SINCE the House of Representatives returned from its last recess, two issues had agitated the minds of the members. One was the retreat, which was hailed as a huge success. The second issue, which actually preceded the retreat, is the reconstitution of the 71 committees in the House.
Before they went for the retreat, which was held at three states-Niger, Bauchi, and Osun- the restructuring of the committees was the major topic of discussion in the House. A member had admitted that the lawmakers had come back from their recess with more worries than when they left in June.
Those particularly worried were the occupants of the "plum" positions of chairmen of committees, or even chairmen of sub-committees. On their heels were those aspiring to step into the position. The House leadership was not less worried, because it was aware that the reconstitution would mean a major realignment of interests.
Before the lawmakers went on recess, the Speaker, Aminu Bello Masari had tried to prepare the minds of the members concerning reconstitution of committees. However, the members did not know the extent of the reconstitution. Some of the committee chairmen had thought that Masari's idea of tinkering with the structure and composition of the committees was going to be superficial, ending in the mere swapping of a few positions. However, on resumption, the ad hoc committee raised by the House leadership to appraise the performance of the committees presented a damning report, which indicted over 33 committee chairmen.
The infractions ranged from dereliction of duties to allegations of compromise in the exercise of oversight functions. After the Selections Committee, which was headed by the Speaker, together with the other principal officers studied the report, they agreed that some of the chairmen should be relieved of their positions.
Sources at the meeting, which was held in Masari's office said other issues came up for discussion. One was the lopsided composition of the committees. It was said that whereas hundreds of members did not have leadership roles in the standing committees, some committee chairmen were also chairmen of two or more sub-committees. The report also said the since the inauguration of some committees last year, some chairmen have not turned in any report of concrete activities carried out by the committee.
In the report, some chairmen were indicted for compromising their offices in carrying out their oversight functions. The Guardian learnt that President Olusegun Obasanjo had had cause to draw the attention of Masari to reports from some ministries and parastatals alleging the "overbearing influence" of some of the chairmen. The President at his inaugural address to the National Assembly in June 2003 had warned that he would not tolerate a situation where the legislators would turn their oversight functions to instrument of intimidation and extortion. He said that the warning was informed by experiences from the activities of some lawmakers in the last dispensation.
The lacklustre performance of some committees has not come as a surprise to the lawmakers. The process that threw up most of the chairmen was seen as the problem. They said that perhaps for the first time in the history of the National Assembly, external influences played greater role in the appointment of committee chairmen than basic pre-requisites. The circumstances had held the leadership hostage before the inauguration of the National Assembly. There had been a big battle between the old members and the new ones over the appointment of principal officers. The old members had to go into bargains with some of the influential new ones to step down for them. In return, the new lawmakers would be compensated with plum committee positions.
In addition, some influential politicians including governors and ministers were alleged to have mounted pressure on the House leadership to give priority to their "people" in the sharing of committee positions.
The two factors above largely influenced the appointments into the committees. The manner some committee chairmen started their assignments was also considered as an indication that few of them understood the import of their appointment. At the inauguration, some of the chairmen put up grandiose ceremony, inviting their state governors and other dignitaries who were accommodated in five-star hotels in Abuja.
Then, most of the committee chairmen who were strangers to the oversight functions started summoning ministers and chief executives of their parastatals. The chairmen became mere pupils in the hands of the more experienced and more informed bureaucrats, because they did not take time to study the terrain of the 71 committees.
It is not surprising that the Rules and Business Committee, which is headed by Ita Ewang was considered among those that performed well. The experienced lawmaker was on a familiar terrain because he performed similar functions in the House of Representatives in the last dispensation. He is regarded as one of the pillars of legislative activities in the House because of his role as the compass of the chamber. When there is a deadlock in the House, he navigates the chamber through, a role that has earned him the wordy title: "the last bus stop of the House."
The Public Accounts Committee is the only committee recognised by the 1999 Constitution. The appointment of Oluwole Adeyemi of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) as chairman initially generated some controversy as the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) frowned at it. The position of the ANPP was based on parliamentary conventions. The party said that if the position should be held by the opposition party, it should have been given to the ANPP as the next party with the largest number of members after the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The leadership felt differently. After an initial lull in activity, the committee members shocked the leadership when they presented their report indicting several ministries and parastatals.
The Public Affairs Committee chairman Abike Dabiri, described as a square peg in a square hole, received accolades from observers of events in the National Assembly. She has not disappointed the leadership. Dabiri has saved the House embarrassing moments with her proactive handling of information on several occasions. She has ensured a steady flow of information between the media and the House of Representatives, thus removing suspicious that would otherwise have given rise to speculations in the media.
Her committee has dwarfed the main information committee, many wonder if there is still need for the information committee.
It is to the credit of the Appropriation Committee headed by Gabriel Susuwan that the 2004 Appropriation Act was passed in record time.
The Defence Committee headed by Oluwole Oke shone soon after inauguration with the way it handled the problem of military pension. But, the shine faded soon after and the question was what went wrong. Nevertheless, over N200 million has been recovered due to the exercise.
The Marine, Transport and Housing Committees gave the House some focus with their emphasis on capacity building. One problem the committees faced was that of inexperience. But they took the bull by the horn by collaborating with their agencies to come up with capacity building. The Marine Transport Committee saw to the implementation of the law on cabotage as well as the domestication of some international conventions.
The Judiciary Committee led by a lawyer Bala Abu Nalla has justified itself with the quality of legal guide it provided for the House.
Some committees that are considered to have justified their existence are Justice, States and Local governments, Internal Affairs, NDDC, Industries and Finance. The Finance Committee in particular worked with the Ministry of Finance to produce the 2004 Budget.
As the leadership moves to dissolve the committees, some members have resolved to politics of blackmail. The chairmen who are aware of their possible removal are busy raising sentiments to influence the leadership.
At the retreats, the issue of the composition of standing and ad hoc committees attracted intense debate.
The attention of Masari and Abdul Ningi were particularly drawn to the fact that the present situation was anomalous. The members complained that some committee chairmen had arrogated too much power to themselves to the discomfiture of other members.
Masari admitted that he was aware that some chairmen were overzealous, but lamented that the situation had degenerated because some principal officers have sympathy for some committee chairmen.
The number of the committees was condemned by Chairman of the Senate Committee on Works, Senator Idris Kuta. He said that the issue of the committees had become a tool for control in the National Assembly. For example, in order for the leadership of the Senate and the House of Representatives to stabilise their positions, they widen their support base by appointing more chairmen and deputy chairmen. The House in the Second Republic, Kuta said had only 27 committees as against the present 71.
As Kuta condemned the present structure, the members campaigned for greater participation in the restructuring. They canvassed an amendment of the House Standing Order to a collegiate structure where the committee members would elect their chairmen, determine their tenure, and remove them especially in a case of proven misconduct. This they said would improve the situation where wrong persons were appointed into chairmanship positions when they do not have adequate knowledge in the operations of the committees.
