It is now two and half years into the administration of the All Progressives Congress (APC) led federal government. During the 2015 electioneering activities which resulted in the defeat of the then incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan and his party, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Nigerians were enthusiastic about the process, with some colleagues, friends and even family members taking sides. While some wanted continuity, others clamored for change. Ultimately, Nigerians decided for the latter and Muhammadu Buhari, the APC presidential aspirant was voted to govern the country.
Prior to the conclusion of the elections, I wrote a piece titled ‘The Morning After May 29, 2015 where I posited that irrespective of the party and candidate that emerged victorious, the expectation would be that a crack team of technocrats will be assigned portfolios and good policies designed, existing ones that require amendment modified, and already well-designed ones will continue to be implemented, all in an attempt to move the country forward. I also postulated that strategies of how Nigeria will move from rhetoric to taking practical measures to strengthen its institutions must be put in place given the important role that institutions play in the socio-economic development of any nation.
Lastly, I was of the view that Nigeria will need good luck in the form of high oil prices and minimal or no disruptions to oil production as this will boost government revenue. Of the three points raised, the second which has to do with strengthening of our institutions appears to be one of the Achilles heel of the present government. This is because at the heart of the intrigues, drama and politics of the budget process since the APC-led government came into power are the uncoordinated internal workings of the Ministry of Budget and National Planning (MBNP) on the one hand, and the battle for the control of the Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) between the Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF) and the MBNP on the other.
Before delving into the main issue however, it is necessary to note that there have been arguments for and against the performance of President Buhari and his team, including how the government has fared in the budget process. While some argue that little or nothing has been achieved and that propaganda is the hallmark of the government’s talk, those sympathetic to President Buhari and his government are of the opinion that the administration has done well given the rot created by the many years of PDP’s misrule. However, it will be malicious to say that the current government has done little or nothing in the two and half years in power while the achievements recorded by the 16 years of PDP rule cannot be wished away. Nevertheless, some of the challenges faced by the government of the day are self-inflicted and the recurring budget problem is a classic example. Although budget preparation and execution were not devoid of controversies during the PDP era, what obtained then was more of disagreements over budget assumptions, especially oil price and production as well as the issue of constituency projects. But despite efforts at improving the budget process, including technical support provided by some development partners, it is disturbing and disappointing that budgets prepared under the APC-led government have so far caused uproar rather than commendation. The 2016 budget was highly controversial; the 2017 budget may go down in history as the worst in terms of implementation while the proposed 2018 budget could turn out to be another instrument for executive-legislative face-off going by the recent pronouncement of the senate.
Unfortunately, the uncoordinated workings within the MBNP and the struggle for the control of the BOF between the FMF and the MBNP may be impairing the budget preparation as well as execution process. One of the first directives by President Buhari when he assumed office was that the then National Planning Commission (NPC) and the BOF (which at the time was under the FMF) be merged to form the Ministry of Budget and National Planning (MBNP). Although arguments still exist for and against the merger, one of the fundamental problems of the MBNP is the failure of government to provide a legal framework for its operation. The NPC Act has not been repealed (a visit to the website of the MBNP even shows that it operates using the domain name of the NPC), the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) 2007 that empowers the Minister in charge of Finance to prepare the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the Annual Budget has not been amended. That the Minister in charge of Budget and National Planning supervises the preparation of the MTEF and the Annual Budget and then present same to the Federal Executive Council (FEC) while there is a substantive Minister of Finance should be an interesting discuss for legal experts.
Also, the lack of well-defined structure, organogram and reporting lines, especially for the top hierarchy of the Ministry remains a challenge. For example, one of the early problems encountered was the reported superiority conflict between the office of the Director-General of the BOF and the Permanent Secretary. This, as well as a number of other reasons may have contributed to the problems encountered during the 2016 budget preparation. In addition, the 2017 and 2018 budget preparations were affected by the clear division between the Planning and Budget sides of the MBNP. This manifested in Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) receiving different and sometimes conflicting directives during budget preparation. A good example herein is when in July 2017 the Planning side organized a workshop on the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP) while the Budget side ordered a training on GIFMIS Budget Preparation Subsystem. The same set of MDA personnel were expected to attend the ERGP workshop and the GIFMIS training which took place same working days in the month July 2017.
The other and also equally disturbing issue is the battle for the soul of the BOF between the MBNP and the FMF. Sources at the BOF hinted that they really do not know where their loyalty lies given that they get summons from both the Minister in charge of Budget and National Planning as well as from the Minister of Finance. One of the reported fallouts of this power tussle is the creation by the Ministry of Finance of a Cash Management and Planning Department which appears to have rendered the hitherto busy Expenditure Department of BOF redundant. As such, there have been reports of both the MBNP and FMF being at logger heads as to the modalities of releasing funds for budgetary allocations. This needless skirmish is caused and aggravated by the fact that necessary steps have not been taken to institutionalise operations of the MBNP. In other words, these problems could have been avoided or minimized if proper governance procedures were hitherto taken by the government. There is therefore the need to strengthen the MBNP as it appears to be one of the weakest institutions of the current government despite the presence of capable and tested individuals in the Ministry.
Overall, the issues discussed herein are just some of the challenges of the budget preparation process from the perspective of the executive arm of government. There remain other contentious issues including but not limited to the seemingly ambiguous role of the legislature which often results in face-off with the executive.
Maxwell Ekor
Maxwell Ekor writes from Abuja
