Senate Leader Ahmad Lawan, a major contender for the office of Senate President in the incoming 9th Senate in this interview bares his mind on the contest, what he has to offer, and other issues. Excerpts:
Daily Trust: How does it feel, coming from a tough general election, to face another tough battle for Senate president?
Senator Ahmad Lawan: Let me start by thanking God that my colleagues have provided the platform. When we returned from the general elections, some of our colleagues met and decided that we should run. They initiated everything; mine is to follow the advice. I’m lucky to have my colleagues’ endorsement and get fresh advice. Sometimes I even ask ‘what should I say?’ That is to say that I only aggregate the views of my colleagues on what we should do as senators, and if I’m to be elected as Senate President, how we should go about it. What we’ll start now, we’ll have to sustain it for four years if we make it by the grace of God. We need to have sustained engagements both within and among ourselves. My colleagues have done well, giving me the support. Therefore, I don’t feel any heavy burden on me, because this is something that’s done collectively.
DT: How do you carry the campaign out, considering that some of those in the contest are members of your party?
Lawan: This is democracy. Whoever feels he has something to offer and runs, I think the environment is democratic where people can run. I’m not a stranger to contests. This will be my sixth tenure in the National Assembly from 1999. But even before then, I contested under the UNPC. Therefore, I’m used to contests. I think I’m enjoying it because my colleagues are there for me. We share common beliefs and we know that we have something to offer in terms of governance. We remain committed to those ideals of progressive politics, that Nigeria should move from where it has been right from 2015 when President Muhammadu Buhari was sworn in. I believe that in the fullness of time, a decision will be taken in the chamber when the senators elect the presiding officers. I pray that at the end of the day, we’ll win and go along with all our colleagues regardless of whether they contested or not.
DT: Would you say that your political philosophy has changed over the years from the beginning, to where you are right now?
Lawan: I started in 1998 as the pioneer vice chairman of All Peoples Party (APP) in Yobe State. I ran for my federal constituency, Bade/Jakusko, in 1999 and won. I won again in 2003 under the same political party, but APP in 1998 and ANPP in 2003. I remained in ANPP until 2014 when we joined the coalition to form the APC. So, it has been consistency all the way. I believe in progressive politics. I believe that ordinary people must be at the centre of all our decisions, but that’s not to neglect the business people who also need to be encouraged to create employment opportunities. But I believe that the ordinary man must be at the centre of this, because today some of the insecurity all over the country is because we did not in the past, do much to create employment opportunities for our people, especially the youth. I have no reason to change. In fact, going on a personal note, in 2010, there was an effort to get to another political platform because my political mentor then moved to another platform. But I thought that would not be possible because I didn’t believe in that political platform, even though it was in government for years, and maybe I would be safer and benefit more individually. But I felt I believed in something and I must continue to believe in that thing, because that’s the right thing to do.
DT: You’ve been ‘anointed’ by your party for the position, but we have two other APC senators, Ali Ndume and Danjuma Goje, gunning for the seat. Have you engaged them in dialogue?
Lawan: The leadership, elders and stakeholders of our party across the country, including our governors, recommended me. The word ‘recommended’ was used, to run for the office of Senate President. You could have read a lot of endorsements coming from geopolitical zones saying the leaders have endorsed us. That’s a plus, and a head start. But it doesn’t, in my opinion, preclude anybody from running. The party has a preference, and that’s normal. It’s a global practice that the party will say this is where it wants to go. If someone feels otherwise, the party cannot easily say you’re shut out. Maybe if there’s anything the party needs to do it is to talk to such a person to say ‘this is our reason, and please let’s work as a single unit.’ My brothers who are running are taking the liberty of democracy. For me, I believe everything has its own time. You have to look and read the most opportune moment to talk and engage. I believe that we’ll do that in due course.
DT: What unique thing do you have to offer, and how will you avoid being a ‘rubber stamp senate president?
