There is no arguing the fact that well-structured and properly executed budgets are essential ingredients in the economic growth of any nation.
And to have a good budget, the budgeting process must be right.
That was the point President Muhammadu Buhari made last week while signing the 2018 Budget into law when he noted that though the annual budget represents less than 10 per cent of aggregate yearly expenditures of the Federal Government in the economy, it, nevertheless, has a very significant accelerator effect on the financial plans of other tiers of government and the private sector.
Unfortunately, over the years, the institutions of government responsible for delivering implementable budgets have fallen short of their responsibilities.
The 2018 Budget, which was only signed into law in June, is not an exception.
For a budget that is six months late, a lot of Nigerians had expected that speed would be of essence in implementation.
That expectation seems to be misplaced as the president lamented at the signing ceremony that the budget was not implementable because of distortions by the National Assembly.
He only signed, he claimed, in order not to further slowdown the country’s pace of economic recovery.
The president’s accusations against the National Assembly were weighty.
Not only did they make cuts amounting to N347 billion in allocations to 4,700 projects, they also introduced 6,403 projects amounting to N578 billion.
The president alleged that many of the cuts were made to critical projects which makes it difficult or even impossible to implement with the reduced allocation.
On the other hand, the president said the lawmakers unilaterally inserted new and inconsequential projects that were neither properly conceptualized, designed nor costed.
The president listed such nationally or regionally strategic infrastructure projects such as the counterpart funding for the Mambilla Power Plant, Second Niger Bridge, East-West Road, Bonny-Bodo Road, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway and Itakpe-Ajaokuta Rail Project as major casualties, which allocations were cut by an aggregate of N11.5 billion.
Similar cuts were made to critical projects in the health, education and power sectors as well as Federal Capital Territory (FCT) projects.
On the health sector, the president said: “The provisions for various strategic interventions in the health sector such as the upgrade of some tertiary health institutions, transport and storage of vaccines through the cold chain supply system, provision of anti-retroviral drugs for persons on treatment, establishment of chemotherapy centres and procurement of dialysis consumables were cut by an aggregate amount of N7.45.”
The president also accused the National Assembly of increasing Statutory Transfers by an aggregate of N73.96 billion for recurrent expenditure.
He cited the example of the increase in the National Assembly allocation by N14.5 billion, from N125 billion to N139.5 billion.
This, no doubt, are weighty allegations and Nigerians were understandably incensed.
But that was before the National Assembly officially gave its side of the story, which essentially contradicted the president’s position.
In a 12-page statement titled, “The President’s Budget Speech: Our Response” which was signed by the Chairman, Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Aliyu Sabi Abdullah and Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Media & Public Affairs, Honourable Abdulrazak Namdas, the lawmakers debunked many of the allegations.
For instance, on the issue of the Second Niger Bridge, they insisted that there is no contract for the project and the government failed to expend the money appropriated in 2016 and 2017 for the same project.
“The issue of the Second Niger Bridge project, apart from early works, as of today, there is no existing contract for the Second Niger Bridge in spite of frequent requests from the National Assembly. The N900 million reduced from the N10 billion proposed by the Executive was deployed to fund ancillary roads that connect to the Bridge. It should again be noted that the N12.5 billion and the N7.5 billion appropriated for the Second Niger Bridge in the 2016 and 2017 budget by the National Assembly were never utilized for the project,” the lawmakers said.
They also disclosed that “the adjustments and reductions in the locations, costs and number of projects approved were made in order to address geopolitical imbalances that came with the executive proposal.”
For a government that has exhibited an inexplicable inclination to promote inequity, many Nigerians believe the lawmakers on this score.
Truth be told, neither the executive nor the legislature smells rose on the issue of budget. They both have fair share of the blame.
For instance, while it is true that the Appropriation Bill came in on November 7 and the lawmakers could have expedited action to pass it on time, it is also true that as at March 15, President Buhari was still directing the Secretary to the Government of the Federation to compel the Heads of Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) of the Federal Government to appear before the Committees of the National Assembly to defend their respective budgets.
Not only that, up till April, the executive was still making adjustments to the Appropriation Bill.
For a political party that controls both the executive and two chambers of the National Assembly, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has exhibited a very poor attitude to governance.
Six months into the year, Nigerians should be reaping the benefits of a budget that ought to have been executed half way and are therefore not interested in the self-serving back and forth that has become the norm.
We believe that the president’s alarm is mere red-herring. It is self-serving.
What we see in all this is a lack of capacity. The blame game smacks of lack of leadership to make the budgetary process efficient and effective in serving the people of Nigeria and it is a distraction.
The Buhari administration had with the 2016 and 2017 budgets spent more than N3 trillion on capital expenditure, a feat unprecedented in the history of budgeting in Nigeria.
While, the administration flashes this scorecard to Nigerians, the problem is that infrastructure project delivery in the country in these two fiscal years is underwhelming, without any major improvement in the country’s infrastructure stock.
This is the issue that Nigerians should pay attention to particularly on the eve of an election year.
The budget should be used to induce growth and development. That seems not to be the situation with ours, as Nigeria acquires the new status of the poverty capital of the universe.