The recent verdict of Àkwa Ibom State House Assembly on the performance of the 31 local government councils has continued to generate a heated debate and trigger sharp reactions across the political and public circles.
The resolution adopted by the House relied on the report of Rt. Hon. Mfon Idung Committee on Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs that visited and assessed the performance of the local government councils in the state.
Actually, the 2026 committee report of the local government areas adopted during House plenary, affirmed that Nsit Ubium, Mkpat Enin, Abak, Esit Eket, Ikono and Udung Uko as the six underperforming local government councils.
According to the report, the committee reportedly frowned at inadequate infrastructure and poor utilisation of resources by the six councils.
Also read:
- Editorial: NBS and its cynical Report on inflation
- Editorial: Tackling Persistent Floods In A‘Ibom
- Editorial: Let Nigeria Remain
Though the committee said it examined, among other things, Projects executed by the councils, Utilisation of public funds, Condition of council infrastructure and facilities, Service delivery and grassroots development, Human-capital and empowerment programmes, Performance of individual local government administrations, some councils contested against it.
For example, Nsit Ubium and Mkpat Enin fired several salvos at the committee’s report, submitting that their projects and interventions contradict the Assembly’s ruling.
While applauding the committee for embarking on the trip, the report will encourage some local government councils to wake up from slumber by doing more to ginger grassroots development.
However, we find the report lacking in objectivity, fairness and credibility.
Before now, the Committee should have undertaken the tour as a surprise package, not necessarily alerting the councils before it went out to do one of its core oversight functions.
Among the committee’s oversight functions include Budget Monitoring and Project inspection of both state and councils’ projects and Scrutinizing MDAs.
Others are investigating Inefficiency and Corruption, Summoning Public Officers especially commissioners, heads of agencies, and local government chairmen to explain policy implementation gaps, financial queries, or infractions as well as Reviewing Local Government Performance are others.
By going out and issuing yardsticks for assessment of the councils showed that the committee gunned for contest contrary to its constitutional responsibility of finding out as it is with a view to recommending to appropriate quarters for penalty.
Assuming that the committee wanted to do assessment, did the committee aforesaid communicate such decision to the councils stating their purpose and criteria of the tour? How many times has the present House, during its plenary, summoned Commissioners, Special Advisers, top government functionaries or Local Government Chairmen to appear and answer query on some alleged corrupt practices or poor performance? How many times has the Committee members on Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs visited Local Government Areas on their own volition to find out the state of the council, funds allocated and projects executed?
Yet, the House prides itself as the second arm of government, but is shy to stamp its feet against some ill-conceived and poorly executed projects and anti-people programmes of the executive arm. How many of its motions and resolutions has the governor ever implemented or acted quick for fear of purported impeachment? Apart from executive bills, how many members sponsor individual bills that the executive or judiciary comply with or enforce?
This is the same House that has failed to appraised itself or hold the executive to ransom. Yearly, the governor has been presenting budgets to the members for approval. As its constitutional duty, has the House monitored the implementation of the budget even Supplementary Budget or otherwise or even invite Commissioner for Finance or Accountant-General to answer some queries for delay in implementation? More humiliating to the Legislative arm is the delay in the completion of its plenary Chamber forcing some of its committees to be relocated to an outside hotel for sitting. Contract was awarded for the renovation of its main Assembly Chamber and the contractor yanked off Assembly’s roof. Has the House summoned courage to invite the contractor or Commissioner for Housing to appear and tell them why the project is being delayed or rain is ‘bombarding’ the chamber?
To us, the report would have been a saintly piece if the members actually went on official oversight function tour by their volition, not on a sponsored junketing. Reports have it that the committee was allegedly bankrolled by the councils. This dents the independence and credibility of the committee.
The committee was said to have commended Etim Ekpo, Ibesikpo Asutan, and Itu for projects and accountability observed during the inspections, though yardsticks for the judgement were unknown?
Sadly, the committee chewed its tongue by admitting that the State Government has not meddled in the councils’ funds. In other words, the committee had admitted, albeit, consciously that State/Local Joint Account has been abolished. This is inducts the state government. For a long time, why is the Committee playing hide and seek in telling our people the exact amount each of the 31 local government council is collecting on a monthly basis from the Federation Allocation Account Committee (FAAC) to match with the projects executed so far? This fairytale by the Committee made up of Hon. members impugned reality of the true situation and made them look culpable on how the councils’ funds are being expended.
Why has the House not interrogated the poverty level of most urban and rural people in the state? Why has the House not summoned the Commissioner of Education on the placement of the state at 36th in the recent released NECO results including dilapidated public primary and secondary schools in the state? Why is the House not interested in finding lasting solutions to the reckless abandonment of refuse on streets, erosion menace and potholes in the Uyo, the state capital?
This is how handicapped the House is in taking controversial, indeed, critical decisions on matters affecting the welfare of the populace.
We may excuse the House that this is political season and therefore everything must be done to douse tension and for their survival especially those angling for second or third term in the office. By then, it is damning to play to the gallery on certain crucial decisions that demand actions to avoid some people seeing the hallowed Chamber as a rubber stamp.
There is a common legal parlance that he who goes to equity must go with clean hands. Similarly, the House Committee should have been guided by truth, and should have listed problems and ways out of the predicament. The report that passed judgement without proffering solutions sounded hasty and panicky perhaps showing that some members might have had an axe to grind with some councils’ chairmen.
We, therefore, call on the House to use the report as a working document by dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s for better local government performance in the future.
By so doing, the House must have learned its lessons, cleared the cobwebs in its path, and refocused its priorities, while local government councils concentrate on the urgent task of turning poverty into prosperity at the grassroots.
