Infrastructure: Govt must embrace public-private partnership —Omisore

Former Deputy Governor of Osun State, Dr Iyiola Omisore, an engineer and expert in Public-Private Partnership (PPP), served as Chairman, Senate Committee on Appropriations between 2007 and 2011. He speaks with MOSES ALAO on the performance of the National Assembly in the last one year; reasons for the poor state of infrastructure in the country and why it has become imperative for Nigeria to embrace public-private partnership for development.

You served in the Senate for two terms and you were even the chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriation, a committee seen as largely strategic in the National Assembly. Looking at the National Assembly in the last one year, how will you rate it?

The National Assembly that we have today has tried and has done so much despite its limitations. The National Assembly has always been the whipping child in any democracy, because at any given time, either during military or civilian rule, you always have the judiciary and the executive functioning, but the legislature is the one that makes democracy realistic. But people are not used to the legislature; they do not understand its workings, so they begin to abuse members of the National Assembly.

Look at the issue of budget, for instance. You heard the hullabaloo about budget padding last year, an issue that was only used to cover Nigerians’ faces. There is nothing like budget padding in our dictionary in the National Assembly. The constitution says all revenues in the federal purse must be appropriated and they must pass through the National Assembly. The executive is allowed by the constitution to bring to the National Assembly what is called budget estimates for an incoming year. The National Assembly will in turn work on those estimates and give the executive what is now called budget. So, there is the need to understand the roles of the executive and the National Assembly. If the roles of each arm is well-understood, the issue of budget padding would not arise at all. It was just a sheer blackmail from wherever it came from. There are committees in the National Assembly that work with the executive; the Committee on Works relates with the Minister of Works. The Committee on Health works with the Minister of Health and so on. There is nothing coming in the budget proposal that they would not have discussed at their levels. The oversight function is given to the National Assembly as well; that is to say, if you are given N2 billion for a contract on road construction between Lafia and Makurdi, because of the checks and balances, the executive will propose that in this year we want to build Lafia to Makurdi road. The legislature will sit down; the appropriation committee and the members of the appropriate committee will sit down and look into the proposal and the budget will then be approved. Then the executive will award the contract to the contractor and the burden of oversight will come back to the National Assembly. The legislature plays the role of project manager and after overseeing that project for, let us say a particular year instance, now if it is a project that is supposed to run for three to four years, the National Assembly would have known the level of works done and what remained and the resources that would be enough to bring the project to completion. But the issues of appropriation and oversight have always been a major cause of disagreement between the National Assembly and the executive and that is why they often go to town to blackmail the National Assembly.

But so far, this National Assembly has tried its best within its limitations. The main problem is that of continuity; how do we sustain the standard and make sure that the progress achieved are improved upon. And the continuity issue does not stop with the National Assembly; it affects the executive too. How do we ensure that policies and programmes at the local, state and federal levels continue? There is a problem with governance in Nigeria today, whereby the incumbent government, I don’t know whether it is out of pride or pleasure, does not follow up on the programmes and policies of its predecessor. In advanced countries, when a government is formed and there are what you call legacy projects or policies to follow, the new government doesn’t change such policies or projects.

But what if the so-called projects or policies are not in line with the vision and plan of the new government, should it continue with such?

That is why I called them legacy projects; some projects and policies cannot contradict the vision or whatever plan a new government has. The fundamental basis of governance is to provide development for the people; so anyone coming into government is not coming to rule over his household. The key programmes, such as the need to provide water, provide good roads, make education accessible, provide employment and provide security and so on, cannot contradict the plan of any new government. These shouldn’t change. I agree that the methodology and approach can vary but it should not be a clear departure, which cost more money. Due to ego and pride, incumbent governments abandon the projects of their predecessors and jump to new ones. Why can’t they just evaluate where things were and complete the projects? That is what I am saying.

Following your position on continuity of projects, one would recall that during your time in the Senate, some projects were initiated such as road constructions, hospital refurbishment, and water and so on. Did you ensure that the required funds were given to those projects and in what states are they now?

You know that projects were conceived to be executed by the executive and a four or five-year project cannot be completed in a four-year tenure. I was chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriation for four years and, of course, I inherited some projects that must be completed too. Because of my experience as an engineer, I knew that I should not just head a committee and begin to block or prevent the completion of projects. So I worked hard to ensure the completion of those ongoing projects.

Let me give you an example of some legacy projects in the country, which I insisted must be completed as the head of the appropriation committee. These projects run into billions of Naira. When the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua was sworn in, he inherited what was called the Presidential Implementation Projects (PIP), which were handed over by former President Olusegun Obasanjo. These projects were more or less what one can call legacy projects. They included the East-West Road, a road that connects Edo State, Cross River, Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Bayelsa; that is a road that links all the six states in the South-South. There were about four or five sections. There was also the National Independent Power Projects (NIPP) by Niger Power Hydro Company and, of course, major roads such as the Lagos-Ibadan expressway, Abuja-Lokoja-Okene-Ondo road, Abuja-Kaduna road, Kano-Maiduguri-Yobe road. These were the road projects handed over to us when we got to the Sixth Senate. Of course, civil servants, because of their selfish interests, were saying the projects should be stopped but I said no, the projects must be completed.

