Connect with us

Opinion

Should Local Government Councils Be Autonomous?

Published

on

As citizens worry over the dearth of democracy dividends at the local government councils, the councils claim that lack of autonomy was an impediment to their meeting the expectations of Nigerians at the grassroots.
Our correspondent, Calista Ezeaku and photographer, Dele Obinna sought the views of Nigerians on the thorny issue of granting autonomy to LGAs or not.
Excerpts:

Well, the issue of the Local Government autonomy should not be a matter that people will begin to argue about. This is a thing that is established by law. It is just like somebody using his position to take over something that rightly belongs to the other person.
So the issue of autonomy is not negotiable. And I think that what the States are doing is an infringement, to usurp about 50 per cent of the local government functions and they have made the councils to under perform in their responsibilities as local governments. So I think autonomy should be granted without delay to enable local governments function. The law recognises three tiers of government – Federal, State, and Local Government.
The same authority that established States also established the local governments. Therefore, usurping the functions of the local government at the State level is an abuse of power. And I think the state governments of the nation should be wise enough to know that they have been holding the thing that rightly belongs to their children and it is high time they released it to ensure that development gets to the grass roots.
Delay in the payment of teachers salary was one reasons given that made the State governments to start controlling the local government’s finance, but one thing is that the issue of payment of salaries has not even changed even now that the States have refused to allow local governments run their councils the way it should be.
The workers salaries have not been effective. If you go to records I can assure you that for the past eight months, salaries are paid two weeks after the end of the other month.
There had been no month that State or local governments pay salaries at exactly the end of the month. It is always a carry over which is a replica of what they said was not good.
So, there should be proper separation of power to ensure proper sanity in the system because the state claim to be more decent in terms of administration than the local government. Everything depends on the mindset. Even in the past when allocations were being tampered with, it was not applicable to all the councils. There were still some local governments that had good leaders that were meeting up with the target to ensure that salaries and other duties that were supposed to be within the coffers of the local government were done.

Henry Chikwele Wechie – Business Consultant.
I think local governments should be granted autonomy so that development can get to the grass roots because without financial autonomy it will be very difficult to get development to the grassroots where people will benefit. We have three tiers of government – federal, state and local government. So local government should stand as a pillar of its own. It is just like we have separation of powers in the judiciary, executive and legislature. They all have their own functions. So, local government should have its own direct function that will take care of the grassroots. Proper separation of powers will ensure that all the tiers of government will do what they are supposed to do and that will facilitate development.

Hon Chochi Amadi – Common Nigerian
I want to say that the autonomy of local government is a good idea. If local governments should be granted autonomy it will be a welcome idea. But there are some portions of the 1999 constitution that need to be touched to be in line with the autonomy of the local government. By that I mean the local government should be put in check. I think it is from this angle that people are saying no to the autonomy of the local government. But if they put everything together in line of checking, balancing and all that, the autonomy of local government is going to be a welcome one.
While a portion of the 1999 constitution will be amended, it will ensure proper checks and balances in all tiers of government. That will make all of them to perform instead of one tier blaming the other for its low performance. If there is a law backing the functions of the local governments and all that they can do, I think it will be better for all.
So there should be an amendment on how the local government should be run. There should be a touching of how it will be balancing so that the people in the legislature, executive will know what the law is saying on that. That will also direct the state and the federal government.

Mrs Felicia Osasuwa – Health Worker
The local governments should be granted autonomy because it seems as if they are tied in one corner. But if the chairmen are allowed to manage the local governments by themselves, I think they will do better. When you give birth to a child, you allow the child to grow and be on his own. It’s not good that the child stays under his parents forever. When you allow a child to be on his own, that child will do better.
There is this fear that if local governments are granted autonomy, the chairman might misuse the funds of the council. But there are some God-fearing local government chairmen. If you are a God fearing person and public funds are given to you, you will use it well. You will not embezzle it.

Hon. Bernard Uche Enyiche – Business Man / Former Supervisor
I worked with the local government council in 1998 as a supervisor for health. We were autonomous then. At the end of the month, the chairman would go for JAC meeting. Their money came direct to the local government. So it was easy to dispense. Projects were easily arranged, organised and effected.
But this money coming from the Federal Government to the State, it does not make things straight and a lot of things go wrong because we are Nigerians. So the best thing to do is to make the local government autonomous.
I think when it comes to development, it was better when the local governments were autonomous than now because now you are not sure of what comes to local governments. If the money will come direct from federal government, chairmen will know how much they get and what projects to embark on with the money. But this time, the money comes from States, and perhaps they do some deductions I don’t know, because of the payments that are involved. And by the time the money gets to the local governments, you can never be sure of how much until they see their accounts.
So if the local government are autonomous, I think it will be the best for the country.
Mrs Lizzy Samuel – Teacher
I think the issue of local government autonomy would have been ideal if we have honest, sincere and selfless people as chairmen. But unfortunately, the reverse is the case in Nigeria. Our leaders are selfish and self centered. Before now, local governments were autonomous, but instead of paying workers, particularly primary school teachers their salaries, they withheld the salaries, owing teachers for up to seven months. That was how the payment of primary school teachers became the responsibility of the State government, who collects the local government allocations from the Federal Government and deduct our salaries before giving the local government the balance. Since then, we’ve not had the issue of prolonged delay of payment of teachers’ salary. When the local governments chairmen were in charge of teachers salaries, many local government councils were almost dead. The chairmen claimed they had zero allocation after paying workers salaries. But since the State government took up the responsibility of payment of teachers salaries, nobody has heard anything like zero allocation again.
So for the sake of teachers, let the statusquo remain. Let State Governors carry on with the control of local government finances. The local government chairmen claim the money given to them by State Governors after the deductions is not enough for them to execute projects. But the question is, the so called little amount they receive, what do they do with it? Some of them generate huge revenue internally, what do they do with it? Nothing! Many of them are seen at their offices only when the allocations come. They will share the money among themselves and nobody will see them again.
That is why there is no development in many local government councils.
I’m not saying the governors are saints, but at least they make sure that our salaries are paid, so they should carry on.

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending