My Pages

Showing posts with label lawmakers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawmakers. Show all posts

Saturday, 28 September 2013

Nigeria: How much do we pay our lawmakers? - Part II

Back on the streets
The Nigerian youth marched out to our legislative houses all around the country on Thursday the 26th of September 2013.
On Twitter, they mustered and gathered organised under the Twitter hashtag of #OurNASS where Nigerians demanded accountability, transparency and better representation. [Al Jazeera]
The occupation of elected political office had long shifted from the call to service to what was self-serving interests exemplified by outrageous remunerations that make the eyes water.
A salary to feast on
It is the long held belief that our democracy is both profligate and extravagant, it is safe to assume that the cost is unsustainable.
However, when the people congregated at the National Assembly in Abuja, some senators braved the crowds and came out to chat with the people where for the very first time a senator presented his payslip detailing the salary for one month paid in January 2010, in the previous electoral cycle as tabulated below:

Without considering inflationary changes and reassessments up to 2013, this alone presents an interesting reading on the percentages scale.
Multiples beyond belief
A senator will take 735% in allowances beyond his basic salary monthly with 200% going to housing and 250% going to managing a constituency office.
If the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) deductions total more than the basic salary, you then wonder if the allowances are taxed too.
Besides this, the vehicle loan is 400% of annual basic salary, but if a term is 4 years, how does a senator pay off that loan without seeking extra funds over and above the salary?

It would mean the legislator will would have either to meet that from the allowance pool or engage in other business activity to meet possible shortfalls, this remuneration structure is uneconomical and presents the framework for nefarious activity, possibly corruption.
Not sustainable
What does not show in this salary payslip is the furniture allowance, which is 75% of annual salary paid in a lump sum at the commencement of legislative tenure and 5% for housing allowance.
We still need to get a current figure representing what we pay our legislators but in percentage terms with reference to the basic salary, it is unlikely as I have said before that any private sector job rewards people this well, this democracy at this rate and cost is unsustainable.
Other reading

Tuesday, 6 August 2013

Nigeria: How much do we pay our lawmakers? - Part I

How much do we pay our lawmakers?
Getting round the inscrutability of the remuneration for Nigerian legislators has been a completely fraught exercise that none of the organisations with the function of regulating such appear to have a handle on.
However, when the Economist blew the lid off the exorbitant salary packages of the Nigerian Senators a few weeks ago as I wrote in this blog [1], the uproar that followed especially on social media meant that it was impossible to ignore and something had to be done.
A moribund commission
The Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) [See their About page here[2]], is empowered to:
"Determine the remuneration appropriate to political office holders, including the President, Vice-President, Governors, Deputy Governors, Ministers, Commissioners, Special Advisers, Legislators and the holders of the offices mentioned in Section 84 and 124 of the Constitution."
They have through this news story [3] gleaned from a newspaper advertisement released some information regarding the salaries of the Nigerian legislators but we are left with many more questions than what this red meat to the dogs of dissent was supposed to sate.
A guesstimate at best
Whilst the figures published by the Economist might be in dispute, the Economist asserts that their figures are for 2013, whereas the figures released by the RMAFC are in their words, ‘has been the official remuneration package since February 2007 till date’, which makes one wonder whether the salaries and allowances of our legislators have remained the same for 6 years despite inflation, the global financial crisis and two elections – that stretches the limits of incredulity, it really does.
Now, the Commission has taken it upon itself to do the following:
Accordingly, the Commission, therefore, considers it most appropriate and necessary to provide the actual details of present remuneration package for political, public and judicial office holders to avoid misinformation and misrepresentation of facts capable of misleading citizens and members of the international community.
They don’t really know
And what do they have?
According to the RMAFC, the emoluments for ministers, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of Service and Chairmen of Constitutional Bodies are close to those of the Senators
One might read that to mean they do not have the actual figures because, they reference that the “Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders Salaries and Allowances etc, (Amendment) Act of 2008, states the actual amount being paid to legislators and other public officers, adding, however that “any other allowance (s) enjoyed by any political, public office holder outside those provided in the Remuneration Act of 2008 is not known to the Commission and the Chief Accounting Officer should be held accountable”, I guess that means they really do not have all the information.
That is because, the said, Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders Salaries and Allowances etc, (Amendment) Act of 2008 [Viewable here as a PDF [4]] does not include the salaries of the any of the legislators, however, we have a general idea as to why seeking political and public office in Nigeria is quite a lucrative career move.
I commiserate
I can understand what Zakari Mohammed, the spokesman for the House of Representatives meant when he said, “Whatever is being written is mere exaggeration and does not reflect what is accurate. They fail to realise that what we take as salaries is different from what we use in running our offices.” Even accounting for what it takes to run an office, that would mainly be staff and other outgoings amounting to about 250% of basic salary with about 550% of basic salary in allowances to pocket. It still begs the question, what is accurate?
Then the RMAFC concludes with, “It is, therefore, wrong and misleading to add up allowances irrespective of whether they are regular, refundable or non-regular, as the regular annual emoluments of political and public office holders.
Honestly, RMAFC, if we were to add all that into the mix, the Nigerian Senator remuneration package will come to an eye-watering 1,505% of basic salary, and the other 225% for furniture? It breaks the bank to smithereens – Nice work if you can get it, I say.
The table of the Nigerian Senator Salary Package
The table below was derived from the figures supplied by the RMAFC [3] and as far as accuracy is concerned, they are only as good as 2007.



