2013 Budget: Unending fireworks between the Presidency, National Assembly

The Presidency, the Senate and the House of Representative appear locked in a battle of figure and superior reasoning over the 2013 budget.

While  the Presidency proposed $75 benchmark, both chambers of the National Assembly vehemently rejected the figure. Instead, they came up with their respective benchmarks. The Senate opts for $78 while the House of Representatives firmly pegs it at $80.

Expectedly, this has generated a lot of controversies within the three institutions. Finding a common ground appears difficult at the moment as Saturday Vanguard’s JOHN BULUS in this special report analyses the effects of the  fireworks.

Even without any foreboding, one could have fathomed the brouhaha presently brewing between the Presidency and the National Assembly over the N4.92 trillion 2013 national budget presented to the joint session of the federal legislature by President Goodluck Jonathan last week, precisely on October 10, 2012. This is predicated upon some unhealthy developments that almost heralded an impeachment process on the President by especially, a vexing House of Representatives in  August this year.

The lower arm of the legislature was conspicuously dissatisfied with the performance of the 2012 budget and asked the executive to tell Nigerians how far the budget has impacted on Nigerians. The issue later assumed a critical dimension that for weeks, the media was awash with impeachment threats against President Jonathan.

But like the proverbial cat with nine lives, President Jonathan wriggled himself out of the odds. But not without learning some lessons. And to some analysts, the lessons learnt by the President may have translated in the timing, preparation and presentation of the 2013 federal budget. Indeed, not a few Nigerians would argue the fact that since the advent of democratic rule in 1999, no attempt has been
made by Jonathan’s predecessors to present the national budget in October. The culture has always been in December.

JONATHAN, MARK and Tambuwal

But in a controversial stance that has elicited cacophonic reactions, President Jonathan made bold, took a detour from the status quo and presented the 2013 federal budget to the National Assembly last week.

Even at that, one had expected that Jonathan’s pleas to the National Assembly in their usual manner accord the Budget accelerated consideration without much ado. But no. That may be far-fetched as there appears to be this disturbing discrepancy between the presidency and  both Houses of the National Assembly.

Rather than abating, the “war” is assuming a very critical dimension that may prompt a greater face-off between the three institutions. Perhaps, in the estimation of most analysts, this may be better understood in the reenactment of the scenarios that may have prompted the current development.

The July impeachment threat

It all started when a motion supported by over 21 members was presented to the floor of the House by Hon Albert Sám Tsokwa from Taraba State was adopted. Tagged ‘the non- implementation of the 2012 budget’, the motion sought to access the performance and implementation of 2012 budget by the Executive. Sam Tsokwa, who led the debate on the floor of the house, noted that the 2012 budget was passed with an aggregate expenditure figure of N4.8 trillion including the N180 billion Subsidy Re-investment (SURE) programme.

According to Tsokwa, the budget which was passed and signed into law by the President reflected the application of the highest degree of fiscal responsibility by the National Assembly. He expressed worries that seven months into the 2012 fiscal year, capital budget implementation by various MDAs was far behind expectations and wondered that in spite of the fact that the MDAs had reached advanced stages in the implementation of the procurement process, they were unable to release contract award letters because of insufficient funds.

Essentially, Hon Femi Gbajabiamila representing Surulere in Lagos State who initiated the debate on budget implementation, suggested that if the economy is not properly greased by September, then the House may not have any option than to start impeachment process against the President.

Gbajabiamila in his argument stated that “the President had come to the floor of the House with a budget which he called transformation budget but it is a budget of abracadabra and voodoo.”

Gbajabiamila continued: “The President is not doing anybody any favour as constituency projects are done all over the world. I have met the President, he is a fine man, I like him but I like my country more because when the budget is not implemented, our constituents suffer and it leads to lack of infrastructure; so come September, if the budget is not 100 per cent implemented, we will start to throw articles of impeachment at the President.”

Some quarters believe that    the  threats of impeachment to President Jonathan may have jolted him to present the 2013 budget as against the previous ones. They asked, for instance, why the 2011 and 2012 budgets were not presented in October.

But the founding National Chairman of All Progressive Grand Alliance, APGA, Chief Chekwas Okorie thinks differently on the timing. He said “the presentation of the 2013 budget to the national assembly in October is a welcome development and a radical departure from what used to be the case.

The commendable intention of Government is to allow the national assembly adequate and reasonable time to debate it and make its input in the budget and pass it in good time for the President to assent  to it early in the budget year, commencing January 2013.

I expect the  national assembly to be dispassionate, reasonable and patriotic in dealing with the issues involved and avoid undue  grandstanding in order not to scuttle government’s intention”.