The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federalism

  • How close is Nigeria to federalism? (2)

    How close is Nigeria to federalism? (2)

    Another naïve definition of federalism is the claim by the north that federalism is a system that ensures “being a brother’s keeper

    Today’s piece is a continuation of the thesis that the ongoing conference in Abuja is likely to help Nigerians from all parts get to see the hidden fears of most of the nationalities or regions that constitute the republic, much more than it is likely to lead to re-inventing or re-launching Nigeria. We focused on the first regional position paper made available to the public, the document titled: “Northern Nigeria the Back Bone and Strength of Nigeria.” We concluded the first part on the note that the position paper prepared at the instance of northern governors and northern socio-political organisations chose to exaggerate the value of the North to the entire country or to the rest of the country.

    Such hyperbolic self-presentation is not unexpected in a context which provides opportunities for many groups to defend and protect their interests, even when such interests are in opposition to each other. In a conference that is trying to review current ways of doing things with a hope to create new and better ways, it is normal for those who prefer the status quo to argue forcefully for such interest. It is also not unusual that each group in such context may choose to make what may amount to other interest groups as self-serving arguments. Such hyperbolic self-assessment is in harmony with the saying that war is a continuation of politics in another mode and that politics is also a continuation of war in another mode.

    What is likely to make negotiations that are capable of changing the course of Nigeria’s history from the politics of self-enervation or self-paralysis difficult to accomplish are position papers that do not want to come to terms with the dynamic character of all social formations and human constructions. In addition, one thing that is likely to poison the water of amicable inter-regional or inter-nationality relations is presentation of position papers that “inferiorise” other regions or nationalities. Such positions are capable of revealing the fact that a journey that several regions believe is designed to lead to unity among various nationalities and cultures in Nigeria is a journey to make it easy for one region or nationality to dominate the other.

    It is difficult for any political observer to miss the fact that the position of the north at the conference gives the impression that the region is not willing to accept any changes to the current political structure. In doing this, the region overtly scrambles the chronology of Nigeria’s political history. It states that the states derived from the regions that were amalgamated by Frederick Lugard in 1914 were not independent states but just administrative provinces. This attempt to begin the history of states in the country from 1966 smacks of gross distortion of history. History books are replete with the fact that there were several pre-colonial states before 1914. Benin Empire was one, Oyo Empire was another, Hausa- Fulani Empire was another, just as the Kanuri Empire was another, just to name a few of the pre-colonial states that British colonialists met on ground when they arrived in different parts of what later became Nigeria at their instance. ‘Provinces’ created from such independent pre-colonial states have not automatically lost their right to self-determination because of changes as parts of regions to states.

    The north’s view that Nigeria’s federalism does not fit into the pattern of classical federalism as illustrated by the political experience of the United States does not negate the need for other polities to search for new forms of federalism. The American states that chose to go into a federation were not any more independent at the time they came together than the pre-colonial states in Nigeria were at the point of colonisation. States derived from such regions have not lost their independence to any other state within Nigeria since their creation.

    Similarly, the view that the 36 Nigerian states are mere administrative provinces that cannot serve as federating units does not tell the whole truth. Nigeria at Independence was a country of three regions, none of which was dominated by the other until 1966. That the three regions were later transformed into 36 states is a product of decades of military dictatorships superintended by generals from northern Nigeria. It is now instructive through the north’s position paper that the 36 states must have been created by such military dictators as provinces to serve the interest of the north. What is not clear is whether the provinces were actually created for the north or for Nigeria. There is a strong need for more confessional statements from northern governors and other elite groups on the motive behind creation of states between 1966 and 1998.

    However, delegates at the conference have the right to ask that the 36 ‘provinces’ or clusters of them be accepted as federating units in the same way that the original three regions served as federating units until the coming of military autocrats. The purpose of the conference is not just to make cases for sustaining sectional interests; it is principally to search for how to make Nigeria a functional federation that can add value to the parts as well as to the whole. What is implied in the position of the north is that it is the former Northern Region that owns Nigeria, not only because it can lay claim to 80% of the population or land mass, but also because it has succeeded over the years in owning most of the military heads of states that turned three regions into 36 states or provinces.

    Another naïve definition of federalism is the claim by the north that federalism is a system that ensures “being a brother’s keeper.” There is nothing in the history of territorial federalism or ethnic federalism that suggests that the raison d’etre of creating federations is for constituent parts to serve as brother’s keepers. If anything, all examples of federalism—in North America, in South America, in Europe, in Asia, and even in some parts of Africa—indicate that federations are created so that constituent parts can be partners, who through the process of cooperation assist each other to achieve its goals of self-development and self-preservation through harnessing of energies of the partners.

    The re-definition of federalism as an opportunity for brothers to make sacrifices for other brothers to thrive sounds profound, but it is not realistic. It is reminiscent of the philosophy of even development developed by military dictators during the decades in which they created multiplicities of states and in the process changed the percentage for derivation that was in force until the arrival of military dictators. If Nigerians wanted the country to be made into provinces to be ruled by a central government, there would have been no reason for the counter coup of July 1966. General Aguiyi-Ironsi’s efforts to create a full-fledged unitary governance of the country would have been enough for everybody including the soldiers from northern Nigeria that carried out the country’s second coup d’etat.

    If truly the Northern Region paid to keep Nigeria together during the period of colonial rule, it must have done it for the colonialists rather than for the colonised. That the funds for keeping Nigeria together during the colonial period came largely from the north deconstructs the historical assessment of the motivation for amalgamation of the three regions in 1914, which characterised the south as the woman of means to partner with the northern prince. In addition, the north would have had no reason to ask in 1953 for a loose federation without any central legislative activities beyond Defence and Foreign Affairs. If President Jonathan’s opening speech at the conference promised anything, it is for the conference to come up with new ideas to make Nigerians from various nationalities love to belong to the same country and live together in peace and harmony. Position papers that present any section as the centre of Nigeria and others as its peripheries is not likely to lead to an environment of good inter-nationality relations after the conference, more so if decisions at the conference only succeed in reinforcing the status quo that the north appears to be obsessed with.

    To be continued

  • How close is Nigeria to federalism? (1)

    How close is Nigeria to federalism? (1)

    From what has been happening at the conference since its inception, it is likely that those pessimistic about the national dialogue at the beginning may end up being vindicated

    So far, discussions or deliberations at the ongoing national conference underscore the fact that those who expect that the Jonathan conference would lead to more federalism might need to start disabusing their minds. On the contrary, it is becoming increasingly clear from decisions reached at committees that the ongoing conference may very well lead to more centralism or unitarism, apart from cosmetic changes in areas not crucial to sustenance of the huge powers of the central government and the exclusive list of functions.