So how can the country get these projects completed, given their importance as what you called legacy projects, which means they are critical to the economy?

Yes, they are legacy projects and they will remain important and critical to Nigeria’s economy and development forever. They must be completed. Some of the other legacy projects include the Calabar-Lagos rail, Lagos-Ibadan rail, Abuja-Maiduguri-Port Harcourt rail. These are projects that the Federal Government must do by all means. If they are not done today, then we will have to do it in future. That was why I insisted that those key projects must be done.

At the time I was in the Senate, I insisted that that there had to be follow-up. Like the Lagere-Enuwa-Ilesha Bypass in Osun State, I facilitated that and monitored it until I left the Senate. And that was what we did across the country on water, health and other critical sectors. My method when I was chairman was that if we were going to spend N500 billion on roads, there are six zones in Nigeria, so the money should be divided among the six zones. Then the zones should put their priority projects that will serve the purpose of the people. You must maximise your funds to the largest benefits of the people. This philosophy informed the projects I initiated while in the Senate. As chairman of the appropriation committee, I called the federal universities’ vice chancellors and asked them what their challenges were. The University of Ibadan, for instance, said its major challenge back then was that the university needed to open up the Ajibode extension, so that the university could be decongested. UBA, CBN and Ford Foundation were all going to do one intervention or the other in the university but none of them was ready to do roads. I ensured the provision of funds for infrastructure development in the university. The University of Lagos said they had water and electricity challenge and we told them to do a survey and we provided funds for them too. Same for the Obafemi Awolowo University. I was quite particular about the South-West; that was why I invited teaching hospitals and Federal Medical Centres in the South-West too and asked them what they needed and we intervened at different levels. They are things that can be seen. I facilitated several other projects on water; these include the initiation of Ogbese Dam; Ife-Ijesha dam in Ahun; Oyan Dam and so on. I built a template of infrastructure development for the South-West in a way that no political office holder from the region has done at the federal level. But when I left the Senate, the projects suffered because of lack of continuity. I did all these because I saw the post as an opportunity to assist my people and I would not have done less. But I was not a governor or a minister, so all I could do was to appropriate funds and if they are not done, then it cannot be said to be my fault.

For instance, I initiated and encouraged the siting of an Air Force school in Ipetu-Ijesha and a postgraduate Navy Communications School in Ile-Ife. I must mention the roles played by my brother and friend, Dr Muyiwa Oladimeji and his ally, Senator Bode Olajumoke, who was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Navy, who also attracted the best Navy School to Imeri, Ondo State. He has never hidden the role I played to make it happen. The Centre for Black African Arts and Culture in Osun State, which is now a subject of litigation between former Governor Olagunsoye Oyinlola and his successor, Rauf Aregbesola today, I facilitated funds for that centre as the chairman of the committee on culture. The funds I asked the Ministry of Finance to give them were close to billions. Why the centre, which is a UNESCO centre that none of them sweated for, should cause a fight between the Osun State government and Oyinlola, is still strange to me. As a senator, I saw it as a legacy project for Osun State given our great cultural heritage and I made efforts to ensure that a lot of things were done in that place through different interventions.

Other key road projects I envisioned based on their importance to Osun State and my position as appropriation committee chairman included the dualisation of Gbongan to Kwara boundary. It was my conception that the dualisation should be done and Oyinlola started it. That road is quite long and it was to be done with about N12 billion. We divided it into three sections, Gbongan to Sekona was Section 1, Sekona to Osogbo was Section 2 and Osogbo to Kwara boundary was Section 3. Aregbesola inherited the project and he has been on a section since I left the Senate in 2011. I appropriated so much money at that time, either the money lapsed or was misappropriated, I don’t know. But they are still on it today.

Apart from that road, I ensured the provision of N3 billion yearly for the development of Osun Airport Development for three appropriation years but former Governor Oyinlola did not maximise the opportunity, because the funds were not accessed. For the money to be released, there must be a design and practical evidence of the project to be started. Former Secretary to the State Government, Alhaji Fatai Akinbade and Alhaji Tajudeen Oladipo can attest to what I am saying.

But the state government claims that the Gbongan-Kwara boundary road is its project.

