Its very obvious now in nigeria that its a criminal that will be shouting rule of law, rule of lam, or constitution when he knows that he has a skeleton in his compboard. They have used bail-out funds to buy cars and pocketed the rest. Nigerian governors, politicians are stupendiously fanstatic thieves.

sweetgala:


Yes. Were you not alive when this bailout package was put together. Some state HOA even shut it down refusing their governor from collecting what was a government loan appropriated by the Senate

Any money appropriated by Senate can be audited by the Senate.

The senate is not an auditor and they did not appropriate this spending. This is not an FG loan.It is NOT FG money and the assertion any money appropriated by the senate can be audited by the senate needs substantiation. Essentially what happened was the equivalent of money printing or quantitative easing by the CBN to provide a loan which is guaranteed against future allocations. Nigeria borrows from other governments .Are we to have US senators coming to audit how the loans were spent?

The National assembly approves foreign loans for state governments that is not quite the same as appropriation. The truth is that the bailout money MUST be still appropriated by the state houses of assembly before being spent that is the constitutional reality.

Only state houses can appropriate money spent by the state and whatever the senate did is not appropriation

omonnakoda:
The senate is not an auditor and they did not appropriate this spending. This is not an FG loan.It is NOT FG money and the assertion any money appropriated by the senate can be audited by the senate needs substantiation. Essentially what happened was the equivalent of money printing or quantitative easing by the CBN to provide a loan which is guaranteed against future allocations. Nigeria borrows from other governments .Are we to have US senators coming to audit how the loans were spent?

The National assembly approves foreign loans for state governments that is not quite the same as appropriation. The truth is that the bailout money MUST be still appropriated by the state houses of assembly before being spent that is the constitutional reality.

Only state houses can appropriate money spent by the state and whatever the senate did is not appropriation

This was a FG loan from CBN account .

There was a clear clause attached to this bailout which was agreed upon. Fayose is just a rubble rouser

I begin to feel that Mr Fayose cannot be trusted with money.

He becomes vigorously agitated at the slightest mention of OWO, KUDI, EGO.

Dem use money do u nii?

Federal released money for the payment of workers salary; has the money been used as directed?

hotice01:
Senate should have written to the state assembly.
I'm not in support of corruption but due process should be respected.
It's the duty of the state house of assembly to monitor and probe the spendings of the state government and then maybe forward findings to the national assembly I.e Senate.
Same way it's only the national assembly that can probe the federal government spendings.
#JustMyOpinionThough

it was the process of probing fg spending that fg told them how they bailout state,
And in the same purview of probing fg, they've to extend the probing to the state fg sent the bailout to.

Reading through most of the comments, I can deduce that most pple are no more thinking straight again. Their sense of judgment have been beclouded by hate, hunger and sentiments. Some pple would not even read through b4 commenting

kernel504:
What a nation! How can the national assembly oversight over the spending of a state, when there is a state assembly?

Buhari, will grind the economy of Nigeria to a halt with all these impunity.

so buhari is now controlling the Senate?

sweetgala:


This was a FG loan from CBN account .

There was a clear clause attached to this bailout which was agreed upon. Fayose is just a rubble rouser

It was not an FG loan do not say what you have no knowledge of. Even if it was that changes nothing it is not the job of the senate. The fact is the FG is broke so where did the FG get the money to be loaning when the FG itself was borrowing to pay salaries. People who have no idea often pontificate blindly. What is CBN account? What does that mean. Did the loan appear anywhere in the FG budget for last year?

Can you provide evidence for this clause that you claim that enabled senate oversight, I am very keen to see this do not disappoint.

defash8:
This is what we are talking about, putting cart before the horse. Buhari opened our vaults to these govs without terms & condition. He acted solely without NASS but here we are getting to know most govs diverted the bailout. You cannot change the rule of the game when it is on. We need to move on, Fayose response is on point & FGN should always do the right thing including the senate. Disbursing bailout without Senate approval is an impeachable offence committed by Buhari. The Senate need to query why such fund was released without terms & conditions, no control. It is pathetic.

1. Bros, it is better to say little especially when you do not have information about things than to argue virulently from a false premise.
2. You think anybody will release bailout without conditions? Yes there were conditions to bailout, even the NLNG largese had conditions
3. Where in the law books did was it stated that he needed NASS approval to bail out states from a terribly bad situation? Some of you spew ignorance at will.
4. Most importantly google is your friend. Go look at the conditions that came with the two tranches of bailouts........

omonnakoda:
It was not an FG loan do not say what you have no knowledge of. Even if it was that changes nothing it is not the job of the senate. The fact is the FG is broke so where did the FG get the money to be loaning when the FG itself was borrowing to pay salaries. People who have no idea often pontificate blindly. What is CBN account? What does that mean. Did the loan appear anywhere in the FG budget for last year?

Can you provide evidence for this clause that you claim that enabled senate oversight, I am very keen to see this do not disappoint.

How can you do brazenly contest what is General knowledge. The whole of Nigeria is aware of the nature of this loan

sweetgala:


How can you do brazenly contest what is General knowledge. The whole of Nigeria is aware of the nature of this loan

I am not aware. There are some very simple matters of law that escape you . There is a hierarchy of authority in law. You would have us believe that the nature of the loan is accompanied by some kind of agreement which you fail to provide evidence for but rather rely on sentiment and the fallacy of Appeal to general knowledge.
I do not admit that there is any such agreement.

Even if there is the agreement must pass two hurdles 1) it must be lawful i.e conforming with extant legislation 2) If it complies with such legislation then such legislation MUST BE constitutional.