    Recently, northern governors in collaboration with socio-political organisations in the region presented to the conference a document that seems to be strong enough to scatter the thoughts of southern delegates who had attended several South-south, Southeast, Southwest, ostensibly to mobilise the southern states in favour of the conference. In a cool, calm, and confident manner, reminiscent of Hausa-Fulani approach to national political matters before and since independence, the North brought to the conference a few days ago a paper that seems not to be devoid of suspicion and antagonism directed frontally against the South.

    Despite the deflation of southern states’ contribution to Nigeria, it appears from reports of committees that the position of the North has been gaining more grounds and converts at most committees so far. It will not be surprising if many southern delegates with genuine commitment to federalism are already wondering if delegates from the south are awake at many of the committees. Some may even be cynical enough to say that most southern delegates, having enervated themselves with sectional conferences to ensure that they use the conference to further position President Jonathan for the 2015 presidential election, must have been left with no choice other than working towards ‘consensus,’ while their northern delegates continue to make unsupportable claim about being the backbone and pillar of Nigeria or the principal owners of Nigeria. More on the wild claims of the North later.

    Of course, there are many Nigerians that did not invest any emotion in the conference from the start. Such people did not share the overflowing optimism that some of us uncompromising federalists shared about national dialogue, whenever or wherever it is convened. From what has been happening at the conference since its inception, it is likely that those pessimistic about the national dialogue at the beginning may end up being vindicated. That should not be totally unexpected in anything that has the character of a game of chance. The organisers of the conference chose to select delegates of their choice, rather than asking federating units to send their representatives. The organisers chose to legislate that decisions would be on consensus and that where this fails, conference decisions should be made or unmade by the wishes of 31% of delegates. This is a layman’s way of interpreting the rule that no decision can be taken at the conference except it is passed by at least 70% of votes.

    Furthermore, the organisers of the conference tied the hands of delegates except the bold and no-nonsense ones from the North with the injunction not to say anything that problematises the territorial unity of the country at the conference and for delegates to note  that the indivisibility and indissolubility of Nigeria is a given. Citizens had been told that this no-go area was a consensus from those that members of the presidential advisory committee consulted.  President Jonathan on his part admonished conference members to be open to “table thoughts and positions on issues, and make recommendations that advance togetherness,” further enjoining delegates not to “approach these issues with suspicion and antagonism,” in order to ensure a stronger, more united, peaceful and politically stable Nigeria.”

    If there had been firm ground rules (rather than presidential admonitions) about the language of position papers, the North would not have become victorious at many committees after insulting the rest of the country with the imperial language that subtends its position paper. Without doubt, a paper with the subtitle of “Northern Nigeria: the Backbone and Strength of Nigeria” smacks of gross insensitivity to the feelings of nationalities and states outside the orbit of the North. The people being referred to subtly as the Asiniwaye or Efulefu of Nigeria unfortunately include the Yoruba, age-old trading partners of the Hausa, Kanuri, and other nationalities in the North many centuries before the amalgamation of Nigeria by Frederick Lugard.

    The North’s position presented a few days ago at the conference has achieved some significance, even if and when restoration of federalism fails. We observed in this column a few weeks ago that if the conference does not achieve anything, it would enable some nationalities to unearth their political or even cultural subconscious. Northern governors, Arewa Consultative Forum, and other organisations consulted before the crafting of the North’s position paper have clearly exteriorised the innards of the region’s political assessment of Nigerians who are not part of the communities indigenous to the North, thus elevating the threat of domination of one section by another.

    Is anyone surprised that any of the fractions of the South has not taken the North up on its view that non-northerners in the country are backseat passengers on the journey to build a peaceful and politically stable Nigeria amalgamated to the North to support northerners as conductors of the train to Nigeria’s destiny? Those who have studied the sociology or anthropology of most of the nationalities in the South would have no problem coming to terms with the fact that there would have been so much fractiousness in the ranks of the South since the presentation of the North’s position.

    Despite the assurance from President Jonathan that he did not convene the conference in order to gain any political mileage for his bid to run in 2015, the South would have been meeting in various caucuses on a paper that has made it clear to millions of children born in the South that they are second-class citizens in the country of their birth. Different quarters in Abuja would have been hosting meetings about not jeopardising the interest of the president by being too vocal and thus angering the North to boycott the country’s “mother of all conferences.” Certainly, given the ontological plurality of perspective among the Yoruba, that nationality would have been fragmented into groups of pro-Jonathan and anti-Jonathan for president in 2015 and of other groups of individuals who prefer to see themselves as apolitical professionals to the extent that there would be no serious group to counter bogus claims in the position paper of the North.

    If southern delegates are too busy pursuing consensus to respond to claims by northern governors and socio-cultural organisations, their citizens outside the conference should come to their aid to ask northern governors some questions. Given the fact that most of the resourceful Mid-west region was also part of the theatre of war, like the part that later became the South-south, it is rational to ask of the presenters of the North’s position the following questions: 1) Where is the evidence to support that the North is the backbone and strength of Nigeria? 2) When the North was financing the civil war solely, what was the Western Region doing with its enormous resources from cocoa, palm kernel, and rubber? 3) Did Chief Awolowo, the finance minister during the civil war, tell the Yoruba region not to contribute funds to a war in which many of the commanding officers at the end of the war were Yoruba officers? 4) In 1960, it was common knowledge that the federal government of Nigeria owed the Western Region thousands of pounds in loan. What factors turned the fortunes of the North round so radically a few years later to the extent that it b ecame the only region to fund the civil war?

    To be continued

  • Will National Conference tackle true federalism?

    Will National Conference tackle true federalism?

    The drop in revenue for states from the Federation Account has strained the relationship between President Goodluck Jonathan and some governors. This development has reinforced calls for the enthronement of true federalism and fiscal restructuring at the forthcoming national conference. Adebisi Onanuga reports.

    he relationship between President Goodluck Jonathan and some governors appears cold. Reason: the disagreement on how the money and revenues paid  into the Federation Account, particularly from the sale of crude oil, are shared and allocated among the three levels of government.

    Section 162(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) establishes the Federation Account where all revenues collected by the government shall be paid, with a few exceptions.

    Sub-section (2) empowers the National Assembly to determine the formula for the distribution of funds in the Federation Account.

