FG, states disagree on control of palliatives accounts
From Niyi Bello, Akure
A DISAGREEMENT between the Federal Government and the 36 states over modalities for the disbursement of about N12.5 billion as a palliative for the recent increase in fuel price has put the exercise on hold.
The Federal Government in the wake of strike threats from Organised Labour and the public last October, announced that it would make available about N5 billion from the excess crude oil accounts for all the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
While 31 states were to get N100 million each, N200 million was voted for each of the five populous states of Lagos, Oyo, Kano, Rivers and Kaduna.
Under the arrangement, about N8 billion is to be contributed by the states as counterpart funding in the exercise, with 31 states contributing N200 million each while the five big states will contribute N300 million each.
The total amount will then be spent on provision of transportation facilities, especially mass transit vehicles, to ameliorate the effects of the new price regime on transport costs.
The Guardian, however learnt at the weekend that the states are resisting the Federal Government's plan to solely disburse the total amount and its insistence on deducting the states counterpart contribution from their federation account allocations.
During last month's Federation Account Committee (FAAC) meeting held in Abuja and attended by officials of the Federal Ministry of Finance and Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Allocation Commission (RMFAC) as well as commissioners for finance in the 36 states of the federation, the states' representatives were said to have vehemently opposed the Federal Government's proposal.
Their argument, The Guardian learnt, is that each of them should be allowed to spend its own share of the fund as they deem fit since each state has its own peculiar terrain and need.
With both sides insisting on their positions, the Minister of Finance, Dr. (Mrs.) Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who presented the Federal Government's proposal to the gathering, requested the state commissioners to go back home and seek the opinion of their governors before the December FAAC meeting. She promised to also consult with the presidency on the matter.
The Ondo State Commissioner for Finance and Economic Planning, Chief Tayo Alasoadura, who disclosed the statement to The Guardian, said that the Federal Government's proposal is contrary to the principle of fiscal federalism.
He said: "We opposed the proposal because we were not consulted on the best ways to spend the money. Rather, the Federal Government wanted to remove our own contributions from our allocations and spend it on their own."
Alasoadura added: "We opposed it also because the states are not facing the same problems and so cannot apply the same solutions to solving them. For instance, I don't know what we in Ondo State are going to do with luxurious buses. We would rather spend our money to purchase small buses to ply our roads."
The commissioner further argued that each state had begun various programmes to cushion the effects of fuel prices increase and that the best thing the Federal Government could do is to allow them to use the money to prosecute their own programmes.
His words: "under a true federation, why should the Federal Government decide for a state the best way to spend its (state's) own money? It is constitutional arbitrariness that we are opposed to."
Alasoadura continued: "In Ondo State, we have our own palliatives committee that has come up with recommendations on how to cushion the price increase and the state government has earmarked the sum of N500 million for that purpose. We could do a lot with the money coming from the excess crude oil account. We will spend our money in our own way."
The Commissioner also hinted that the states might insist on their position.
He said: "When I told my governor, Dr. Olusegun Agagu, the development, he insisted on our earlier position and feelers from other states indicate the same thing.
"So, we are going to the next FAAC meeting resolute on what we had earlier insisted upon; that our money should be given to us to be spent by us according to our own needs and programmes."
Meanwhile, a member of the National Judicial Commission (NJC), Adetokunbo Kayode (SAN), has described the palliative measures on petroleum price increase as "an after-thought that exposed government desire to do very little about the high level of poverty in the land.
He told The Guardian during an interview in Akure, Ondo State capital yesterday that what the various tiers of government needed to do was to build social security mechanisms into our system so that the gap between the rich and the poor would appear to have been bridged.
The legal practitioner, who, however, lauded the Federal Government for its ongoing reforms, said: "all over the world, processes of reforms are always excruciating for the population but government always cushions the effect on the low income earners. That is what is called social security, not an emergency palliative measure that is like a drop of water on scorched earth."
His advice: "We should build into our government system, mechanism to support the unemployed, the children, the aged and the disabled particularly among the low income group at the expense of the state."
Kayode further argued that the financial strength of the Federal and state governments could carry that most important social responsibility."
He added: "To make the money even more readily available, we need to look at our tax system with a view to getting more from the rich in the society. In Nigeria, the rich don't pay tax, they should be made to pay so that the poor can live."
