Opinion

Local Government Autonomy: How Desirable?

Published

12 years ago

November 24, 2014

The two chambers of the National Assembly recently adopted the proposal for administrative and financial autonomy for local governments as the third tier of government in the federation. While this move was received with joy among stakeholders in the local government system, others like primary school teachers and state governors opposed it, giving the problem of executive recklessness and ineffective administration at the local level as some of their reasons.
What do Port Harcourt residents think about this burning issue? Our Chief Correspondent, Calista Ezeaku and photographer, Dele Obinna went round the city to find out.

Prince Ekong Omirsen -Protocol Officer
The local government employees have been looking for this autonomy. I think it is better that local government as a third tier of government be autonomous. That will ensure that local governments are not being toyed with. Most of the chairmen are not even sure of themselves.
They come into power almost by selection and they pay allegiance to those who selected and not those who voted them in. But if LGAs are going to be autonomous, then intending chairmen would talk to the people, the people will vote them in and they would pay allegiance to the masses and not the governors.
You see, in this country we are always looking for scape goats. The governors alleged that LGA chairmen abuse their offices and that’s why they want to control LGAs. If they say the chairmen abuse their offices, I think other segements, of the government also abuse their offices. So we cannot take the chairmen as scape goats. So I will want the local governments to be fully autonomous, where the local government chairmen will be fully incharge and they will not be answerable to any body other than the masses. They will be check-mated by the councillors. There will be proper checks and balances.

David Dakoru – Pastor
My opinion over the independence of the local government is very straight. There are three tiers of government in Nigeria – Federal, State and Local government. The Federal and State are autonomous. So I support the bill in the National Assembly that the right thing should be done. More powers should be given to the local government.
A situation where the states collect money from the national, take the bulk sum and give pea nuts to local governments cannot make the local governments to work effectively.
Some people have argued that granting autonomy to local governments will enhance corruption in the country but I disagree with that. When we talk about corruption in Nigeria, it cuts across every segment of the society. Both at the Federal, State and Local governments, there are corrupt people. In government of today, there are only a few people that are not corrupt. At least fifty percent of the people are corrupt from the federal down to the grassroots.
But why I am emphasising that the local government should be autonomous is because the greater number of the population dwell in the rural area. And these local government areas are supposed to have major infrastructure, but they are not there. In Rivers State, the governor tried to a little extent. He used the allocations collected to build the primary health centres and schools which is a welcome development. Now, the primary functions of local government are not being attended to because of inadequate fund. It might be true that some local government chairmen cannot account for the little money they collect monthly but the truth of the matter is that you cannot be 100 per cent clean.
But if you give a local government may be N100m, by the time they deduct the meney for the over head cost – salaries and so on – what will be remaining cannot even be used to build roads. I believe LGAs can make more impact if they are granted autonomous status. The control of the local governments by state governors impedes their growth and development. They can sack a local government chairman overnight and either bring him back again or put another person.
It is not supposed to be so. How many times has a governor been sacked like that? Both of them were elected.
Let us freely allow them to do their jobs. What is the essence of creating the local government areas if they will not have the funds and freedom to operate?

Bar. Chinda – Legal practitioner I think the constitutional amendment is a good development. We have been longing for this for a long time and we hope and wish that the national assembly will keep it to their word and the president will assent to the bill. Ordinarily, as a lawyer, I do not see anything wrong with local government autonomy because previously local governments had been treated as if they were nothing. But with the amendment, at least LGAs will be able to get fund directly from the federal government and no governor irrespective of his party affiliation or that of a council chairman will disband a LG. There is a Supreme Court authority which says that no governor has any right to disband a local government properly constituted. But most governors have been doing that for a very long time.
They come into power and probably the LG chairmen are not of the same party with them, they would disband the LGA leadership and appoint a care taker committee.
I think this wouldn’t come into effect again if local governments become autonomous I also think if there is proper checks and balances on local governments, autonomy will not increase corruption in the system as some people believe. Auditors are prepared to do their work. Now and again, the Federal Government has to send auditors directly from the federal government and no longer states to audit local governments. It will also be the responsibility of the Federal Government to make sure that local government chairmen actually sit in their local areas and deliver. And there has to be monitoring of projects and evaluation of projects and if they are not up to expectation, more funds will not be delivered to them. In my own opinion there has to be a local government minister, directly responsible to checkmate the activities of LGAs.
I believe the amendment will sail through depending on the discipline of the legislators because even if the governors gang up against it, our people in the Assembly will not buy into that idea.