    It provides: “The President, upon the receipt of advice from the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), shall table before the National Assembly proposals for revenue allocation from the Federation Account, and in determining the formula, the National Assembly shall take into account, the allocation principles, especially those of population, equality of states, internal revenue generation, land mass, terrain as well as population density;

    ”Provided that the principle of derivation shall be constantly reflected in any approved formula as being not less than 13 per cent of the revenue accruing to the Federation Account directly from any natural resources.”

    The proviso to the sub-section entrenched, with respect to natural resources, the principle of derivation in any formula the National Assembly may come up with. By this principle, “not less than 13 per cent” of the revenue accruing to the Federation Account directly from any natural resource shall be payable to a state of the Federation from which such natural resources are derived. For a state to qualify for this allocation of funds from the Federation Account, the natural resources must have come from within the boundaries of the state, that is, the resources must be located within that state.

    Unfortunately, the Federal Government has deviated from the constitutional provisions with the governors now accusing it of deliberately manipulating the Federation Account to give the impression that there are inadequate funds to share, despite steady increase in oil prices since the beginning of the year.

    The 2014  Budget is predicated on $74 per barrel of crude oil while an estimated 2.39 million barrels per day were forecast for sale. But sales of crude has remained steady at $109, leaving a profit margin of over $35, which means more money coming to the Federation Account and vice versa. Expectedly, more money is to be shared by the Federal and state governments. But, regrettably, allocation to states have been on the decline, hence the worry over the state of economy and the unending decline of allocation going to the states of late. Every state in Nigeria depends largely on the  allocation from the Federation Account, just as its respective annual budget is predicated upon earnings from the Federation Account. With this they are able to develop their states. The only exception is Lagos that has been able to harness its resources for developmental projects.

    Allocations to states, especially opposition states, have been haphazardly done with the latter complaining of a deliberate attempt by the Federal Government to strangulate them and starve them of funds ahead of 2015. This has resulted in their difficulty to execute developmental projects. Unfortunately for the states, Vice President Namadi Sambo, who is the chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC), has  not convened the meeting of the council, which could have addressed issues raised by the governors. The meeting has been postponed five times.

    Kano State Governor Rabiu Kwakwanso, last week accused the government of causing divisions among the governors. He alleged that President Jonathan gave governors in Plateau Governor Jonah Jang’s faction of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) N2 billion each as ecological fund. The money, he claimed, was taken from the common purse of the country and was not given to governors who voted for Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State as chairman of NGF.

    Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomhole has described the government’s inability to meet its financial obligations to the states as a recipe to national disaster.

    Oshiomhole, while reacting to Federal Government’s inability to pay monthly allocations to states, urged the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to pay the over N2.3 trillion owed the Federation Account, adding that the corporation was not sincere with Nigerians on the number of barrels of oil refined daily.

    “I don’t know if the Federal Government is broke, but I know there is a serious crisis and it is unprecedented in the history of this country. For the first time, since 1999, allocations can no longer come as at when due to states. I have been involved in trying to understand what the reasons are and I have not seen anything yet. Whether we use the word broke or you deny the word broke, the truth is that there is financial crisis in Nigeria which has very serious national security implication.

    “So, I am hoping that the NNPC should wake up and meet its obligation to the Federation Account. Ootherwise, the integrity of the government is at stake,” he said, adding: “they collect 455,000 barrels per day for domestic refinery, but they also agreed that the refineries are not working, that at the very best they cannot refine more than 100,000 barrels per day. So, the question is what are you doing with the balance of 355,000?

    “If you multiply $109 by 455,000 barrels per day, you will imagine the kind of money NNPC ought to be paying into the Federation Account. And from some of the figures that have been thrown around, NNPC is owing the Federation Account over N2.3 trillion,” he said.

    The Progressive Governors’ Forum, PGF, at its meeting in Abuja last week also condemned the Federal Government for illegal deductions from states’ funds. Besides, the All Progressive Congress (APC) governors decried what they called ‘flagrant disregard by the Federal Government of the Constitution and the Appropriation Act on collection and sharing of government revenue and implementation of budgets.

    The governors wondered why the President Jonathan’s administration has consistently been unable to implement budget provisions, which it willingly formulated and passed into law by the National Assembly.

    In a communiqué, they vowed to take appropriate legal actions to compel the Federal Government to respect the constitutional rights of states and comply fully with the Appropriation Act.

    “We wish to say that there is no justification for the continuous dwindling revenue collections into the Federation Account given that the price of crude oil, being the main revenue earner, has been relatively stable and above $100 per barrel since the beginning of 2013.

    “The Forum excoriates the Federal Government’s consistent flagrant disregard for the Constitution and the Appropriation Act as passed by the National Assembly. In fact, we wonder why the Jonathan’s administration is unable to implement the budget provisions, which it willingly formulated and which the National Assembly passed into law,” they noted.

    A comparative analysis of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) monthly economic report and that of the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), conducted by Governor Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti State, indicated that revenues accruing to the Federation Account were not fully reported.

    According to Fayemi, the Nigerian economy is highly dependent on the proceeds from sale of oil. He noted that oil represents 95 per cent of Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings and 80 per cent of budgetary revenue for the federation while revenue from taxes, custom and others account for 20 per cent of budgetary revenue. Hence, income from revenue generating agencies are expected to be transferred to the Consolidated Revenue Account for appropriation.

    Fayemi noted that there was no time Nigerian oil sold less than $95 in 2013 and $110 in 2014.

    “Conclusively, Nigerian earned more revenue from oil sales in 2013 and 2014 than budgeted,” he said, adding that this can be corroborated by a comparison of revenue reported by Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Federal Accounts Allocation Committee (FAAC).

    He said any major change due to poor handling/depletion of the nation’s resources would have ripple effects on the implementation of budget at the state and local government levels. Fayemi said the report of earnings to the federation by CBN was an indication that Nigeria earned more revenue than was reported into the Federation Account by the Federal Government. He said the effect of the depletion of the nation’s revenue has created a huge financial burden for states, including Ekiti, in meeting its obligations. According to him, average monthly deduction from money due to his state is N481 million which has resulted in the inability of the state government to meet its commitments as and when due and increasing vicious circle of poverty in the country.

    Huge sums of money meant for the account have been declared missing or found their way into other accounts.

    Amaechi, while inspecting some projects in Obio/Akpor Local Government Wednesday last week, cited, among other revelations, sleaze in federal agencies, alleged misuse of subsidies on petrol, kerosene and sharp practices in the allocation of oil blocs, saying: “whopping sum of $10 billion and $20 billion were alleged to be missing.”

