July 13, (THEWILL) – States and local governments advocate more money, but fail to justify what they already get, writes MIKE UZOR
Mounting pressure for increased resource control by states often obscures the reality that spending power has a level of devolution in Nigeria that is not found anywhere else in Africa. Progressively, Nigeria has attained a system of devolved spending power where state and local governments get close to one-half of national revenue.
The authority to spend that much on behalf of the nation has not been linked to increased provision of social services; nor is there a matching transparency and accountability. The quest for increased resource control powers subdues the demand for state and local government authorities to demonstrate responsibility in spending what they already get.
The second and third-tier governance design was adopted in Nigeria with a view to making government spending more impactful on the people than could be accomplished at the federal level.  It is, therefore, counted as direct responsibilities of states and local councils to move their people out of poverty, provide community access roads, electricity and other life enhancing social services.
State and local governments are designed to be the direct actors in developing their economies by empowering economic activities within their respective domains. By activating the development functions and building capacities in the states, they place themselves in an enhanced position to generate revenues internally.
Beyond some politically motivated slogans and make-believe gestures to paint a picture of internal capacity building, the second and third tiers of government are found to be without action or sufficient action in these basic responsibilities. This has been the story of their performance records over the 22 years of Nigeria’s return to civil rule.
The neglect of government responsibilities of ensuring normal growth and development of state and rural economies has its costs. Without proper education and opportunities in the economy, a large number of the youth has been lost to the wrong side of life. The society at large is paying dearly for this error in governance – the sustained failure to apply national resources to build the people across the states.
State and local government authorities have responsibility for primary and secondary education, basic healthcare, water and sanitation, feeder roads and other economic capacity building infrastructures. Well organised societies have found that investments in these services, particularly education, are the key ingredients for human character molding, correcting deviants and ensuring a safe and peaceful development of society.
Over the 22 years of continuing neglect of these responsibilities in Nigeria, there have emerged from across the nation, area boys, hoodlums, miscreants, insurgents, militants, gunmen and herdsmen turned kidnapers. State governments usually blow their trumpets on how much they are spending on education and social services.
The question then is how such claimed investments have produced the high and rising population of deviants. To the contrary, they are counted as products of a woeful failure of the school system; the evidence of bad government interventions across the board in a sector as key and basic as education.
The big question mark on state and local government finances is how else have the funds not invested in the people been applied. That has for so long been a closed end question for there are no answers coming from any quarters. The position is the same across the states of the federation. Accountability is not just on a long holiday; it has been sent on an exile.
The coat of federalism appears to have been borrowed without the matching trousers of accountability. State governments do not take orders from Abuja and they are not bound to answer queries from the people. Typically, they reign supreme in their domains.
The constitution gives authority to the states to receive the approved share of the national revenue but attaches no responsibility as to how they should spend the revenues to the benefit of their people. This is the true meaning of Nigeria’s federalism as the 1999 constitution has defined it.
The over 47 per cent of the federation revenue allocated to state and local governments is meant to be applied in education, basic healthcare, water and agricultural services. While these government tiers have all not received a pass mark in these services to the people, the system does not hold them responsible for failure.
The demi-god disposition of state governors explains the existence of a backlog of years of unaccounted spending, lack of due process in approval and disbursement of funds, no audited accounts and no transparency about how public funds are being spent from year to year.
The failure to build economic capacities in their respective states all these years is paying back with a bad coin – meager internally generated revenues. Where they have not sown, they cannot reap! Apart from Lagos State that stands out for being the nation’s financial capital, the fiscal crisis and insolvency aren’t far-fetched from most of the states of the federation.
The rainy days that were not provided for through quality investments in their people are now around the corner for state governments. Bereft of internal capacities, as many as 24 state governments had to go cap-in-hand for bailout by the federal government in 2016 to be able to pay staff salaries.
The bailout was approved for the purpose of clearing arrears of salaries and pensions. However, some state governors were said to have diverted the funds to other purposes, which frustrated the purpose of the bailout and allowed salary arrears to build on.
Even now many states are owing several months’ salary arrears and they are unable to service their debts. Net of due deductions, the revenues of a number of state governments compared to expenditures clearly mean that they are failed entities.
Dependence on oil revenue is total across the three tiers of government. This means that no government in Nigeria is able to shield its economic enclave from the devastating effects of oil revenue volatility. Demand for accountability for allocated revenue continues to be overshadowed by a frenzied quest for greater resource control.
This admixture of economics and politics seems to propose the wrong agenda on who should be in charge of national resources. The chorus continues to sound in the direction of giving more to states that are less accountable, surprisingly! Putting more resources in the hands of state and local governments that have neither performance nor accountability to show for the level of authority at their command is considered a major flaw on the resource control agitation.
The push for increased financial powers to states is not supported with how to ensure strict rules on disclosure and responsible spending, due process for expenditures, empowerment of check and balancing arms of government, timely release of audited accounts of government and state-owned enterprises.  Administrative checks and balances are undermined through the election process usually influenced to ensure state assemblies and local government offices are filled with loyal people.
Insecurity of lives and property has taken over an increasing number of states – an indication that huge security votes given to state governors as chief security officers of their states haven’t been properly invested in security matters.
The funds are not accounted for to the public that is suffering the consequences of possible misappropriation. After a joint investigation of the security votes by the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre and Transparency International, the bodies concluded that the transfers are fuelling corruption.
State governments are expected to take a fundamental look at the problem of insecurity by facing the much work that requires to be done in the field of education. The responsibility to prevent growing children from becoming insurgents through education is placed at the doorsteps of state governments.
Governors are expected to stop celebrating payment of arrears of workers’ salaries but show the nation by what margin they have raised the performance of state schools and the literacy levels in their various states.
The demand by states for increased power over revenue can be legitimized if performance and accountability have been linked to what they already get. A demonstration of performance and accountability are underscored as the conditions for further devolution of power to states. The conditions aren’t likely to be attained without internal changes that truly make governors answerable to independent assemblies and the judiciary.
•Courtesy: NextMoney