Bar. Maxwell Oji- Legal Practitioner
I think that is the best news of the day because the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, being a grundnorm ought to be respected. The issue of the autonomy of the local government is a constitutional matter and it ought to be followed to the letter. If we have three tiers of government – the federal, the state and the local government, it follows therefore that in as much as the federal and state receive what belongs to them, then what belongs to the local government ought to be given to them. There is no point having autonomy in name but not in practice. Its wrong.
It’s obvious that autonomy of the local government will facilitate development in the grassroots because if what belongs to LGAs are given to them, it is believable that if things follow the way it should be the chairmen should be able to know the needs of those at the grass root and as provided by the constitution as their duties and responsibilities, I supposed that they should be able to do that which constitutionally is given to them as their responsibilities. And to ensure that the money allocated to the local government areas are not embezzled by the chairmen, the anti-corruption agencies should be up and doing. There should be proper checks and balances.
Recently the governors alleged that the local government chairman are hardly in their offices. That they run government areas from their hotel accommodation in the cities, that the state governments have taken away all the big projects ought to be executed by LGAs like funding of primary school education, roads, health care and all that. They argued that if these big jobs are taken away from LGAs, what is now left for them to do is to only pay workers salaries.
So if autonomy will be granted LGs, they should ensure that they take back these responsibilities specified by the constitution that these are the responsibilities meant for the LGAs. Chairman should take back these responsibilities and let the fund meant for these responsibilities be given to them.
Mr. JJ – Civil Servant
In this Nigeria what is causing confusion is that we don’t even know the type of democracy we are practicing. I don’t know where we borrowed our own type of democracy. I don’t know whether we are practicing presidential system of government, true federalism, which we are not seeing in place.’ If we say we borrowed a democracy from America, we suppose not to be arguing whether the local government should be autonomous or not. The state governments have hijack most of the revenue that the LGAs are entitled to. The states have also hijacked most of the functions of the LGAs like education. That is why there is so much decay in our educational sector. Previously, when LGAs were in charge of primary schools, inspectors on routine inspection to primary schools. Now nobody does all they are interested in is approval by the ministry. No routine checks.
The states have virtually taken all the jobs that LGAs are supposed to be doing because of the financial gains. So it is good we state the type of government we are running because they say we have the federal, state and local governments. How can the Local Government now be under the state governments. Is it still three ties of government? I don’t think so.

Mr. Dallas Olodun-NOA staff
The general view will be that it is good for democracy. But I have always been concerned about governance in Nigeria and the abuse of power by those in authority. Governors have always been criticised for mismanaging public funds and I don’t know how reliable the LGA chairmen will be in terms of managing fund, in terms of utilizing funds, in terms of properly appropriating these funds if LGAs are granted full autonomy. Besides payment of salaries what will they use this money for?
However, I believe the main aim of creating the local government area as the third tier of government is for grassroots development. The chairmen know the grassroots, they know the needs of the people. So it is a wrong allegation for governors to say that the autonomy of local government will lead to ineffectiveness and corruption. As I always say, Governors over night become billionaires, why shouldn’t chairmen become millionaires? Why are they kicking against it? They are not clean in the first place, so they shouldn’t kick against it.
I quite agree that the local governments are answerable to the states just like the states are answerable to the federal government. There should be a level of control of the local government council, LGAs should be autonomous to a large extent especially in terms of managing their funds. Even the federal government will still have hands in the running of LGAs.
But I think they should try and allow the LGAs to be autonomous for now and assess the level of development in the next four to eight years. We shouldn’t wait for NULGE to call out its members to protest at various state houses of assembly or to embark on strike before the bill is considered. Nigeria is becoming a strike action environment. It shouldn’t get to that level.

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s Outburst

Published

2 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Sacrificing Humanity for Politics?

Published

2 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

“Politics is temporary, but humanity is permanent. No politician is worth sacrificing genuine friendships, family bonds, or peaceful coexistence.””Politics is temporary, but humanity is permanent”.