Friday, 30 October 2009

Nigeria: Lawmakers deliberate on the completely absurd

Originally written for NigeriansTalk.org as Lawmakers deliberate on the completely absurd.

No respect for the lawmaker

Sometimes I wonder why deliberations between lawmakers never get accorded any recognition of sophistication, erudition or plain sense.

It somehow never even gets to the level of a marketplace brawl in the heat of the day, the brutish entertainment of professional wrestling seems to have more decorum and order in its proceedings and eventual result – it is no wonder people might better watch a wrestling match than politicians politicking and preening themselves in self-absorbed discourse under the pretense of being representatives of some constituency.

That is the worrisome aspect of this line of thought, the fact that lawmakers are not seen in any good light and they then have the power to enact laws and legislation that affects our lives and livelihoods, it goes without saying that we need a better class of person first then better levels of deliberation.

A topic ready for debate

I have been reading comments to a news story in the good fatherland of Nigeria where lawmakers have deliberated the absurd, it is incredible that we end up with such representatives; these people do seriously believe they have raised serious concerns and their deliberations rather than being ridiculous are legitimate discourse.

The nEXt online newspaper carried and article with the headline Lawmakers ask robbers to declare temporary ceasefire [1], a headline like that should garner enough curiosity and interest, it did mine.

Nigeria is currently hosting the Under-17 Football World Cup, a competition that was almost pulled last year because the government could not see its obligation to follow through a commitment to host, the self-same government that is seeking a permanent seat on the UN Security Council – such is the myopia that plagues our leadership.

Appealing to the patriotism of bandits

Ogun State has one of the venues, so the lawmakers met up and first lamented that a particular location – Isheri Bridge on the border of Lagos and Ogun States had become a den of bandits.

Anyone would think once a hotspot for crime has been identified, you empower, equip and instruct the law enforcement agencies to sort it out and have a report at some future date as to how it was done and what else they need to be more effective at crime-fighting.

These politicians had a different line of thinking that could only be expressed verbatim, “there is a need for the men of the underworld to suspend their operations in the interim, because of the on-going mundial.”

Yes, our lawmakers were asking armed robbers to have a ceasefire, they should suspend their criminal activities to bolster and participate in the window dressing rebranding of Nigeria as a peaceful, crimeless and safe country.

Indeed, it is good to appeal to everyone’s sense of patriotism at a time like this, but this takes the absurd to another level crass stupidity, you cannot imagine anything worse can come after that appeal.

At the mercy of criminals

Well, it got worse, because the lawmaker went on to say, “Then they can resume thereafter, because there is nowhere in the world where robbers and robberies could be stopped from their work.

One comment read, if this were a drama sketch, it would be unbelievable, the lines would be struck out, but this really happened, those words were spoken by an elected representative that had willfully suspended every iota of intellect.

In one sentence, they threw in the towel to crime, left us at the mercy of criminals and in that defeatist thinking equated robbery to some sort of gainful pursuit or employment.

Robbers and robberies do get stopped and many do end up being nabbed by the long arm of the law if law enforcement is given the tools, responsibility and confidence to do their job. However, this lawmaker and the chamber in which his remarks received shameless hearing and debate have undermined ever establishment and institution that might at one time have been able to combat this menace with all vigour and win.

So feeble, so delusional

To rub salt in insult into injury, he concluded his plea for support with, “If foreigners witness the robbers' attacks at this point, it would send a bad signal to other nations.” In my view, nothing could be worse than having this debate where the lawmakers have put us at the mercy and goodwill of men of the underworld and given the police no particular impetus to make order, safety and security prevail.

Then the Speaker of the House feebly suggested, “I want to use the opportunity to call on the police to intensify efforts in checkmating criminals. They should please not relent in the efforts.” How the police are expected to win the war on crime where the chess analogy leaves them so powerless as pawns and the armed robbers are all elevated to queens escapes me.