It cannot be a state government project, because it is a federal road. And as I have said in many interviews before now, the road already had a design and contractors had already been mobilised, so how can it be claimed as a state government project? The last thing I heard was that the state government is saying that it has spent so much on the project and it needed a refund. But as I advised some state governors before, you cannot do a kilometre of road for N500 million while the Federal Ministry of Works’ provision is N30 million per kilometre; nobody will pay you. You will hear them say the Federal Government owes them for doing federal roads but the truth is that nobody owes them, because by the time states are claiming they had expended N50 billion on projects, by Abuja’s reckoning it owes only N3billion.There is a Standard Rates and Measurement on federal roads and states must conform to these prerequisites to be refunded. You cannot just blackmail the Federal Government and that is why we always said states must have procurement procedures, but most states don’t have this in place.

There were some other roads such as Gbongan-Iwo road and Ile-Ife-Ilesha road, which you facilitated but have now been abandoned. Are you not to blame for this, as many people already do blame you…?

The first project you mentioned was Gbongan-Oyo boundary road while the other one was the dualisation of Mayfair Junction-Enuwa-More-Ilesha Bypass. That dualisation from Mayfair Junction to Ilesha Bypass would have been the first township road dualisation apart from Osogbo, the state capital. These roads would have opened up Gbongan, Iwo, Ile-Ife and many Osun State communities to developments. It is true I facilitated them, but it will be wrong for anyone to blame me that they were abandoned. They were abandoned after I left the Senate, because there was no follow-up. That was what I said earlier about lack of continuity; that is what we do in Nigeria. I experienced it in the Senate; all the projects I insisted must be completed, if I was not there, they might have been abandoned. But these roads are important to the residents of Osun State and Nigerians who ply the roads in these axes. Anyone taking over the mantle of leadership must consider the overall interest of the people before deciding to discontinue projects.

You recently got a Ph.D. in Infrastructure Financing with a specialisation on Public-Private Partnership, how do you think Nigeria can achieve results on these important projects you mentioned and others using PPP model?

It is high time we began to explore the vast opportunities in public-private partnership for development. Government cannot do everything; it should be humble and smart enough to know this and then call private investors to look at the roads, do they have viability? They should build the roads, toll them and government should give them a maximum of years to return the roads back. There are many PPP models; we can employ Build, Operate and Transfer; Build, Operate and Own or Build, Operate, Design and Transfer.

Depending on the model, the government will invite funders or financiers and give them the authorisation to build infrastructure, it could be in any sector of the society. Government will only provide the legal framework and conducive atmosphere. It does not have to spend its resources on the project again. PPP is the way to go; it is already taking the front seat in development globally. Let us say, an X amount of money is to be expended on the project, you tell the funder that he can recoup his money within the next 25 to 60 years, which is the UNDF world best practice. After recouping his money, he will return the project to the government. this is called build, operate and transfer. Another model where you build, operate and own is that because of the huge investments expended on building the infrastructure, you will operate and pay toll to government forever. Part of PPP is concessionaire, which is in place at the ports and airports across the country now. You concession out government property and the funders build, operate and pay revenues to government. The basis for this is that a government property or asset might be generating below the resources needed to maintain it and, therefore, being a liability to the government, you can concession it to a funder who will promise to give a better return. In the course of that, you will have better equipment and general improvement of the property. But there must be strong terms and conditions between the government and the concessionaire.

There is no government in the world that can single-handedly fund development of infrastructure without relying on PPP. This is why I have been saying it to all who care to listen. At the last National Society of Engineers (NSE) conference in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, I told the engineers during my lecture that engineers, as builders and professionals, should encourage PPP model in every state and in the country. Infrastructure must be funded by PPP.

But do you think PPP can work well in Nigeria, given the nature and belief of the people that government must do everything and the high number of over-stressed infrastructure?

Look, in the time that there were plenty resources, government could afford to face everything, but now that the resources are scanty and there is so much pressure on government, we no longer have a choice but to make PPP work. We are now at a shore of no-choice, so it is in this time of recession that government can explore PPP and make it work.

Let me also tell you that PPP model will assist greatly in eliminating corruption. One of the greatest ways corruption is perpetrated in projects is the area of procurement, but if you operate PPP, a funder cannot inflate prices or use less-quality materials to build infrastructure because he knows it is like stealing from his own pocket. But in the present system we are using, you can give a project to a contractor who will do a shoddy job and run away.

Finally, as an expert in PPP, what will you advise the government to do on these numerous projects affecting the people?

As I said earlier, PPP is the way to go. Look at the decision by the Dangote Cement Company to construct Obajana-Kabba road in exchange for tax incentives from the Federal Government; that is a PPP arrangement. That road is a hub for his company and in advanced countries; any company plies a road that is a hub for it would always do what is called Corporate Social Responsibility and the government will encourage them with tax holiday, industrial parks, safety and so on. But anyone who will enter a PPP arrangement with government must ensure that the agreement is water-tight.

And my advice to the government is that they should follow the rule of law and the ideals of good governance, putting the people and their interests first.