Every election season leaves behind more than ballot papers and campaign posters. It often leaves broken friendships, divided families, fractured communities, and hearts filled with resentment. In the heat of political competition, many people forget a simple but profound truth: politics is temporary, but humanity is permanent. Across our communities, it has become increasingly common to see people sever lifelong relationships simply because they support different political parties or candidates. Individuals who once shared meals, celebrated milestones, and stood by each other during difficult times suddenly become strangers not because they committed any personal offence, but because they exercised their democratic right to think differently. This growing trend should concern every citizen. Politics is designed to provide leadership, shape public policy, and improve society.

It was never intended to become a weapon for destroying relationships or creating permanent enemies. When politics begins to erode our humanity, it ceases to serve its true purpose. A democratic society thrives on diversity of thought. Every citizen possesses the constitutional right to support any political party, candidate, or ideology without fear of intimidation or hatred. Political disagreement is not a crime; rather, it is evidence that democracy is alive and functioning. The true measure of political maturity is not our ability to silence opposing voices but our willingness to respect them. Unfortunately, many people have mistaken political loyalty for personal hostility. Instead of debating ideas, they attack personalities. Instead of discussing policies, they spread insults and misinformation. Instead of building bridges, they construct walls of bitterness.

Such behaviour weakens not only our relationships but also the democratic values we claim to defend. The reality is simple: elections are temporary. Political offices have fixed tenures. Governments change. Political alliances shift. Today’s political rivals may become tomorrow’s allies, while today’s allies may become tomorrow’s opponents. History has repeatedly demonstrated that politicians who once exchanged harsh words eventually sit together at negotiation tables in pursuit of shared interests. Yet ordinary citizens often remain trapped in unnecessary hatred long after political leaders have reconciled.This reality offers an important lesson. No politician should be worth sacrificing genuine friendships, family bonds, or peaceful coexistence. Political support should never require personal hatred. We can campaign passionately for our preferred candidates while still respecting those who choose differently.

Democracy flourishes when disagreement remains civil. One of the most dangerous habits in politics is inheriting other people’s enemies. Far too often, supporters adopt the personal conflicts of political leaders as though they were their own. People who have never met begin insulting one another on social media, damaging relationships, and sometimes engaging in violence simply because influential figures disagree.Such misplaced loyalty serves no meaningful purpose. Political leaders often possess the opportunity to reconcile, negotiate, and move forward after elections. Their supporters, however, are frequently left with damaged relationships, regret, and lasting divisions within their communities. Wisdom demands that citizens distinguish between political competition and personal relationships. Rather than inheriting hostility, we should cultivate independent judgment.

Judge individuals by their character, integrity, honesty, and personal conduct not merely by the colour of the political party they support. A person’s political affiliation does not automatically define their values, competence, or humanity. Equally important is the need to elevate the quality of our political conversations. Instead of engaging in personal attacks, we should focus on issues that genuinely affect people’s lives. Discussions should revolve around education, healthcare, infrastructure, security, economic growth, employment, agriculture, and accountable governance. These are the matters that determine the future of our nation not endless exchanges of insults. Social media has further amplified political intolerance. Behind anonymous profiles and smartphone screens, many people say things they would never express in person.

Every post, comment, and shared message has the potential either to promote understanding or to deepen division. Responsible citizenship requires restraint, accuracy, and respect, especially during politically sensitive periods. Politics should inspire service, not hostility. Leadership should unite rather than divide. Citizens should be free to disagree without becoming enemies. After all, beyond our political preferences, we remain neighbours, colleagues, business partners, classmates, worshippers, and fellow citizens who share the same hopes for peace, prosperity, justice, and national development. As another political season approaches, let us remember what truly matters. Campaigns will end. Elections will pass. Winners will celebrate, and losers will regroup. But the relationships we preserve, the respect we extend, and the humanity we uphold will remain long after the campaign slogans have faded.

The greatest victory in politics is not defeating an opponent at the polls; it is preserving our values while participating in democracy. Let us choose dialogue over division, understanding over intolerance, and respect over hatred. Above all, let us never forget this timeless principle: Politics should never be more important than humanity. And perhaps the wisest political advice anyone can embrace is this: Never inherit people’s enemies. In doing so, we preserve not only our relationships but also the very spirit of democracy itself.