Much more hot air of words but no backbone or force of parliament to arrest an untenable situation; all this constituted a debate in a house of assembly.

Scanning through the comments left, it is clear that the Nigerian populace with an opinion are less than impressed by this and attribute this to the rot that has made politics an unpalatable mix of the nastiest people holding the reigns of power but completely clueless as to what being in power represents.

It is no wonder that they cannot even get a local government official to appear before them.

The danger is that this kind of deliberation is probably not an exception, but the norm in many other state assemblies, providing for chaos, drift and misgovernment – Nigerians need to talk about this kind of representation and deliberation, it should never become commonplace.

Source

[1] 234Next.com | Lawmakers ask robbers to declare temporary ceasefire

Monday, 12 May 2008

Nigeria: Leaving the objective for the subjective

Leaving the issue

This is probably a classic example of the issue I raised in my blog about the Senate Health Bill being rejected for having irregularities.

In that blog, I made the observation that generally Nigerians tend to leave behind the issue and pander around peripheral subjects that becloud the real matter at hand thereby losing the ability to objectively focus on what needs to be done.

No power for all the money

Nigeria has a serious energy crisis which is experienced by a majority through inadequate power supply; it would appear the last regime spent $16 billion according to some sources on building new power stations and fixing the transmission grid.

Nigeria produces 3,000 MW of electricity whilst it needs at least 8,000 MW, the Nigerian House of Representatives Committee on Power and Steel has been reviewing the numbers and contracts awarded having seen situations 18 turbines worth $3 billion are still at port because neither the government nor contractors have the means of moving the machines to their power station locations.

You are cordially invited …

Before concluding their report on their findings on the power contracts and why improvements do not seem to be commensurate with the moneys and contracts signed, the House Committee on Power and Steel, respectfully invited the former President Olusegun Obasanjo, his deputy, vice-President Atiku Abubakar and the former Minister of Finance Nenadi Usman to help understand the terms and circumstances of the contracts and what was expected for what was paid to fulfil those contracts.

Obasanjo and Atiku have offered to appear, Usman has been too chicken to appear at any of the committees to which she has been invited.

In general terms, if these people do have any information that would help us understand what was spent between $6.5 billion according to Obasanjo and any other figure of speculation, we would be glad to know why it has not yet resulted in improved power supplies or some other impediment to progress.

A legal clearance

The Nigerian Bar Association has been flipping the pages of the Nigerian Constitution and concluded that the legislature is within its rights of competence to invite, summons, issue a bench warrant or warrant the arrest of a citizen that refuses to heed its friendlier requests.

So, all should be in order for these people to respectfully present themselves to the committee and hopefully answer the questions they are asked so that the committee’s report might have a completeness that would allow us to move on to providing decent solutions for power.

Defending the indefensible

Well, not really, a group of lawmakers from the South West – read politicians driven by tribal instinct – have opposed the invitation to Obasanjo, criticising the committee for not seeking the backing of the principal officers of the House.

I think the committee already has the mandate of the House to review and investigate issues under their remit, if it includes inviting citizens no matter their previous status; they should not have to renew their mandate to invite individuals of interest to the committee.

They go on to argue that it is an act of disrespect to invite someone of Obasanjo’s status having served the country meritoriously as a past leader.

Well, I would contend, if he has served the country meritoriously, he should quite proudly and honourably be willing to defend and accentuate the good points of his service before any committee of properly constituted authority that might be seeking to get at the truth or attempting to impugn his service.

Obasanjo is already in the fray

Obasanjo may not have awarded the contracts but his regime should have had systems in place to monitor the progress of contracts and sanctions in place to exact against those who fail to deliver on the contracts.

Obasanjo himself has published information about what he spent on the power contracts which makes him a person of particular interest to answer questions on that matter – we should not be caught in the emotion of those lawmakers, the matter at stake is not about personalities, it is about questions that need answers that Obasanjo, Abubakar and Usman probably know a lot about.

Preserving a flawed status

The Nigerian Tribune which has an editorial remit that makes fawning sycophancy a prime art, suggests that Obasanjo and Abubakar might not appear before the committee.

Obasanjo, they say is being advised by his associates not to appear in order to preserve his status as former president – it makes you wonder if a former president of Nigeria does not come under that general collective term of citizen of Nigeria.

We are being regaled with due process talk of who should invite anyone between the Clerk of the House and the committee – it does not really matter to me, if the committee by a majority has decided to invite anyone, it just belabours process to have it contested by House officials.

But this is a clear example of people who are leaving the objective issue of obtaining answers to questions about power to peripheral subjective issues about status and respect – how that helps answer the questions escapes me and it does not help anyone – neither the summonsed parties nor Nigerians at large.