Editorial
Aligning Budgets To Nigerians’ Needs
President Muhammadu Buhari signed the 2021 federal budget of N13.08 trillion into law on
Thursday, December 31, 2020. Tagged the “Budget of Economic Recovery and Resilience”, it comprises a capital expenditure of N4,125,149,354,222 trillion and recurrent expenditure of N5,641,970,060,680 trillion, statutory transfer of N496,528,471,273 billion, N3.324 trillion for debt servicing, supplementary capital allocation of N1,060,751,051,650 trillion, and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate of 3.00 per cent.
Budgets globally aim to have a guide on revenue generation and spending to prevent confusion. Every arm, tier, and agency of government formulates its budget for the fiscal year and they are not expected to spend above the approved limits. But oftentimes that is not the case in Nigeria as some agencies expend unapproved monies with impunity.
Following the presidential assent to the 2021 budget, many concerns are expressed as to whether the budget addresses the people’s necessities and how the document can be correctly implemented in line with the existing fiscal and monetary laws.
The executive and legislative arms of government have always produced yearly Appropriation Acts. But successive budgets for several decades have not been implemented satisfactorily. Consequently, administration after administration has been unable to realise the grand objectives of the serial economic plans.
Regrettably, our national budgets are not aligned with the country’s development goals. With the demise of national development planning, budgets are prepared without plan or strategic framework. It is like building a huge edifice without an architectural drawing. That is why government’s promises cannot be actualised because there is no effective budget policy.
It might be necessary, at this juncture, to ask: how far have budgets gone to alleviate some of the endemic problems in Nigeria? We do not just mean the federal budget but all the state budgets put together. Every year, 38 budgets are rolled out including those of the federal government, 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
To what extent have budgets ameliorated the problem of poor electricity, water supply, health care, education, dilapidated roads, unemployment, insecurity, etc? Are Nigerians faring better now compared with last year when the budget was passed? What systematic changes have occurred? What periodic solutions have been provided or on-going? What difference has occurred in the life of an average Nigerian?
This is even more worrisome when the citizens are rarely and inadequately consulted or engaged in budget planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. In most cases, the national and state budgets do not adequately reflect the expectations and aspirations of the citizens.
This situation mainly exists because the budgeting process in Nigeria is faulty. It is split only between the legislative and the executive. The processes are not open and active participation is not encouraged. Most access to information and civic participation at best occurs at the seldom held public hearing stage in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
At the planning stages of our budgets, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and traditional rulers being representatives of the people ought to be enabled or encouraged to communicate their needs and concerns to the government and possibly contribute to the Medium-Term Revenue Framework and the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), or even the draft budget.
Citizen participation in budget hearings is significant. It can be done through involvement and advocating for more public hearings on a budget in the National Assembly. These and others are ways to sustain and improve access to information and civic pursuit in the different phases of budget preparations.
The failure of budgets across the country is heart-breaking. That is why pessimists call budgeting in the country annual ritual. That has been the case since 1999 when the present democratic dispensation began and it was thought that the era of military impunity was over. Indeed, our rogue budgets are merely rituals; they seem not to be made to change anything.
And really, how can there be change when on average, every year, 70 per cent of our budgets go for recurrent expenditure while only 30 per cent is for capital expenditure. How can an underdeveloped country like Nigeria develop when only a fraction of the annual budgets is put for capital projects?
Faced with corruption, neither the recurrent budget nor the capital spending achieves its target. The inability of many state governments to pay salaries, pension benefits and other entitlements to workers underscores the failure of recurrent expenditure. Sadly enough, the Federal Government is gradually contracting the disease and is no longer able to pay workers’ salaries promptly.
There seems to be no law that compels governments to account for the previous budget before announcing a new one. As a way out, there is a need for such a law, at all levels, to make public, at the end of each financial year, the performance of the previous year’s budget; what was achieved and what is left, which would form the basis for making a new budget.
Beyond the usual pomp that characterises budget signings in our country, we hope that President Muhammadu Buhari’s 2021 budget, unlike previous appropriations, will operate within standard budget parameters to attain its broad objectives of meeting policy goals and development needs of Nigerians.