    The suspended CBN Governor, Mallam Lamido Sanusi had raised the alarm that the $49.8 billion, which was supposed to be remitted to the coffers of the Federal Government through the apex bank, was nowhere to be found.

    Sanusi’s allegation and petition to the Senate Committee led to the ongoing probe of the missing fund at whcih the Coordinating Minister for the Economy and Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, told the committee that she would hire foreign experts for forensic audit of NNPC.

    REACTIONS

    The development has thrown up a number of issues as Nigerians are worried over the state of health of the economy. More worried are pundits who are questioning the rationale of a fiscal policy that does not guarantee equity in the sharing and allocation of revenue among the federating units; the need for a sovereign wealth fund and an excess crude oil account that does not have constitutional backing. Lawyers versed in fiscal policy issues agreed that the country is not broke, blaming the situation on the absence of true federalism, insincerity on the part of the government and those whose duty is to manage the funds coming into the Federation Account.

    They included Felix Fagbohungbe (SAN), the Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Monday Ubani and a member of the Ogun State Judicial Council, Abayomi Omoyinmi.

    Fagbogungbe argued that that it is not right and a breach of the Constitution for the President to withhold the money that belongs to states because it is from the Federation Account which belongs to the states, Federal Government and the local governments. He could not fathom the reason for the decline in the revenue to the Federal Government which caused the decline in revenue to states.

    “The reason is that we have not been told whether the number of crude that we sell per annum has changed from  what we sold the previous year. The money accruing to the account should change because we have not been selling below the baseline. The quantity of oil we have been selling per day, per week, per month and per year has not changed nor declined.

    “So, what would now be responsible for the decline in the income to the Federal Government? That means something is wrong and we are getting to know what is wrong. From the CBN revelation, it means that there is a problem in the management of our revenue. I don’t think we need a body to tell us that the issue is the management. Our revenue has not been well managed, such that we are short of revenue. We are not short of revenue, it is the management of it that is the problem,” he said.

    Fagbohungbe said it did not matter whether Nigeria adopted a Federation Account or fiscal federalism in the sharing of revenue, it all depended on the operator. He said what this means is that “the Minister of Finance should be sacked, the Minister of Petroleum should quit, the MD of NNPC should also be removed because they have been accused of the mismanagement of our fund. The coordinating minister is not coordinating anything, so she should leave. She is the one causing the problem for Nigeria. The three of them should go at once so that we can have peace in our finance management and the oil industry. This their second coming has not been helpful to Nigeria,” he stated.

    Ubani agreed with Fagbohungbe that going by the Constitution, it is wrong for the President to withhold what is due to the states. He said every amount that accrued to the federation must be credited into the Federation Account and  be shared accordingly by the three tiers of government.

    “But there are strange things happening at this time in Nigeria. We heard the President saying the other time that any state governor that abuses him that it would affect his state. In other words, the President is trying to claim absolute power now. It means that states would not get what is due to them because they are abusing him.

    “Secondly, what I don’t understand is the issue of dwindling of allocation when  the price of crude internationally has increased and it keeps soaring daily. So, why is the Federation Account being manipulated to the extent that states are being denied their normal allocation? It tells you that there is no serious governance going on in the country, that  what all the money is being conserved for is for electoral purposes at the federal level,” he said.

    Ubani further noted that if the states are being denied their allocation due to them on purpose, then the governors  would not be able to run their state effectively, whereas the Federal Government would have enough money to throw around.

    His words: “It shows that the money they are conserving is for  electioneering purposes at the federal level. It explains why the states are being under-funded in order to put them in bad light before the people so that they would not probably return some of the governors to office. So, it is about politics, all the conservation, all the non allocation of funds to states. That is what is going on actually. That is why they are manipulating the processes.”

    He said the development was a reflection of the fact that we are not operating a federal structure the way we should. He said if we continue with the way it is now, Boko Haram will continue, kidnapping will continue, stealing will continue, smuggling will continue unemployment will continue and all manner of violence will be unleashed on Nigerians and there would be agitation and much violence in the system because we are not running an efficient federal system.

    Omoyinmi also argued that the President  has no right, legal or moral, to withhold funds that belong to the state under any pretence. This has been confirmed by the Supreme Court in the case brought against the Federal government by Lagos State during the Obasanjo era when Lagos State government allocation was withheld on the ground that the state government created additional local government councils.

     

    THE WAY OUT

    To Fagbohungbe, the system of revenue allocation can only be changed by the National Assembly. He said the issue  should be discussed at the confab. Let’s wait for what they would say at the confab.

    Ubani said if Nigeria must make progress, the national confab presents the most golden opportunity for Nigeria to restructure. If we must run a very effective federal structure, where every region or state will assume  control over what it produces, giving only a percentage to the Federal Government, then we must return to the federal system between 1960 and 1966. So, running to Abuja, cap in hand, to beg for money, should stop.

    Omoyinmi said a sovereign wealth fund or excess crude account was uncalled for and not constitutionally provided. To him, it is very unlikely that there would be equity sharing in as much as its sharing and its creation do not have the effect of law. He stressed that the current revenue allocation formula should be  reviewed and discussed fully at the national conference with the hope of finding a lasting and dispassionate solution inline with the principles and ideals of true federalism.

  • Niger Delta to demand resource control, true federalism at confab

    Niger Delta to demand resource control, true federalism at confab

    What are the issues the people of the Niger Delta will clamour for at the National Conference? Resource control and true federalism, The Nation learnt, will top the agenda of the region at the conference, which is billed to start soon. The region will also not subscribe to “No Go Areas” and manipulations by agents of the government, it was also learnt.

    The stage was set for the conference at the Pan Niger Delta Conference, organised by a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), Social Action. Feelers after the conference show that the powers-that-be in the region are being rallied to pursue this line of thought.

    The conference has initiated collaboration with other regions to build confidence and consensus to avoid potential conflicts.

    The conference with the theme: “Niger Delta and the National Conference,” was held at the Atlantic Hall, Presidential Hotel Port Harcourt. It attracted representation from the states of the region, human rights activists, community leaders, women groups and youth organisations.

    A communiqué issued as a result of the January 28 conference leaves no one in doubt as to the direction of the region at the conference.

    The communiqué reads: “As Nigeria begins its second century, it faces the challenge of organising a new generation of citizens that would live under conditions of dismantled structural contradictions without the constraints on peoples’ capacity to fulfil their potentials. The PNDC is part of the attempts to deal with that challenge.

