JOSHUA EGBODO writes on the unanswered questions as the House of Representatives probe its utilisation of the funds over the years
The issues
When the worrisome manner in which the ecological fund project was being managed peaked, the House of Representatives, way back in June, 2022 passed a resolution, mandating its Committee in charge of the Special Intervention Fund to investigate the total consolidated mandatory accruals into the fund, and its disbursement from 2010 to March 2022.
The committee was also expected to determine the utilisation of the ecological fund by benefiting government’s Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) for the period under review, as well as conduct public hearing with all major stakeholders, on the effective and efficient utilisation of the ecological fund and report, and report its findings back to the larger house.
Attention of the House was drawn to the matter through a motion by Hon. Femi Bamisile from Ekiti state, on Thursday June 23, 2022, who in his presentation pointed out that apart from the annual statutory appropriations, four agencies of the federal government draw funds from the one percent share of the federal government allocated fund to ecology and derivation fund according to their respective enabling laws.
“The National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) by virtue of Section 13(2) (b) of its Act, draws 20%, National Agency for the Great Green Wall (NAGGW) by virtue of Section 12 (2) (b) of its Act, draws 15%. The North-East Development Commission (NEDC) by virtue of Section 14(12) (b) of its Act, draws 10% and the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA) by virtue of Section 18 (2) (a) of its Act, draws 10%.”, Bamisile stated in presenting the motion.
Probe launched
On Thursday November 7, 2022, the committee commenced its investigative public hearing on the matter, and so much in the opinion of many, was left to be desired.
MDAs’ poor appearance
When the investigative hearing began, it was clear that not many of the affected government agencies made appearances as expected by the panel. The committee took special attention on the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA), which it queried sternly on its receipt and utilisation of the share of its ecological fund. Chairman of the Committee, Hon. Ibrahim Isiaka gave the panel’s position after Director General of the Authority, Prince Paul Ikonne had made a presentation on the details of funds received since 2022.
“We made submission already as requested by your committee, Mr. Chairman. From June, 2020 till the day of requesting for this submission to be made which is from March 2022, NALDA has received a total N9,642,557,654.91. Up till date, NALDA has received a total of N12, 740,506,664”, he had said.
Reacting, Isiaka said “NALDA, we have received your submission and having gone through it, the committee members have so many queries and questions. Before we put on the spot you still want a bit so that we go through the rest”, and also expressed displeasure over the non appearance of some agencies.
States absent too
Besides failure of many of the agencies invited to appear, several state governments were also not represented. According to the committee chairman, about 10 states which included Ogun, Enugu, Plateau, Kwara, Imo, Niger, Ondo, Borno, Jigawa honoured the invitation out of the 36 states invited.
Anger, fresh summons
A member of the panel, in a motion requested a resolution that affected agencies be issued a fresh summon. Relying on the motion, Isiaka summoned head of National Emergency Management Agency, NEMA while re-inviting others.
“Those that refused to cause appearance here, or refused to respond to our letters, should know that anyone willing to test the capacity of this committee will not be disappointed. It is very obvious that people are even just paying lip service in his country and being frivolous about the clamour for devolution of powers, such that the urge to always go cap in and to the centre by states… this committee and the House of Representatives has in the past few months, worked assiduously to make sure that the 774 local governments of this country and the 36 state including the FCT, their self sustenance in terms of funds and allocation to them for ecological challenges.
“Out of 36 states of the federation, we do not even have half of the representatives here with us. I don’t know where we are going to. This is the second opportunity and window open to them. The first was when we started public hearing on the regulation of ecological fund, that is the Bill, as it where that time, only three states came here.
“And again today, we are having the investigative hearing and of course, while we have so many stakeholders who can contribute and then we have our take home, our recommendations aside that the House had passed for the third reading and signed the newly proposed formula to sharing which the President had even keyed into.
Now the states representatives, or the states think they should not just cause appearance to help us share ideas. We are all working for Nigerians, for the benefit of the citizens” he said, warning against the perception that the project was one slush fund.
“Everybody is seeing it as an idle fund. Now, we are calling all of us to sit down, let us allow the whole world to know that it is not an idle fund… “By (a) new legislation that may be coming, we are saying enough is enough. We do not want anyone to be referring to it and say it should be their funding. They should look for their source of fund elsewhere.
He queried the attitude of agencies of resuming to honour invitation, even when President Muhammadu Buhari was respectful enough to direct through the SGF, a compendium on the project for the committee.
“But we have some good news for them. We still give them that window to hurriedly make their submissions and appear to defend whatever they are submitting, or they would be willing to go and defend themselves at another institutions of the government. Because when we send our reports, definitely another institution would invite them, i can assure them”, he said.
