurrent implementation of four budgets will lead to severe budget credibility issues, as revenues projected in 2024 alone would most likely be used in implementing four different budgets, negatively impacting service delivery in critical social sectors and the provision of essential public infrastructure”.
He said BudgIT had identified many frivolous items in the 2023 Approved Budget and 2023 Supplementary Budget that would compete with essential projects in the 2024 Budget for the meagre resources available to the federal government.
“We call on the federal government and the National Assembly to amend the complications of this convoluted budgeting system and return to a disciplined January to December Budget Calendar.
“We also urge the federal government to identify and implement only the projects and programmes that align with Nigeria’s overarching development goals, reduce inequality, and improve the lives of citizens, the bulk of whom are multidimensionally poor,” he said.
Speaking on the development, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, the Executive Director, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), said that this is the first time Nigeria is going through this kind of “disturbing zero discipline, directionless and lack of public priorities and national interest budgeting, which rather creates opportunities for duplication, waste and corruption.”
Rafsanjani said that the 2024 appropriation law and a number of supplementary budgets submitted to the National Assembly with unjustified borrowings for consumption and reckless spending on some public officials without tangible efforts to improve the nation’s economy and revenue for national development was “terrifying”, as Nigerians are suffering and poverty is on the increased.
“But at the same time, we are witnessing collapse of critical infrastructures and human capital development, poverty, unemployment and overwhelming insecurity in Nigeria with no capacity through budgetary system to address all these challenges.
“The current National Assembly members seem to be satisfied with only their constituencies’ projects, which are often personalised, with no “needs assessment” carried out or even consultation with the constituents they represent.
“As a result, they have decided to leave their fundamental job of checking that the federal government has a budget for national development. They don’t scrutinise the budget to ensure pro poor and national interest budgets for development. And if an individual member raises concerns, they will gang up against him/her like what happened to Senator (Abdul) Ningi. This is sad,” Rafsanjani said.
Also, the Executive Director, Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED), Comrade Ibrahim Zikirullahi, said that the organisation had consistently emphasised that the Tinubu/APC-led administration lacked a clear agenda for governing the nation.
He said that it was perplexing, how a government could manage multiple budgets simultaneously and still expect accountability.
“Such confusion and lack of direction epitomise the current administration. This raises questions about the effectiveness of the government’s policies and programmes. And without a clear agenda and direction, it is challenging to assess the impact and success of this government.
“Overall, CHRICED’s criticism of the Tinubu/APC-led administration underscores the need for a more coherent and transparent approach to governance in Nigeria. We will continue to advocate for greater accountability and transparency in government actions, in order to ensure that the needs and interests of the Nigerian people are prioritised and addressed,” Zikirullahi said.
Tinubu responding to IMF dictates – Falana
When contacted, Human Rights Lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), said the amendment of the 2023 Appropriation Act was to accommodate the unpredictability of the market occasioned by the ruining of the economy through floating of the naira and removal of subsidies from petroleum products as well as electricity as dictated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
“The Bola Tinubu administration is responding to the crisis of peripheral capitalism,” he said.
According to him: “The crisis has been compounded by oil theft and smuggling of mineral resources and the revenue expected is not forthcoming”.
Presidency speaks
Speaking on the development, President Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga said the budget cycle was extended to December to ensure that the capital projects contained in the appropriations were not abandoned.
“It is because it (the 2023 supplementary budget) is running simultaneously with the 2023 budget. There are some elements of that budget that were not implemented. That is why they are moving it forward to be implemented.
“They have already got the provisions meant for them. So, they are trying to make sure they implement them based on the provisions of that budget. It means the 2023 and 2024 budgets will run concurrently,” Onanuga said.
(Daily Trust)