    “Specifically, the objectives of this Conference are: To identify the strategic interests of the Niger Delta at this historic moment, and to create a peoples’ platform for their pursuit; to map out plans for the achievement of the strategic interests of the Niger Delta during the National Conference and beyond; to draw up strategies that would help to prevent the difficulties that imperilled previous national conferences and dialogues with regard to attainment of the aspirations of the Niger Delta and other minority peoples.”

    The conference observed that the Niger Delta has been at the forefront of the struggle for the restructuring of the Nigeria based on the people’s conviction that a multi-ethnic nation-state like Nigeria can only exist peacefully on the basis of a truly federal structure that gives importance, equity and justice to all the components; it also observed that the peoples of the Niger Delta believe that the diverse nationalities that make up the country can only coexist successfully and peacefully on the foundation of clear restructuring of the federation anchored on principles of free association and the right of nationalities and communities to have spaces for political and economic actualisation.

    It added that having a President of Nigeria from the Niger Delta was neither a core demand nor is it a solution to the problems of the region, much as every individual in the country, including members of minority nationalities, can aspire to and hold the highest political office.

    ased on observations, the communiqué noted: “That we welcome the initiative of the executive arm of the central government with respect to the National Conference, and resolve to mobilise our peoples to participate fully;

    “That the primary mandate of the National Conference is to restructure Nigeria into a truly federal state where the components have political autonomy;

    “That representation at the National Conference should be based primarily on ethnic nationalities, and may include equitable participation from national interest groups;

    “That the resolutions of the National Conference should be ratified by a referendum organised in line with the principle of “peoples’ suffrage” as opposed to universal suffrage. By “peoples suffrage” the conference means the votes of the various nationalities that make up the country;

    “That the National Conference should culminate in a new Constitution for Nigeria, which should be the basis for the conduct of the next General Elections;

    “That the historic demands of the Niger Delta peoples and other minorities in Nigeria for identity, resource ownership and control, and environmental justice must not be reduced to development and infrastructure politics. What the Niger Delta peoples need now is freedom to actualise themselves to their full potentials, and self-determination within a Nigeria founded on equity and justice;

    “That conference endorses the setting up of a platform for engagement on the National Conference process, including development of mechanism for assembling the positions of the peoples of the Niger Delta.”

    Rights activist Ms Annkio Briggs, who was one of the speakers at the event, said the national conference must be based on ethnic representation instead of regional representation.

    She said: “Despite our enormous resources the Niger Delta, problems have remained unattended; the region is lacking access to basic necessities; that is why we must represent the aspiration of the people of Niger Delta. The Niger Delta must defend their right by ensuring that we have the right to serve for second term like other region and nobody should intimidate us for that. We have problem as people but the national conference offers us that opportunity to address those problems.”

    A former President of the Ijaw National Congress (INC) and lecturer at the University of Port Harcourt, Prof. Kimse Okoko, said some persons were exploiting Nigerians on the pretence of representing the people. He said the time had come when the people should make input on the issues that concern them.

    “The issue of national conference should not politicise the people should be represented through various ethnic group to have a people constitution and not geo-political group. We need structures to facilitate the attainment of the best possible quality of life for the peoples of Nigeria. We seek a Nigerian state to be a community where individuals and groups would achieve their best potentials,” he said.

    Leader of Social Action, Dr. Isaac Osuoka, said he resisted politicians’ sponsorship and participation at the conference. He said the conference was sponsored by Social Action and other non-governmental organisations who share the same belief because they did not want politicians to hijack the conference.

    Osuoka said: “Some of the participants of today’s conference, including some of our eminent leaders know that the idea of the Pan Niger Delta Conference dates back to the 1990s, especially during the late Abacha military junta. Following the genocide in Umuechem (Etche), Ogoniland and parts of Ijawland, organisations like the Chikoko Movement, Southern Minorities Movement (SMM), Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP), Rivers Coalition, Environmental Rights Action (ERA) Ijaw Youth Council (IYC) started discussing the framework for a process of joint analysis and collaborative intervention in mobilising our peoples to promote the demands of self-determination within the Nigerian State, as guarantee for environmental and economic justice.”

    He lamented that the efforts and sacrifices of Niger Deltans to end military have mostly been unappreciated.

    “In the 19902 s, our people, through their representative organisations, were unanimous in demanding for a restructuring of the Nigerian federation as a precondition for a democracy in Nigeria. Rather than merely conducting elections with frameworks set up by the military dictators, we all asked for a sovereign National Conference (SNC) and a representative Government of national Unity (GNU) to supervise participatory constitution making before elections.

    “Within this idea, the National Conference would serve as platform on which the different nationalities and social groups in Nigeria would democratically decide on such crucial issues as power-sharing between the various equitable structures for the Nigerian Federation, the control of resources, including land and minerals, the religious question, alternative economic recovery package, a fair electoral system and other such decisions which border on the destiny of the Nigerian state and its peoples.”

    Speakers at the event include, Prof. Ebiegberi Alagoa, Prof. Ben Naanen, Rev. Nnimmo Bassey, Ledum Mitee, Prof. Andrew Efemini, and Dr. M. Akobo.

     

  • Emco gears up for album launch

    Emco gears up for album launch

    WITH his latest singles, I Like Am So and Sweet Potato currently rocking the airwaves, Afro pop singer, Emco, in his 20s, says that he is out to shock the Nigerian entertainment scene with his forthcoming album.

    Still in the works, the artiste, who goes by the real name Emmanuel Chihurumnanya Oparaji, reveals that his love for music has seen him work with the likes of Objazz, Young D, Bolaji (Sound Kingdom), Cartier and Silver Saddih just to mention a few. His lists his role models in the industry as Dare Art-Alade, 2face Idibia and Fela while among Non-Nigerians Alicia Keys, Reuben Studdard, John Legend and R. Kelly are his influences.

    The budding artiste had his Primary and Secondary education in Lagos State, Nigeria and furthered his studies at the Imo State University where studied English Language.

    Emco started out being involved in a number of Talent Shows. To his credit, he was the first runner-up at the Glo Campus Storm, Owerri in Imo State in 2006. He later contested and won the Voice of Campus talent hunt at the Imo State University in 2008. Later that year, he contested and won the Star Road Quest Competition in Imo State, Nigeria.

  • Federalism and taxation 2

    Federalism and taxation 2

    Payment of tax by citizens has over the centuries cemented the social contract between government and the citizenry.