Lawan: My selling point is consistency. We’re talking about the legislature, and I’ll be 20 years in the legislature by June by the grace of God. I was in the House of Reps for eight years, from 1999 to 2007, and then moved to the senate from 2007 to date. I have participated fully as a member of the House of Reps. I was chairman House Committee on Agriculture, chairman House Committee on Education, even as an opposition member of the House then. That tells you something, that I can work with parties other than mine. I don’t want to blow my trumpet so much, but I think we did well in agriculture and education. The evidence is there for everybody to see. I was made the Senate Leader after I chaired the Senate Committee on Defence during this 8th Assembly from 2015. As Senate Leader, I’m supposed to work with everybody, and that’s what I’ve been doing, engaging everybody. For me, the experience you garner when stay in the legislature is the most priceless factor you have when it comes to what you do as a leader in the National Assembly. I’ve watched very closely how everything has been done over the years. I will be the longest serving member of the National Assembly in the 9th Senate having been in the National Assembly for 20 years. Only two of us will be serving for that long. As an individual, before I came to the National Assembly, I was a lecturer/research fellow with the University of Maiduguri and Centre for Regional Studies. I was in charge of geographic information and remote sensing laboratory before I came to the National Assembly. I had my first degree at UniMaid and later ABU for my Land Surveying Postgraduate Programme, and my Masters and PhD in remote sensing and geographic information systems in Cranfield University in the UK, where I stayed for over five years to do my Masters and PhD. I believe I have the requisite experience to do the job. I believe I have the stability of mind and calmness, the attitude to work with others, both within my party and outside of it. Then when people talk about being a ‘rubber stamp’, I wonder whether the presiding officer is a headmaster. As a presiding officer, you’re only to aggregate and coordinate the views of your colleagues, and the majority will always have its way. You don’t hit the gavel when it’s clear that the majority is against something and you’ll say the majority won’t have it. Then you’ll not survive, because you’re sitting there by the grace of God and the endorsement of your colleagues. If you’re not going to be fair and equitable, definitely you won’t survive. I don’t want to go there just to make a name; I want to go there to make a difference. We want to make the lives of Nigerians better. We want to ensure that all those programmes this administration is talking about will give the required support. But where we have to disagree – and we will because our perspectives will differ – it’s not going to the proverbial market square to start throwing stones. When we differ as leaders, we should have a mechanism through which we should be able to come to an understanding and agreement on the basis of what the national interest is. I don’t have any problem with telling my leaders that this isn’t the right thing to do. So, no, we’re not going to be a ‘rubber stamp’. I believe there will never be a ‘rubber stamp’ presiding officer. In the legislature, unlike in the executive, you’re just first among equals. DT: How did you throw away your Engineering helmet for the politician’s cap? Lawan: I didn’t throw it away. But I never imagined I would be in politics, even though I was supporting the progressive parties. When I wasn’t partisan, I supported the Labour Party in the 1992 elections. I was a student in the UK, and as a student I had a vote. I was then the president of the Nigerian Students Association in Cranfield, so we supported and voted Labour Party because at that time, their policy on foreign students was better than the Conservatives. As a student in UniMaid, I supported the GNPP, not the NPN. I was briefly in the UNPC during the Abacha transition, then APP. In 1997, a year after I returned from the UK, the UNPC was formed and people came from home and said I should contest for my federal constituency. But I also like what I studied, and I had good engagements with the university. I wanted to practice what I learnt in the UK. I think the pressure became too much. I didn’t even know I would become a good politician, but I conceded. After Abacha died, I didn’t go back to work after I withdrew my services, and when the APP was formed, I joined it. When I came in 1999, the first four years were very difficult for me. My understanding of representation is to ensure that I protect my people from anything that will jeopardise their wellbeing and work hard to promote their interest to ensure they benefit from the system. Because of the crisis we had in 1999 and 2003, we had an executive that even felt we shouldn’t be there at that time, maybe the fight was too much, and I felt we were just wasting time. I didn’t throw in the towel just like that. I thought, like most politicians, after being engaged, I just said my people cannot be wrong. Thank God we’re still in politics, and we won’t relent in ensuring that we represent our constituents and we don’t disappoint Nigerians.
DT: Again, as the ‘anointed’ Senate President candidate, how are we going to break the logjam of the federal budget?
Lawan: We share that concern. In fact, we believe that’s one area we have to do something about as soon as we get there, by the grace of God. We believe that we have to talk amongst ourselves that we owe Nigerians that duty, because the economy of Nigeria is largely run by public expenditure. Unless the budget is passed and implemented, the economy continues to remain stagnant, or get worse. When we agree on what to do, then we’ll approach the executive arm. Those of us in the National Assembly should also ensure that nobody travels without having the budget defence of his or her committee completed, especially the chairman and vice chairman. Within one month, the budget defence should be over, whether someone has come to defend or not. In two months, let it be for us to process the budget. We should be able to pass the budget two months after passage. If the president is able to lay the budget say in the first week of September, I do not see any reason why we are not going to be able to pass it by the first or second week of December before we go on Christmas break. That is feasible.
DT: One issue that makes the National Assembly not look too good is that of constituency projects. What’s the future of constituency projects?
