Why Nigeria needs part-time legislature

Nigeria needs a part-time legislature, contrary to a declaration by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dr Tajudeen Abbas, who said on Monday that Nigeria does not need a part-time legislature. Nigeria cannot afford a full-time legislature modelled after the type we have practised since 1999.

Speaker Abbas spoke at a national dialogue on a homegrown parliamentary system of government. Nigeria should indeed be shopping for such a system now. However, given the title or theme of such a discourse, it is awkward that it should start with the key parties defending the current arrangement, the type that Nigerians want to do away with.

The National Assembly members are raising these points ahead of the actual debate, perhaps to shut people down when the actual time comes. There is no need for this now, preempting Nigerians. If they are sincere about what they are saying or how they feel Nigerians take them, let them allow Nigerians to choose between a part-time versus full-time legislature.

The economic system runs on rationality. If a commodity can be bought at a lower price without any loss in value, why must I continue to pay the higher price?  Legislation does not need to be so expensive to be effective. While we acknowledge that it must cost us something, that cost should not be out of context; it must be in line with the general remuneration within the economy.

• Use Akwa Ibom MRO rather than build new one, ex-minister tells FG
• Rising cases of building collapse due to non-adherence to standards – SON

If we are talking about a home-grown parliament, let it be derived from our traditional political structures. In which of such native traditional political systems did we have lawmakers who worked full-time? In which traditional systems did we have lawmakers who took so much from the people through remunerations?

Most of the traditional lawmakers were farmers, traders, tailors and other professionals. They went about their jobs most days. On chosen days, they gathered to talk about how to govern the society; how to ensure safety and who did whatever to ensure the safety of the people.

Some of the comments attributed to the speaker, which of course he made through his representative at the event, Hon. Alhassan Doguwa, can only be described as defences for the indefensible. Our legislators have shown us that the jobs for which Nigerians pay them full-time salaries can be done part-time. 

Their concern is what will happen to their jumbo compensation, should Nigerians convert legislation to part-time work. In fact, despite their claims now, Nigerian lawmakers would not object if we the people were to ask them to do their work part-time but still retain all their salaries and allowances. So, what point are they really making? Are they trying to dissuade us from demanding a reduction in their oversized salaries and perks?

Or, are they telling us that if they were employees of some corporations in the private sector, they would go about their jobs the way they have behaved since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999?

The Honourable Speaker also said: “Unlike smaller or more homogeneous nations, our bicameral system has enabled us to balance representation across regions and ethnic groups, enhancing inclusivity and participation in the democratic process.”

Really? This is quite debatable, dear Mr Speaker. Our people in the villages and communities certainly do not necessarily need a bicameral legislature to be fully represented or made to feel the impact of the government. Anyone making such a claim is simply doing so to justify the current system.

The truth, rather, is that our political structure has ensured that institutions do not work in Nigeria. And to take advantage of that, the system or the politicians flaunt the card of Nigeria’s “heterogeneity”. In place of the so-called heterogeneity, we should be talking about Nigeria’s diversity which, as it has been proclaimed, should be a source of strength, not weakness or problem.

Perhaps an acceptable comment on this issue from the same event came from a former speaker, Yakubu Dogara. “The major problem with the presidential system is not because we borrowed the system, but those who copied the system did not do a wonderful job,” he said, perhaps speaking from experience.

One aspect of a wonderful job that those who hoisted the presidential system on us failed to do was to give the legislators the appropriate remuneration commensurate with their work. Instead, the designers of the system chose a lopsided compensation system for them, creating an absurd system where their allowances are several times above what they call basic salaries.

Since then, it has been impossible to change this gross anomaly. And the beneficiaries are enjoying it; after all, it will take their approval to effect the change. So, they can donate any fraction of their “basic” salaries, as they did when the current economic hardship began to bite, to cushion its impact on some Nigerians.

But you dare not touch their bloated allowances: wardrobe, housing, furniture, entertainment, domestic staff, constituency, and severance gratuity after tenure, among others.