    There are options for the reform of the tax system which could both finance increases in benefits and leave the tax system itself more progressive and more logical in structure. Furthermore, the transition to such a system could be one from which the overwhelming majority of the population would gain-John Halls in Changing Tax: how the system works and how to change it.

    Just as we observed last week, the idea of the federal minister of finance on reforming the system of multiple taxation in the country is still more atmospheric than specific. But as we move closer to a position paper from her, it is necessary for the states to prepare themselves philosophically and strategically to address the issue of taxation in a federation, more so that taxation all over the world is a central political issue for citizens and their governments.

    Among political conservatives who believe that the government should have little or no role in solving the problems of individual citizens, taxation is looked at with disdain. Similarly, in polities like Nigeria that thrive on the mentality of manna from nature as the source of public finance, tax may be considered a burden that the government should not be saddled with while it spends its energy to allocate funds from non-renewable resources that appear infinite to myopic individuals in charge of government. Correspondingly, many citizens in such societies with access to funds from non-renewable resource are generally opposed to tax, more so to progressive tax that they consider to diminish their savings. But among social democrats who think that the role of government is to facilitate the transformation of the government into a caring agency with concern for the welfare of citizens, taxation is crucial to the creation of a welfare state.

    If there is any human creation that has helped to fuel development of democratic states in the last three centuries, it is the fact that citizens pay tax to fund government projects that improve the life of citizens: road, education, healthcare, and even social security for the needy. Payment of tax by citizens has over the centuries cemented the social contract between government and the citizenry. More than vote, tax makes it possible for citizens to own their governments, assist them to create socially beneficial benefits, and even provide funds to fight enemies, if and when they exist.

    Given the claim that Nigeria is a federal republic and the recent announcement by President Jonathan that there is a need to have a national conference at which citizens dialogue on how to improve their federal system, it is important for those leading the debate on reforming the country’s system of multiple taxation to recognize that multiple tax systems is a sine qua non of federalism, be it territorial as in the case of the United States and the United Arab Emirates, or ethnic as in the case of Belgium and Ethiopia.

    The first area to mark down for reform is Nigeria’s Indirect tax system. This area includes all forms of consumption tax: Sales Tax, Value Added Tax, Rates, Excise Duties, Car Tax, Stamp Duties, Driver’s License Tax, etc. At present, the federal government collects most of these taxes. The result of federalization of what should be a subnational tax is that states and local governments in which citizens consume such services and in the process add to the responsibility of the government of such states is that such states induce and collect consumption tax for other states to benefit from.

    For example, when I was growing up in colonial Nigeria and even up to pre-military era, it was the subnational government that collected tax on car registration, issuance of driver’s license, and all rates. Even up till the time of General Sani Abacha, collection of sales tax in Lagos was a state responsibility. Replacing sales tax with VAT, the proceeds of which states send to the federal government for allocation to states in the fashion of revenue from petroleum should be the first area to reform in favour of states and local governments. There is no federal system in the world in which sales tax is collected by central governments, the way federal agencies now collect funds for driver’s license and vehicle registration.

    It is fiscal federalist thinking that encourages true federations around the world to leave indirect taxes to subnational governments. It is subnational governments that provide infrastructure, education, and healthcare to most citizens in federal systems of government. Such governments need funds to provide such services to citizens making such contributions to governance. By paying tax, such citizens are also empowered, thus strengthening their voice in the way they are governed. At present, there are a few states that provide some form of social security for senior citizens while most of the country’s states do not consider such a policy important for their citizens. For example, Osun and Ekiti States provide monthly social security allowances for citizens over 65 years of age. Such states have services they need to fund from indirect taxes. If Lagos State had been allowed to exercise its rights in a federal system to collect Port charges, there would have been no basis for the state to be looking longingly for a special status for the state from the federal government.

    By having a tax system that requires states to send revenue collected from indirect tax to the central government, the federal government carries to a ridiculous extent the weird philosophy of government imposed on the country by military autocracies in the name of national unity and even development. In order to mask the exploitation of petroleum producing states under military rule after changing the principle of derivation from 50% of revenue to zero and later to 13%, military dictators created the policy and decrees to centralize all forms of revenue, which they also created agencies to mobilize and allocate or distribute to states.

    With respect to Direct Taxes, there is nothing in the books that prevents a system in which states collect all forms of direct taxes and send to the federal government whatever percentage is agreed upon for funding projects of central governments. Just as John Halls once said: “The argument that a local income tax would be ‘administratively impossible’ is hard to sustain when Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and the United States of America already have one,” the central government will not lose anything but its unnecessary power to subordinate states that should have been coordinate with it, should all forms of income tax be collected by states with the option of sending some percentage of collected revenue to fund central government’s programmes. Taking this option will remove what the minister of finance refers to as multiple taxation. Until a few years ago, I worked at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania and lived in the State of Maryland. I paid federal income tax, income tax to Oxford, the city that houses Lincoln University, and to the State of Maryland where I lived. This is a good illustration of diversity in a federal system. If this is what is called multiple taxation, it is the only way for different states to offer different levels of social services to its citizens in a federal system.

    The issue that matters most to citizens is not the number of states to which a citizen pays taxes but the use to which such tax revenue is put by those in power, for as long as such tax is progressive. If Lagos State, for example, had not been able to tax individuals and citizens within the state in the last sixteen years, the state would have been uninhabitable by now, given the meagre funds allocated to it by the central government and the exodus of citizens that move to Lagos State from other parts of the country on a daily basis. What must not be missed in the debate about reform of our tax system is the need to insist on progressive taxation, to ensure equity and fair distribution of income. What must be avoided is any reform that takes the power to tax away from states that provide services to their citizens.

    Concluded

  • Federalism and taxation

    Federalism and taxation

    Tax payers wishing to reduce their tax burden in a federal system should not need the intervention of the central government

    Most countries have a wide array of taxes, each of which is applicable in clearly defined circumstances. The proliferation may however be more noticeable in federalist countries like Nigeria. By virtue of powers conferred by the 1999 Constitution, taxes and levies in Nigeria are charged at three levels, i.e. Federal, State, and Local. This follows a demarcation of functions among the three tiers and the distribution of legislative powers between the Federal and State Legislatures—Ade Ipaye in 2010.