Lawan: On constituency projects, it was a running battle between the executive and legislature between 1999 and 2007. During the first tenure, the president didn’t even think the legislature was a necessary arm of government. It was a fight between the two arms. The second tenure of the then president improved a bit in terms of relationship between the executive and the legislature. But still, there was no structure of how members of the National Assembly could reflect projects for their constituents. Members would just indicate ‘let me have a borehole in a village, a primary school in a town, etc’ and it would be included. In 2007, when late Yar’Adua became president, there was an effort between the legislature and executive to have a better-structured way of funding and a certain amount was decided by both sides to be allocated for constituency projects. That’s the practice till today. Those projects would be worth a certain value for a senator and a member of the House. I know it’s about N550m or N600m for a senatorial district, and this is shared between the members of the House from the senatorial district and the senator. That puts some states into disadvantage, like Kano where they have 24 members of the House. Where you have a senatorial district with seven or eight members, they will get less compared to where you have two or three members of the House. Let me put it right on record here, no member of the National Assembly is given the money for constituency projects. You only nominate the projects. The Executive arm through the MDAs will award the contracts. There’s due process. So, we don’t get involved. But you know in politics, some information could be just tossed out there for some reasons. I have not seen any member of the National Assembly awarding contracts for his constituency projects. All you try to do is to ensure that the projects are implemented. You follow it up, if a contractor is given the contract, you ensure that that contractor doesn’t short-change you in terms of the quality of work and the performance of the contract. For me, it’s something that needs to be sustained. I think we should continue with it, though maybe we need to fine-tune it to make it better implemented. On oversight, it’s a constitutional responsibility of the legislature everywhere in the world. We’re supposed to have oversight. I think we can do it in a better way, with a structured way of doing it. The question is the bad reputation it has acquired over the years. I find that very interesting, because if a CEO is requested by a member of the National Assembly to go and bring money, is he under any obligation to do that? No. Why can’t he report it to the appropriate quarters? He should report, that a member has requested for money. Most of what people put out there is not true. When we had to fight with the executive arm of government in 1999, we were even called ‘legislooters’ and things like that. As a senator, I have only five aides. It’s a struggle to make them function. Go to the US and see the number of aides a senator has. I’m not talking about money here. When you do oversight, you’re supposed to do it with so much information, advice and consultancy. I believe that we’re doing well. If there’s anybody who goes out of his way to ask for money, that person should be reported to the appropriate quarters, not to call all members of the National Assembly thieves.
DT: What about the issue of collusion between the legislators and officials in the executive in terms of projects not well-executed?
Lawan: That project belongs to someone. Even if it doesn’t belong to an individual member of the National Assembly, it belongs to a community. The contractor is the one that’s supposed to face the music, because he has signed to implement that project, and he has been paid some money. So, if he fails to execute it properly, he will be held responsible. I know we have been given bad names as members of the National Assembly, and it’s not fair. DT: What about the remuneration? Do you think the salaries and allowances of the lawmakers are justifiable? Lawan: If I tell you what my salary is, I hope you’ll agree with me. My salary is less than one million naira.
DT: How about the quarterly allowances?
Lawan: There’s nothing like quarterly allowance. I believe that we’re supposed to function, and if we have to function as parliamentarians, we have to have an enabling environment. We have to have the resources for us to travel, if we have to perform oversight, we have to have the resources to consult when we have to, because if you don’t, you’re not likely to be efficient and effective in your oversight. I believe that what should bother us today should be the performance of the legislators. What we’re paid as salaries – I think mine is N750,000 because out of N1m, they take about N250,000 as tax. So, I end up with less than N800,000 per month. Am I supposed to work without being funded? Who in the executive arm of government performs without overhead?
DT: Will you have the courage to put a break to your colleagues for transparency, for instance to say that unless somebody travels, he won’t be paid money for that?
Lawan: I think we have an accounting procedure, mechanism and process. It’s not for the presiding officer to say that nobody should be given money. Once someone is going to perform his legislative responsibility, he has to be paid. How else can he perform if he’s not paid? What we need to do is to ensure that the performance of legislators is enhanced. There’s transparency. The way we do our things is open to the public. I believe there’s room for improvement in the area of oversight. I believe that we need to be more transparent in the way our funds are utilised, but I believe that the funds going to the National Assembly are not ‘jumbo’, because they’re not personal funds. They are for members of the National Assembly to perform their roles. In that respect, every arm of government has that kind of money. I’m not in the attitude of this kind of debate, but I always believe that members of the National Assembly should be enable
Comments
Post a Comment