It began as a seemingly minor in- flight disagreement. Comfort Emmason, a passenger on an Ibom Air flight from Uyo to Lagos, reportedly failed to switch off her mobile phone when instructed by the cabin crew. What should have been a routine enforcement of safety regulations spiralled into a physical confrontation, sparking a national debate on the limits of airline authority and the rights of passengers.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) wasted no time in condemning the treatment meted out to Emmason. In a strongly worded statement, the body described the incident as “a flagrant violation of her fundamental human rights” and called for a thorough investigation into the conduct of the airline staff. The NBA stressed that while passengers must adhere to safety rules, such compliance should never be extracted through intimidation, violence, or humiliation.
Following the altercation, Emmason found herself arraigned before a Magistrate’s Court and remanded at Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison, a location more commonly associated with hardened criminals than with errant passengers. In a surprising turn of events, the Federal Government later dropped all charges against her, citing “overriding public interest” and concerns about due process.
Compounding her woes, Ibom Air initially imposed a lifetime ban preventing her from boarding its aircraft. That ban has now been lifted, following mounting public pressure and calls from rights groups for a more measured approach. The reversal has been welcomed by many as a step towards restoring fairness and proportionality in handling such disputes.
While her refusal to comply with crew instructions was undeniably inappropriate, questions linger about whether the punishment fit the offence. Was the swift escalation from verbal reminder to physical ejection a proportionate response, or an abuse of authority? The incident has reignited debate over how airlines balance safety enforcement with respect for passenger rights.
The Tide unequivocally condemns the brutal and degrading treatment the young Nigerian woman received from the airline’s staff. No regulation, however vital, justifies the use of physical force or the public shaming of a passenger. Such behaviour is antithetical to the principles of customer service, human dignity, and the rule of law.
Emmason’s own defiance warrants reproach. Cabin crew instructions, especially during boarding or take-off preparations, are not mere suggestions; they are safety mandates. Reports suggest she may have been unable to comply because of a malfunctioning power button on her device, but even so, she could have communicated this clearly to the crew. Rules exist to safeguard everyone on board, and passengers must treat them with due seriousness.
Nigerians, whether flying domestically or abroad, would do well to internalise the importance of orderliness in public spaces. Adherence to instructions, patience in queues, and courteous engagement with officials are hallmarks of civilised society. Disregard for these norms not only undermines safety but also projects a damaging image of the nation to the wider world.
The Emmason affair is not an isolated case. Former Edo State Governor and current Senator, Adams Oshiomhole, once found himself grounded after arriving late for an Air Peace flight. Witnesses alleged that he assaulted airline staff and ordered the closure of the terminal’s main entrance. This is hardly the conduct expected of a statesman.
More recently, a Nollywood-worthy episode unfolded at Abuja’s Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, involving Fuji icon “King”, Wasiu Ayinde Marshal, popularly known as KWAM1. In a viral video, he was seen exchanging heated words with officials after being prevented from boarding an aircraft.
Events took a dangerous turn when the aircraft, moving at near take-off speed, nearly clipped the 68-year-old musician’s head with its wing. Such an occurrence points to a serious breach of airport safety protocols, raising uncomfortable questions about operational discipline at Nigeria’s gateways.
According to accounts circulating online, Wasiu had attempted to board an aircraft while he was carrying an alcoholic drink and refused to relinquish it when challenged. His refusal led to de-boarding, after which the Aviation Minister, Festus Keyamo, imposed a six-month “no-fly” ban, citing “unacceptable” conduct.
It is deeply concerning that individuals of such prominence, including Emmason’s pilot adversary, whose careers have exposed them to some of the most disciplined aviation environments in the world, should exhibit conduct that diminishes the nation’s reputation. True leadership, whether in politics, culture, or professional life, calls for restraint and decorum, all the more when exercised under public scrutiny.
Most egregiously, in Emmason’s case, reports that she was forcibly stripped in public and filmed for online circulation are deeply disturbing. This was an act of humiliation and a gross invasion of privacy, violating her right to dignity and falling short of the standards expected in modern aviation. No person, regardless of the circumstances, should be subjected to such degrading treatment.
Ibom Air must ensure its staff are trained to treat passengers with proper decorum at all times. If Emmason had broken the law, security personnel could have been called in to handle the matter lawfully. Instead, her ordeal turned into a public spectacle. Those responsible for assaulting her should face prosecution, and the airline should be compelled to compensate her. Emmason, for her part, should pursue legal redress to reinforce the principle that justice and civility must prevail in Nigeria’s skies.