Taking specific notes of other MDAs, the chairman said “NEMA did not reply. We have written two three times, no information no response. The MD of NEMA having failed to respond to the three letters written to him to respond to monies allotted to NEMA is hereby summoned to appear before this committee….
“HYPPADEC having failed to appear before this committee after three letters written must cause appearance. The MD is hereby summoned to appear before this committee.
“Federal Ministry of Health, we have written two letters so far, no response to one. The last and final letter would be written to that ministry today and we urge the Ministry to respond to it on or before November 9.
“Federal Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs, we have it on record how much they have drawn from ecological funds and we have written two letters for them to appear before this committee.
“No representation and no reason for failure to show up. We are writing the third letter which must be responded to on or before November 9, 2022. This is directed at the Minister. He must reply to our letter on or before Wednesday, November 9.
“It is so unfortunate that we invited the DG of Nigeria’s Governors Forum and he is also not here and no representation. Let him be reminded that Sections 88 and 89 of the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria did not mince any words when it states that the House, ie the National Assembly, can and shall invite anybody. That is the underlying word; ‘anybody’. So, the committee is hereby re-inviting him to appear…
Some explanations offered
For some of the states which made appearances, a listening ear was given by the committee as they offer explanations on how received funds were expended. In his submissions, the Accountant -General of Plateau state, Dr. Cyril Tsenyil told the committee that between 2021 and October 2022, the state received N1,328,521, 802.48.
Also, Commissioner for Finance, Jigawa state and secretary Forum of Commissioners of Finance of Nigeria, Ibrahim Babangida Umar, also gave details of their receipt and expenditure, adding however that most of the commissioners were yet to get clearance from their governors to appear before the committee.
“I want to crave your indulgence to chip in two things. I stand here on behalf of Forum of Finance Commissioners, we have actually interacted. It is not a deliberate attempt by Hon. Commissioners not to appear here and answer your invitation.
“As you all know, commissioners and accountant generals are answerable to their principals and I know no commissioner will come without getting clearance.
“Most of the commissioners mentioned that up till now that they have not gotten clearance from their principal. That’s actually the issue. We thank you for having the courage to conduct this investigative hearing”, he noted.
For the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), the Director of Treasury, FCT, Hamza who agreed that it received N1.5 billion sometimes in 2015, could not satisfy the committee on the the required details. The panel therefore demanded more details from the FCT administration. “You have six area councils.
They are part of the 774 local governments. We have the details for the N1.5 billion as you have explained which we are going to engage you on. But what about the area councils and the FCT. Prepare from 2014 based on what you have to 2021. Revise what you have with you, capture it from 2014 to 2021 and submit at once”, Isiaka said in reaction.
Others who made presentation were Director General of the Nigeria Hydrological Service Agency, NIHSA DG, Clement Nze appealed to the committee to make more funds available to it to effectively execute its mandate, and Director, Federation Revenue and Special Accounts, Abdulkarim Ibrahim who stood in for Acting Accountant General of the federation, Mr Sylvia Okolieaboh who offered clarifications on the controversy surrounding previous payments to the states.
“The vertical sharing formula has evolved for sometime. The current ratio we use now, is 52.68% for federal government, 26.72% for states and 20.60% for local government. That 72% for states represents ecological elements of states but unknown to them. Most of them who are wise remove that fraction and enter into a separate account but majority of the states, whatever they receive annually or monthly they assume, …with exclusion of ecological fund.
“Most states now are saying it’s only from March 2021 that they have account of ecological fund unknown to them that all these while, what they have been receiving, there’s element of ecological fund in their kit”, he explained”.
Director, Pollution and Control, Ecological Projects Office, Clinton Igwe, representing the permanent Secretary pointed that the office doesn’t control the ecological funds.
“There’s a general misconception about the ecological fund as distinct from ecological project office which happens to be one of the core reasons why with the approval of President Muhammadu Buhari we had to change our name from ecological fund office to project office, adding that the ecological fund is shared on a monthly basis by the FAAC.
And the curious fresh demand
While debate on the challenges being faced by the committee in obtaining records from handlers of the funds, the House of Representatives, fresh form its break for the 2023 budget processing passed a resolution, asking for N100 billion, or possibly more to be made for the ecological fund. The move was intended to forestall future flooding and address other ecological challenges across the country, as argued by the two sponsors of the motion.
This has however left the bewilderment with analysts, who are questioning the justification, especially when answers have not been satisfactorily offered on the huge amount involved in years of expenditure in that regard.