    The recent announcement by the Minister of Finance about the federal government’s intention to “streamline and harmonise taxation across the country” could not have come at a worse time. As is expected in a democracy, it is right for tax payers to ask for tax reforms that can lessen the burden of tax payers, be they individual or corporate. But for the federal government to be thinking of a major tax reform across the country after the leader of the federal government has called for a national conference to discuss the nature of Nigeria’s multiethnic federalism is to put the cart before the horse.

    Harmonisation of tax in a federal system is anathema, particularly to those who care about public finance for development, more so in a federal system that cannot develop solely on the strength of on revenue from non-renewable resources. A multiple form of taxation is an essential characteristic of federal form of governance all over the world. Over the years, Nigeria’s federal system has been watered down by decrees issued by military dictators to emphasize harmonisation, rather than accepting that a federal system must have diversity, to enforce homogenisation instead of appreciating heterogeneity. Efforts to harmonise tax across a federation is like attempting to “reform the irreformable,” to borrow some phrase from the Minister of Finance.

    Those who believe that the president is not sufficiently serious about the national conference cannot but smile to hear that his minister of finance and coordinating minister for the economy is enthusiastic about harmonising taxation at a time that the president has asked the country to dialogue about what kind of future it wants. Is the intention of the federal government to harmonise the country’s tax systems another attempt to pre-empt the national conference, just as the intention of the president to submit recommendations from the conference to a national assembly that is clearly hobbled by the desire to keep Nigeria federal in name and unitary in structure?

    It is not expected that tax payers all over the world would readily resist multiple taxation. Thus, the recent call by The Tax Payers’ Association of Nigeria (TAPAN) is in order in a democratic system. It is a different matter whether avoiding multiple taxation is realistic in a federal democracy. Tax payers wishing to reduce their tax burden in a federal system should not need the intervention of the central government, as much as they need to negotiate with state governments. Any central government that promises to harmonise taxation in a federal system is either playing to the gallery or being deliberately unrealistic. For any central government to be in a position to harmonize tax across a federal political space, it will need to amend the current constitution to the effect of removing taxation from the concurrent legislative list. To attempt to do that is to call for an end to the federal system.

    Tax payers do have a right to expect that at all levels there is a correlation between tax paid and public service given by the government. But in a federal system, where most public goods and services are provided and delivered at the subnational level, tax payers should cry to the states in which they pay taxes for transparency, accountability, and equity. Crying to the federal government to harmonize tax collection is to undermine the country’s dwindling federal system and to encourage the central government to deny states and local governments of their right to raise revenue and responsibility to fund improvement of the quality of life of citizens in specific states.

    Even though efforts to water down the federal character of Nigeria has been on for over forty years under the inspiration of military dictatorships, it is now too late in the day for an elected government that has in fact announced convocation of a national conference to put energy into harmonising taxation in the country. This is a function that should be left to the national conference to decide. It is common knowledge that fiscal federalism requires more funds at the subnational level in a federal system, if regular and prompt good services are to be provided by the government for citizens and business communities at the subnational level. It is also true that the relationship between the citizen and the central government in today’s Nigeria is more of alienation than dis-alienation, for several reasons.

    One, the central government is overfunded and under monitored by citizens. In fact, public expenditure by the central government appears ‘un-monitorable’ in Nigeria, largely on account of the distance between the central government and the average citizen. Second, the central government relies for most of its expenditures on revenue from non-renewable resource— petroleum. This situation gives the central government a feeling that it is those in power at a given time that are principal stakeholders in the process of governance and that citizens are onlookers. For example, it is easier for people of Lagos State to demand for improvement in provision of public service in Lagos than it is for citizens to influence the federal government to make the country’s most important motorway, the Lagos-Ibadan-Benin safe for movement of persons and goods. L. Enrique Garcia’s claim that there is evidence to suggest that “greater natural resource revenue, by disconnecting spending decisions from the need to levy taxes on the population, contribute to a less efficient use of the extra resources in public service provision” applies to Nigeria as much as it does to Latin America.

    It is hoped that today’s piece will stimulate rigorous debates among tax specialists and federalists on the controversial topic of harmonising tax across the country in a federation. Such debates will help those planning to represent their communities at the national conference to provide realistic recommendations on how to address the issue of ‘multiple taxation’ in a country that appears poised for further federalisation, judging by the tone of presentations of most regions to the national conference advisory committee so far.

  • Pitfalls of fiscal federalism

    Pitfalls of fiscal federalism

    Oyo State Governor Abiola Ajimobi reflected on the proposed review of the revenue allocation formula in Ibadan, the state capital, at the opening ceremony of the two-day Southwest sensitisation on revenue sharing.

