The preparation of an appropriation bill is the constitutional prerogative of the executive arm of government and it is to be approved by the legislature, the representatives of the people, who are vested with the power of the purse. Sections 80 to 83 of the 1999 Constitution deal with the powers and control over public funds; it makes the role of the two arms of government clear. An appropriation bill, which leads to the budget, is a part of the plan, policy, law and budget continuum whereby the provisions of plans, policies and laws are translated into financial resources to be made available to government agencies for the implementation of these laws and policies. Thus, a budget does not stand in a vacuum. It is part of a chain and process that leads to development and implementation, at the federal, state or local government level of high-level federal, state or local government priorities.
A supplementary appropriation or budget is a supplement to an existing budget and by the provisions of section 81 (4) of the 1999 Constitution: “If in respect of any financial year, it is found that – (a) the amount appropriated by the Appropriation Act for any purpose is insufficient; or (b) a need has arisen for expenditure for a purpose for which no amount has been appropriated by the Act, a supplementary estimate showing the sums required shall be laid before each House of the National Assembly and the heads of any such expenditure shall be included in a Supplementary Appropriation Bill.” The same principles that guide the annual budget also guide the supplement in terms of what is allowable and what should not be part of it.
President Bola Tinubu, in his wisdom, thought there were needs and national priorities not captured in the 2023 federal budget and therefore requested the legislature to approve new expenditure. However, most of the items on his shopping list were frivolous, inappropriate, illegal or wasteful expenditure heads. Others were nebulous and couched in a way and manner that cannot be monitored. Previous budget items couched in that manner prepared the ground for “legalised” abuse and mismanagement of resources. In accordance with the established tradition of the administration, the National Assembly has approved the proposals with the exception of the proverbial presidential yacht under the vote of the Navy.
At this time when Nigerians have been asked to tighten their belt, the President was requesting N12.7bn for the presidential air fleet; purchase of SUV vehicles at N2.9bn; replacement of operational pool vehicles at N2.9bn. Under Code 23010105(ERGP7102076 -phased replacement of vehicles and spares) for State House Headquarters in the 2023 Appropriation Act, the purchase of vehicles already had a vote of N1.904bn. This excludes the purchase of tyres for bullet-proof vehicles, plain cars, CCU vehicles, platform trucks, jeeps, ambulances and other utility and operational vehicles (ERGP7103741) in the sum of N251m provided in the 2023 Appropriation. A supplement is normally expected to be smaller than the initially approved sum, asking for N5.8bn as a supplement to the sum of N1.904bn is not only outrageous but an inappropriate and wasteful expenditure. The implication is that the N1.9bn has been spent, it was not enough and needs to be supplemented. What happened to the existing vehicles? Were they taken away by the previous occupant(s) of the office? Nigerians need to know.
A sum of N1.5bn was requested for the purchase of official cars for the office of the First Lady. There are a lot of issues associated with this request. But we may deal with two or three. The first is that public expenditure on an office must only be for an office created by the constitution or any extant law. Without equivocation, the office of the First Lady is unconstitutional, illegal and unknown to Nigerian jurisprudence so as to be funded with taxpayers’ money. Qualifications for vying for the office of the president do not include being married to a man or a woman. Thus, any expenditure on that purported but non-existing office is not only unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, but also an affront to the decency of all well-meaning Nigerians. The second is that even if such an office was known to the law, should it be funded with vehicles to the tune of N1.5bn after provisions have been made for the president and presidency? This is neither a priority nor can it find support in any of our policy provisions. The third is the attempt to implement a “familiocracy”- a system where Nigerians are being ruled, albeit illegally, by a family rather than the elected president.
There was a request for the renovation of residential quarters for Mr President for N4bn; renovation of Aguda House at the cost of N2.5bn; computerisation and digitalisation of the State House at the cost of N200m; construction of office complex within State House at the cost of N4bn; renovation of Dodan Barracks, being the official residence of Mr President at the cost of N4bn; renovation of official quarters of the Vice President in Lagos for N3bn. Furthermore, the supplement includes the acquisition, renovation and rehabilitation of two EFCC forfeited quarters as State House Complex at Mabushi for N1.5bn and a second acquisition, renovation and rehabilitation of two EFCC forfeited quarters as State House Complex at Guzape. Apart from these expenditure items not being priorities, they are evidently overpriced.
How do you reconcile these expenditure items with the provision for annual routine maintenance of mechanical/electrical installations of the villa in the sum of N7.2bn and other maintenance work in excess of N500m in the villa in the original 2023 budget? So, these monies have been spent and we need more?
The Ministry of Agriculture continued the tradition of opaque budgeting that cannot be tracked and monitored. An example is the provision of seedlings, other agricultural inputs and supplies in the geopolitical zones at N11.7bn per geopolitical zone. There is another provision of agricultural implements and infrastructure in the six geopolitical zones at N11.7bn per geopolitical zone. Thus, a total of N140.4bn will be disbursed and no one will be able to hold the ministry to account for this sum and its deliverables. Over the years, we have raised issues with this approach to budgeting and the authorities in the executive and legislature ignored the calls for change. Despite the massive sums spent by this ministry over the years, why are Nigerians still hungry and unable to feed themselves?
All these point to insensitivity, total disconnection from the sufferings of the majority, and apparent contempt for the poorest of the poor. Again, it is up to Nigerians; if we believe this is the path to sustainable development – good and great. If we are convinced that the leadership is proceeding in the wrong direction, we must come to a consensus on necessary corrective action.