By: Michael T. Abraham

Opinion

Making the Out-of-School Children Survey Count

Published

3 weeks ago

July 27, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Reliable data may reveal the scale of Nigeria’s out-of-school crisis, but only sustained political will and practical action can ensure that every child is given the opportunity to learn, thrive and contribute to national development.”

The Minister of Education, Dr. Tunji Alausa, recently announced that the Federal Government, in partnership with the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), will conduct a nationwide household survey to determine the actual number of out-of-school children in Nigeria. The exercise is intended to provide reliable data for evidence-based education policies and targeted interventions. Current estimates put the number of out-of-school children at between 15 million and 20 million, placing Nigeria among the countries with the highest number of children excluded from formal education. At first glance, this is a commendable initiative. One of Nigeria’s greatest developmental challenges has been the absence of accurate and reliable data. Without dependable statistics, planning becomes difficult, implementation inefficient, and evaluation of government programmes almost impossible.

The nation’s actual population also remains uncertain because of the absence of an up-to-date national census. Estimates range from below 200 million to over 250 million, making effective planning a daunting task. Sound policies on education, healthcare, housing, employment and infrastructure all depend on credible population statistics. Against this backdrop, the proposed survey deserves commendation. If government succeeds in generating reliable figures, it will be better positioned to allocate resources equitably, identify areas of greatest need and design interventions based on facts rather than assumptions. Accurate data will also make it easier to monitor progress and assess whether efforts to reduce the number of out-of-school children are achieving the desired results.

However, beyond the good intentions lie important questions. Will state governments provide the enabling environment for an objective and transparent survey? Since education is on the concurrent legislative list, the cooperation of state governments will largely determine the credibility of the exercise. Politics could easily influence the process. States with higher numbers of out-of-school children may qualify for greater intervention funds from the Federal Government and development partners. Would this tempt some states to inflate their figures? On the other hand, high numbers could portray a state government as performing poorly in the education sector. Would some governors therefore seek to understate the figures to protect their image? These concerns are legitimate because whenever statistics are tied to political interests or financial benefits, the temptation to manipulate them cannot be ignored.

Equally important are questions about the survey itself. When will it begin? How long will it last? What methodology will be adopted? Will every household be covered, including those in remote rural communities and areas plagued by insecurity? Does the government have the manpower, funding, technology and security arrangements needed for such a nationwide exercise? Nigeria has witnessed several well-intentioned national programmes that fell short because of poor planning and inadequate logistics. Many Nigerians will remember that the proposed national population census scheduled a few years ago was postponed despite extensive preparations. Funding constraints and logistical challenges contributed to its suspension. What guarantees are there that this survey will not suffer a similar fate? More importantly, what becomes of the findings after the exercise? Nigeria is not short of reports or data collection initiatives.

The recurring challenge has been the lack of political will to translate findings into concrete policies and sustained action. The survey must not become another document gathering dust on government shelves. Instead, it should serve as the basis for measurable interventions, continuous monitoring and improved educational outcomes. Beyond producing accurate figures, the survey must also uncover the reasons children remain outside the classroom. Addressing the crisis requires more than counting affected children. It demands an understanding of the social, economic and cultural factors responsible for the problem. Issues such as the Almajiri system and other practices that discourage formal education should be carefully examined while respecting cultural values and protecting every child’s right to quality education. Poverty remains a major barrier, as many parents cannot afford school-related expenses, forcing children into street trading or child labour

Insecurity has also led to the closure of schools in several communities, depriving thousands of children of learning opportunities.Government must therefore complement the survey with practical measures. Strengthening social protection for vulnerable families, improving school infrastructure, recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, enhancing security around schools and enforcing compulsory basic education are all essential. Equally important is sustained collaboration with traditional rulers, religious leaders, civil society organisations and development partners to address the root causes of school exclusion. The proposed survey presents an opportunity to replace guesswork with credible evidence. However, its true value will not be measured by the number of households visited or questionnaires completed. Its success will depend on whether the findings inspire bold policies, adequate funding and sustained action that ensure every Nigerian child, regardless of location or background, has access to quality education. Only then will the exercise move beyond statistics to become a genuine instrument for national development.