    The Southwest Geo-political zone has always been identified with strategic planning, focused development and methodical care for the future endeavours of its people. The enduring developmental impacts of our forebears in government were predicated on their intense passion for the socio-economic welfare of the people, as well as their development of marshal plans for the future of their people.
    In spite of the series of political challenges and geographical re-adjustments over the years, the Southwest remains the hub of progressive politics. As we all know, the hallmark of progressive politics is to proffer antidotes to the menace of mass poverty. Progressive leaders, vision-driven and passionate about the future of their people, are fired by the zeal to always prosecute causes that engender socio-economic emancipation of the downtrodden and the common man in their governmental environment.
    We are not oblivious of the fact that the Revenue allocation formula being employed for the distribution of our national resources among the federating units took its premise from the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. We are also aware that the formula took its essence from the modification orders which came about as a result of the Supreme Court Judgment of April 2002 in the case between the Federal Government and the 36 states.
    However, it is becoming evident by the day that the current fiscal structure which favours the Federal Government with 52.68 per cent of the total national revenue is at variance with, and certainly not in consonance with the reality of responsibilities of the other tiers of government.
    Cries against this inequitable distribution have been strident among federalism experts and nationalists. Yet, there is no respite at the moment. Efforts, severally and individually, had in the past been made to make the federalist avowal of the Nigerian Constitution to reflect its fiscal disposition accordingly.  However, this desired result and effect have been elusive.
    The effort of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) to use the power conferred on it by the constitution to review the revenue formula and principles in operation is commendable. It could not have been done at a better time, in order to have our fiscal regime conform with changing realities.
    Without prejudice to the would-be report of RMFAC, after this exercise, the realities of the contemporary challenges at the grassroots level would, no doubt, be unassailable to all. I am convinced that the challenges would force out the unison of opinion of all stakeholders that there is an urgent need for an equitable and a more acceptable revenue allocation formula. A formula that will be directed towards the economic imperatives of the nation, further its oneness and eschew unfairness among the various tiers of government, is no doubt a sine qua non for an equitable nation.
    Oyo State Government, like other States in this zone, would make her own presentation in the cause of this 2-Day sensitization programme. It would not be different from the corpus of agitations for fiscal equity. As articulated by federalists and as witnessed by us in the administration of our respective tiers, the responsibility of governance, both at the state and local government levels, have become so enormous but frustrating for the operators. This has been necessitated by inadequacy of resources.
    One sole incubus implicated in this is the primary responsibilities of states and local governments that is being unnecessarily competed with by the Federal Government.  Since the states and local governments are positioned strategically to identify the critical needs of the people at these levels of governance, duplication of efforts on the concurrent list should be reviewed, so as to allow each tier of government to concentrate on areas that will better touch the lives of the governed.
    Since the inception of this administration in Oyo State, efforts are daily being made to put human faces imprints on all the socio-economic welfare programmes and policies implemented by government, with a view to bringing governance and its essence closer to the people.  This we started by advocating a style of governance and politics that is devoid of subterfuge and violence which we inherited, but rather a focus on development.  We have spared nothing to ensure that security is not compromised as only peace can engender development.  Earlier in the life of this administration, a joint security outfit named Operation Burst, comprising all the security agencies in the state, was launched and, by now, its tentacles have spread to all the geo-political zones of the state.  What we have now in Oyo State is a rest from the hitherto disorder and violence that stuck to us and our well-advertised pedigree like a leech.
    The state government is also hosting foreign investors more than ever before and yet almost on daily basis, new proposals are received to do business with the serene and peaceful New Oyo State.  Just recently, a Canadian team signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the state to invest over $1 billion in agriculture in our state. This could not have been possible in the hitherto atmosphere of brigandage and disorder.  The attraction is also the massive infrastructural rehabilitation and construction being embarked upon throughout the length and breadth of the state.
    Investment in the future of our teeming youths has also evolved several youth empowerment programmes.  Apart from the initial 20,000 youths employed by us almost two years ago, many more youth have passed through our skill acquisition centres.  Both the education and health sectors of the State are also witnessing a revolution of massive rehabilitation and infrastructural development that is aimed at bringing back the old glory of the Western Region.
    While this is not a forum for blowing the trumpet of achievements of this administration in the state, driving round the capital city, Ibadan and our major cities will confirm that, like our forebears, we are driven by a vision to bring the condition of living of our people to the acceptable standard for humans in the world.
    This forum is premising its gathering on the last presidential debate organised by the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON), where the President had promised to present whatever are the views of the general public on the subject of the proposed review of revenue allocation formula to the National Assembly, as would be submitted through the report of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission.  This has given a hope that the age-long yearnings and aspirations of the federating units of this nation, in term of availability of resources for the respective responsibilities of governance, would soon be met.
    This is also the forum for all stakeholders to lend their voices to the desired devolvement of more financial resources from the center to the states and local governments.  There is no doubt that some of the issues that would lead to the realization of this dream would require constitutional amendments.  Necessary steps should therefore be taken to correct the present imbalance and unfair distribution of our financial resources.  Both the existing vertical and horizontal allocation formula should be discussed for review.
    Apart from the vertical method which has favoured the Federal Government with 52.68 per cent of total revenue, the seven indices currently in use for the horizontal formula deserve particular attention. It is hoped that indices of general concern like equality and population (including density) is reviewed upward.
    I wish to particularly point out that the issue of crises of population, for example, should be given a proper attention as one of the relevant determining factors for revenue allocation.  For instance, the last census figures which controversially puts Oyo State at 5.6 million is grossly understated and this might have been responsible for the unfair treatment meted to the state in terms of allocation from the Federation Account.  In reality, the population of Oyo State is close to seven million, with a high range of density.
    It must also be mentioned that Oyo State has deposits of minerals in commercial quantities, with the Federal Government undertaking mining activities in the various parts of the state, albeit without the state benefiting from the 13 per cent derivation due to states where mining activities are taking place.
    I know that the South Western zone will have a coordinated view on this subject matter by the end of this sitting.  I wish to assure the commission that the six states in this region will do everything possible to ensure that the objective of this sensitization exercise is realised.  Our hope will then be for justice to be done.
    Once again, I thank the chairman and commissioners of the Revenue Mobilization and Fiscal Allocation Commission (RMFAC) for bringing hope that will improve the economic future of all the federating units of this Country through this conference.

  • Alaafin stresses true federalism

    The Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Lamidi Olayiwola Adeyemi 111, has said the only thing that can save Nigeria and guarantee its future is to revert to a true federal system.

    The monarch, who spoke in his palace in Oyo town when breaking fast with members of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Oyo State Council, led by the Chairman, Mr. Gbenga Opadotun, urged President Goodluck Jonathan and members of the National Assembly to save the country from collapse.

    He said with too much power at the centre and the states going cap in hand every month for money, it would not engender development.

    Oba Adeyemi said if states are allowed to control their resources, they would grow at their own pace and this would ease tension among politicians, who are scrambling to take over power at the centre.

    He urged constitutional roles for traditional rulers to enable them contribute to the nation’s development as envisaged by its founding fathers.

  • Yuguda canvasses fiscal federalism

    Bauchi State Governor, Isa Yuguda, has identified fiscal federalism as solution to the nation’s protracted struggle with development challenges.

    Yuguda spoke as guest speaker in Ado-Ekiti , the capital of Ekiti State, through his Commissioner of Youths and Sports, Alhaji Mohammed Lasisi, at a national summit organised by the National Coalition of Yoruba Youths.

    The governor said that “only an equitable distribution of funds can aid even development of the country.”

    According to him, other tiers of control, including states and local governments, need sufficient autonomy especially over solid mineral resources within their boundaries to undertake independent developmental projects.

    He added that such right to mineral resource exploitation is currently the exclusive list of the federal government.

    Speaking on “Nigerian federalism: The journey so far and the way forward,” Yuguda explained that the frequent unrests and frictions being experienced across the country “would be resolved with proper redefinition of the nation’s federalism.”

    Yuguda also advised that the American presidential system practiced in the country should be modified for reduction in the cost of governance, which he noted was unnecessarily high.

    Calling on youths to shun acts, which could truncate their progress, the national president of the group, Mr. Wale Ayeni, canvassed for profitable avenues to engage youths as another election approaches.

    The Senior Special Assistant on Youth and Student Matters to the President, Mr. Jude Imagwe, tasked youths to cooperate with law enforcement agents to ensure adequate security in the country.