So even if there is such an agreement which is NOT admitted and for you to substantiate, is it constitutional for the senate to provide oversight to the finances of the state. Yes or No? The simple answer is to hear what the constitution has to say

Let us start with Section 120
I do this to avoid confusion and misrepresentation

120. (1) All revenues or other moneys raised or received by a State (not being revenues or other moneys payable under this Constitution or any Law of a House of Assembly into any other public fund of the State established for a specific purpose) shall be paid into and form one Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State


(4)(4) No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State or any other public fund of the State except in the manner prescribed by the House of Assembly.

This is very clear . The bailout money goes into a consolidated Revenue Fund . The key word is "SHALL" not may or any other suggestive but SHALL. No money leaves that account without the State HOA saying so

I do not see the word SENATE ANYWHERE
So let us reflect on that before delving into other constitutional pronouncements on the matter

Only the State House of Assembly has the power to pass laws to set money aside for SPECIFIC PURPOSES outside constitutional provisions. This "LOAN" does not fall into the category of a " money set aside by a constitutional provision" and therefore has to go into ONE FUND TO THEN BE APPROPRIATED by the State HOA

In other words the lesson here is this. Even if there was such an agreement as you claim what should have happened was to get the State House of Assembly to legislate on such agreement before giving the money otherwise the agreement would be unconstitutional and therefore null and void.

If I enter into a loan mortgaging my father's house without his authority. Such an agreement has no meaning. The person holding my guarantee is holding nothing

omonnakoda:
I am not aware. There are some very simple matters of law that escape you . There is a hierarchy of authority in law. You would have us believe that the nature of the loan is accompanied by some kind of agreement which you fail to provide evidence for but rather rely on sentiment and the fallacy of Appeal to general knowledge.
I do not admit that there is any such agreement.

Even if there is the agreement must pass two hurdles 1) it must be lawful i.e conforming with extant legislation 2) If it complies with such legislation then such legislation MUST BE constitutional.


So even if there is such an agreement which is NOT admitted and for you to substantiate, is it constitutional for the senate to provide oversight to the finances of the state. Yes or No? The simple answer is to hear what the constitution has to say

Let us start with Section 120
I do this to avoid confusion and misrepresentation

120. (1) All revenues or other moneys raised or received by a State (not being revenues or other moneys payable under this Constitution or any Law of a House of Assembly into any other public fund of the State established for a specific purpose) shall be paid into and form one Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State


(4)(4) No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State or any other public fund of the State except in the manner prescribed by the House of Assembly.

This is very clear . The bailout money goes into a consolidated Revenue Fund . The key word is "SHALL" not may or any other suggestive but SHALL. No money leaves that account without the State HOA saying so

I do not see the word SENATE ANYWHERE
So let us reflect on that before delving into other constitutional pronouncements on the matter

Only the State House of Assembly has the power to pass laws to set money aside for SPECIFIC PURPOSES outside constitutional provisions. This "LOAN" does not fall into the category of a " money set aside by a constitutional provision" and therefore has to go into ONE FUND TO THEN BE APPROPRIATED by the State HOA

In other words the lesson here is this. Even if there was such an agreement as you claim what should have happened was to get the State House of Assembly to legislate on such agreement before giving the money otherwise the agreement would be unconstitutional and therefore null and void.

If I enter into a loan mortgaging my father's house without his authority. Such an agreement has no meaning. The person holding my guarantee is holding nothing

I refuse to be drawn into an argument which has already been established .

Terms and Condition of the Bail Out fund; Courtsey Premiumtimesng.com

1. Publish audited annual financial statements within 9 months of financial year end.
2. Introduction and compliance with the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS).
Publish State budget online annually.
3. Publish budget implementation performance report online quarterly.
4. Develop standard IPSAS compliant software to be offered to States for use by State and Local Governments.
5. Set realistic and achievable targets to improve independently generated revenue (from all revenue generating activities of the State in addition to tax collections) and ratio of capital to recurrent expenditure.
6. Implementation of targets Implement a centralized Treasury Single Account (TSA) in each State.
7. Quarterly financial reconciliation meetings between Federal and State Governments to cover VAT, PAYE remittances, refunds on Government projects, Paris Club and other accounts.
8. Share the database of companies within each State with the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). The objective is to improve VAT and PAYE collection.
9. Introduce a system to allow for the immediate issue of VAT / WHT certificates on payment of invoices.
10. Review all revenue related laws and update of obsolete rates / tariffs.
Set limits on personnel expenditure as a share of total budgeted expenditure.
11. Biometric capture of all States’ Civil Servants will be carried out to eliminate payroll fraud.
12. Establishment of Efficiency Unit.
Federal Government online price guide to be made available for use by States.
13. Introduce a system of Continuous Audit (internal audit).
14. Create a fixed asset and liability register.
15. Consider privatization or concession of suitable State owned enterprises to improve efficiency and management.
16. Establish a Capital Development Fund to ring-fence capital receipts and adopt accounting policies to ensure that capital receipts are strictly applied to capital projects.
17. Domestication of the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA).
18. Attainment and maintenance of a credit rating by each State of the Federation.
19. Federal Government to encourage States to access funds from the capital markets for bankable projects through issuance of fast- track Municipal bond guidelines to support smaller issuances and shorter tenures.
20. Full compliance with the FRA and reporting obligations, including;
21. No commercial bank loans to be undertaken by States;
22. Routine submission of updated debt profile report to the DMO.