Following the allegations made against the leadership of the House of Representative by the former Chairman of the House Appropriation Committee, Abdulmumin Jibrin, major opposition arty, Peoples Democratic Party has reacted to the alleged budget padding scandal.
Recall that the alleged scandal was revealed following the sack of the former House Appropriation Committee Chairman.
In reaction, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP took to its social media page to write:
1. We watched the interview granted by Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin to @ChannelsTv & have followed his “revelations” with growing concern & bemusement. His revelations raise more questions than they give answers.
2. The ruckus caused by these allegations call the integrity of #Budget2016 to question. This budget process has been an absolute fiasco.
3. It is imperative to point out that at the onset President Buhari proposed a N6.08tr budget. This is the same figure as the budget passed by NASS. On the surface, this fact looks innocuous but is the foundation upon which the entire sham is founded.
4. The Presidency then raised an alarm about insertions into the budget at the National Assembly. The Presidency further stated that Mr. President would not sign the budget until “it was cleaned up”. You will recall that this caused further delay in Mr President assenting to the budget.
6. This whole sham begs many questions:
Qa. Is this the cleaned up version about which Hon. Jibrin speaks?
Qb. Why is Hon. Jibrin only just speaking after being relieved of his post as Chairman of the Appropriations Committee? Would he have spoken up if he had not been relieved?
Qc. Was Mr. President aware of that the budget he presented to NASS was “padded” by his ministers & presidential aides as Hon. Jibrin alleged in his interviews? How did the Presidency miss these “insertions” at NASS despite engaging in a clean up? Or did the Presidency allow them remain?
Qd Are insertions into the budget by NASS members illegal or do they constitute part of the oversight powers granted to legislators by CFRN?
Qe. Should members of NASS be allowed to make “insertions” into the budget? These & other questions require answers.
7. It is very depressing that as at today 01/08/2016 we are still debating the integrity of #Budget2016 & not the percentages of performance
8. In 30 days, the APC led FG is required by the Fiscal Responsibility Act to submit the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) for the 2017 budget & the APC led NASS is required to commence the process of approving it.
9. In the current circumstances, we are hard pressed to see how this requirement will be fulfilled within the time frame required by law.
10. Finally we must realise that this presents an opportunity to reform the budgeting process to ensure that this charade never occurs again.
11. Hopefully, the APC will soon put its in-house squabbles behind it & pay attention to the task for which it was elected – governance.
