Dispute over the ministers’ N8.6 billion four-year budget

The media reported that the newly appointed 48 ministers by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu would be grinning home with a whooping N8.6 billion in wages and allowances in just four years. This news has angered, scared, and concerned Nigerians.

They were concerned because the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) had informed them that the salaries and benefits of the ministers would use N8.63 billion of the country’s scarce resources over the next four years.

There is also growing worry that the amount of money may rise over time, a development that has infuriated and outraged many Nigerians. After the RMAFC finalised its recent examination of public officials’ compensation, the information regarding the salary and allowances the ministers would receive became known to the public.

Nigerians have continued to respond negatively to this, especially in light of the federal government currently led by the All Progressives Congress’s pledge to cut government spending and raise the standard of life for all citizens.

With 48 ministers earning such a massive sum of money in just four years, many people wonder how the promise of lowering the cost of governance would be accomplished.

Those who supported this story claimed that Tinubu should have reduced the number of ministries to 33, as previous President Goodluck Jonathan did when he was in office.

They reasoned that, given the country’s financial situation, this would have freed up a sizeable sum of money for the President to invest in other areas of the economy.

“Tinubu’s cabinet of 48 ministers appears to be the largest since Nigeria returned to democratic governance in 1999,” claimed Mr. Marcellus Onah, one of the lawyers who supported this scenario. 42 ministers served under Muhammadu Buhari, his immediate predecessor. Throughout his eight years in office, former President Olusegun Obasanjo employed 42 ministers. Umar Musa Yar’Adua, the late president, had 39 ministries. With 33 ministers, nine of whom were holdovers from Yar’Adua’s administration, Goodluck Jonathan had the fewest. Later, soon before the 2015 general elections, Jonathan upped the number to 37.

But at a time when the nation’s fiscal problems are nothing to write home about, Tinubu is here naming 48 ministers. As he promised, he should be looking about lowering the cost of governing rather than opening up new channels for spending.

However, given the high cost of governance and the ministers’ pay over the past four years, many Nigerians are urging Tinubu’s administration to revive the Stephen Oronsaye report on civil service reform, which has been sitting in the presidential mansion since it was delivered in 2011.

Remember that Jonathan established the Oronsaye-led Presidential Commission on Restructuring and Rationalisation of the Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions, and Agencies in 2011?

Due to its ‘objective’ substance, the report was ultimately dismissed. In order to lower the cost of administration and free up funds to address other national issues, Oronsaye has suggested that several Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) be merged.

Among other proposals, the report suggested that 38 federal agencies be eliminated, 14 agencies be combined into the ministries from which they originated, 263 statutory agencies be reduced to 161, and 52 institutions be consolidated. Unfortunately, once the report was submitted, Jonathan gave up on it, and neither former President Buhari nor the present president have given the report any attention.

According to experts, if the government can review the report and reduce the MDAs to 161, the nation will save well over N12 trillion. As a result, they are pleading with the government to review the report and consider whether it may be implemented, even if just partially.

They claimed that this was now necessary in light of the nation’s existing fiscal problems, which include continued borrowing without a plan for a strategic debt repayment other than paying off the growing debts with more than half of the annual budget.

Some would contend that the choice of ministers is a constitutional matter.

There is, however, a counterargument that, despite the fact that the appointment of ministers is a constitutional matter—an argument the President would also like to advance—he should keep in mind that, according to the same constitution, there can only be a maximum of 37 ministers—one for each state plus the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.

Additionally, they want the president to be reminded that when former President Jonathan had 33 ministers, nothing terrible happened.

Some people believe that since Jonathan had 33 ministers when the economy was thriving, Tinubu has no need to keep that number the same now that things are bad and the people are struggling to make ends meet.

“Public embarrassment about government borrowing is growing. Government debt levels are at an all-time high. One might anticipate the government, which is professing renewed hope, to follow Jonathan’s example or even adhere, at least temporarily, to the constitutional requirement of one minister per state, given the current debt profile of the government and the biting hardship being experienced as a result of the removal of the fuel subsidy. However, the administration continues to act as though everything is fine with the national economy.

“When the economy was thriving, Obasanjo had 42 ministries. The 39 ministers in Yar’Adua. Buhari also has 42 ministries. None of them had more than 42 ministers while serving as president during a time when fuel was subsidised and the cost of necessities was affordable to the average person. Since there is no longer a subsidy on petrol, practically every area of peoples’ lives has been impacted, making it very difficult for them to survive.

“However, the administration is announcing the appointment of 48 ministers, the most since the nation’s restoration to democracy in 1999, despite its message of renewed hope. When people seem to lose all hope on a daily basis, where is the newfound optimism?

“Normally, this government should have taken into account the economic circumstances and followed Jonathan, who did not appoint up to 36 ministers, or even done better than him by choosing fewer than 36 because the nation does not have money; the government relies on borrowing,” said one observer. But instead, politicians must take use of it at the expense of the general public, claimed Mike Okaro, a worried resident of Lagos.

Although the Middle Belt Forum (MBF) President, Dr. Pogu Bitrus, also voiced discontent and claimed that selecting 48 ministers at this time was cumbersome, he added his voice to the rising worry regarding the situation.

“something is not the first time that something has occurred in Nigeria. In order to placate the populace, the civilian rule appointed many more ministers than allowed by the constitution. The economy will suffer as a result.

“According to the constitution, each state is to have one minister, which is 36 plus one from the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja. However, because the law does not set a cap on the number of appointments, presidents frequently appoint more than that required minimum.

“It is cumbersome; it is not advantageous for the nation, but that is the state of our democracy. And keep in mind that in Nigeria, what is commonly referred to as democracy serves only to appease the demands and needs of the political office holders and the groups they represent.

“As a result, I especially oppose this big, bloated cabinet structure. The size of the United States of America is more than that of Nigeria, but how many ministers do they have there? There aren’t even 20 ministers in the United States. The problem is that our clumsy system of government is bad for governance, bad for us, and bad for our society.

The National Assembly should investigate the situation and see what can be done to lower the number of ministers in Nigeria, he further argued.

“The National Assembly has to review this clause in the constitution so that we can have a better government that doesn’t charge the taxpayers too heavily.

Yes, Tinubu wasn’t the first to do so, but he said, “What we are saying is that there is a need for legislation on such things, so that we can have a better government system that won’t be consuming too much of our lean resources.”

Pogu also mentioned a significant drain on the economy as one effect of the huge cabinet because each minister would have numerous assistants in addition to the wages they would receive from the system.

“Perhaps for political motives, the President is acting in this way rather than taking into account the economy and the country’s ability to support such a system.

“What we are saying is that the National Assembly needs to wake up and take necessary action in order to prevent the presidential system of administration from becoming as cumbersome as it is. Greater prudence will also result from this.

“You see, I don’t believe in the parliamentary form of governance, but it is less time-consuming and extremely cost-effective because the ministries, including the leader of the country, will be chosen from among them as a lawmaker.

“And instead of having two portfolios, government will be a little bit less resource-intensive, and everything will be discussed in the House, making the executive and the legislature the same.

I’m not sure if we ought to create a kind of governance unique to Nigeria so that it won’t be as cumbersome as it is presently. Unfortunately, we continue to struggle with pointless ministry nominations given our current fiscal circumstances.

However, he added, “We need to remind the National Assembly that it has the authority to amend and add to the constitution, to take the necessary action to stop such behaviour immediately and to look for a less expensive form of government, including what is taking place in the National Assembly.

Umar Yakubu, the executive director of the Centre for Fiscal Transparency and Integrity Watch (CefTIW), added that it was wasteful for President Tinubu to appoint 48 ministers, particularly at a time when the administration claimed to be working to reduce government spending and increase income.

“The constitutional criterion for appointment is that there must be one minister from each state and the FCT, or 37 total. But now that the president has nominated 11 additional ministers over what the Constitution calls for, the cost of governance and ongoing expenses will increase.

“Having 48 ministries when other nations are integrating is wasteful. The US, for instance, only has 15 ministries.

“Unfortunately, we are growing down here, which will only make our financial crisis worse. You can picture the cost of fuel and upkeep for the official automobiles that would be purchased for these ministers,” he remarked.

Another APC leader, Hon. Yusuf Shehu, a former member of the Katsina State House of Assembly, characterised the incident as rather terrible given the hardship Nigerians are going through.

He bemoaned the fact that, while the majority of people in the northern states like Katsina, Kano, Jigawa, and Zamfara find it incredibly difficult to even purchase a meal, only around 10% of them can afford three square meals per day.

Some people are only able to afford one meal a day. Families go two to three days without eating. It is therefore very regrettable that only 48 ministers used N8.6 billion, he remarked.

He criticised the political climate in Nigeria, which he claimed was to blame for the lack of progress in the nation.

“Politics in Nigeria is so expensive that leaders don’t take into account the situation of the common man,” he remarked. When they learn that 48 ministers will only be paid this kind of enormous sum over the course of four years, some individuals will pass out.

“Our hospitals are in disrepair, our schools have collapsed, and our roads are in poor condition, yet the government is perfectly content to spend such a sizable sum of money in just four years on only 48 ministers.

“And this does not include any other perks that are not widely known. This just includes salary and benefits. With this level of expenditure on the leaders, how can Nigeria advance?

The government should have thought twice before spending such a significant sum of money on the ministers, he continued, given the suffering the nation is currently experiencing as a result of the elimination of fuel subsidies, currency changes, and naira devaluation.

“If the ministers are truly serving the needs of the people, they should sit down and lower their compensation since it is far too high. They ought to be aware of the suffering of the populace, he remarked.