*Why Reps Must Distance Self from Needless Controversies*

   *Why Reps Must Distance Self from Needless Controversies*

By Abel Ossai 

The House of Representatives stands the risk of becoming like the proverbial hunter, bearing the weight of an elephant upon its head and continuing to search through the underbrush in pursuit of a mere grasshopper.

This vivid imagery serves as a metaphor for those who, despite having achieved or acquired something substantial, remain preoccupied with trivial pursuits. It highlights the irony and the often-misplaced focus in human endeavors, reminding us to recognize and appreciate the significance of our accomplishments rather than becoming ensnared by the minutiae.

The House of Representatives has made a name for itself as an institution that is in touch with the realities of Nigerians. Those who had recognised the House for this quality point to the responsiveness and dispatch with which the House attend to issues of Nigerians under this current dispensation. They cite how the House made numerous pro-people interventions that staved off calamitous national crises in several instances. The implication is that any act of disappointment from the House will break Nigerians, who have come to count so much on the institution.

But the otherwise populist House seems to have fallen on evil times. The House searches through the underbrush in pursuit of a mere grasshopper with the weight of a succulent elephant upon its head. Or, how else does one explain that less than halfway through this four-year Assembly, the parliament has suddenly become enamoured with dabbling in controversial bills when it could have continued the robust legislative intervention it is known for. For the sake of the focus required for the subject matter of this piece, other recent indiscretions with controversial legislation would be mooted. The focus will be on House Bill 2056, which may yet become an albatross for an otherwise fantastic 10th House of Representatives.

The House Bill 2056, “A Bill for an Act to Repeal the National Assembly Service Act (No. 63) 2014 and Enact the National Assembly Service Act, 2025 to provide for a clear administrative structure for the National Assembly Service outlining the qualifications for the appointment of Clerks, Heads of Directorates of the National Assembly and the Secretary to the Commission; to enhance professionalism and accountability within the National Assembly's Administrative framework; and for Related Matters” seeks to introduce significant reforms within the administrative structure of the Nigerian National Assembly.

To set the records straight, legislative reforms are important for ensuring that laws and regulations remain relevant, effective, and aligned with the evolving needs of society. In the case of the proposed Bill, it has all the makings of being relevant for repositioning the management of the National Assembly. By updating and refining legislation, the system can better respond to contemporary challenges and opportunities, fostering a more equitable and prosperous society. For instance, if the National Assembly got it right, the resulting legislative reforms could help streamline bureaucratic processes, reduce corruption, and increase accountability.

But while House Bill 2056 claims to aim for enhancing professionalism and accountability, several pitfalls can be identified in its current form. These pitfalls are enough reason to distance the House from the document. But certain self-interests have clouded his judgement to the point of becoming divorced from the realities of the damage that could result from pushing ahead with this piece of legislation despite these pitfalls.

First, there is a lack of comprehensive definition of the imperative of changing something that is not broken. Hence, one of the primary shortcomings of the Bill is its failure to provide a comprehensive definition of the roles and responsibilities of the positions it seeks to regulate. Only such detailed provision would justify creating an exclusive conclave of people who could aspire to become the Clerk of the National Assembly by inserting a provision that the Seniority of any Secretaries outside the Legislative Clerk Cadre shall be personal and shall not be considered in the appointment of Clerk to the National Assembly.

Also, the qualifications for the appointment of Clerks, Heads of Directorates, and the Secretary to the Commission are outlined, but there is little detail on the specific duties and expectations attached to these roles. This ambiguity could lead to inconsistencies in administration and weaken the overall efficacy of the reforms the legislation seeks to bring about.

By creating a cult of Legislative Clerk Cadre, there is an increased potential for political influence in the emergence of the occupants of purely management positions. Unfortunately, the Bill does not sufficiently address this potential for political influence in the appointment process. While establishing clear qualifications is a step in the right direction, the absence of stringent measures to ensure an impartial and transparent selection process leaves room for political maneuvering. This could undermine the objective of enhancing professionalism within the National Assembly's administrative framework.

Thirdly, there are insufficient accountability measures outlined in the Bill, which is enough reason for the repeal and reenactment to have been kept in abeyance. Although the Bill aims to enhance accountability, it lacks robust mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the performance of appointed officials. In the absence of such clear accountability measures, there is a risk that the so-called reforms intended by the exercise will not be effectively enforced, leading to a continuation of the status quo rather than the intended improvement in administrative efficiency and integrity.

In addition, there is an overemphasis on qualifications. The stated qualifications for the various clerk posts, up to the Clerk of the National Assembly, are built more around the exclusive membership of the Legislative Clerk Cadre than around measurable academic and professional attainments. Others in the National Assembly Service Commission who are not of the Legislative Clerk Cadre possess these same qualifications, which makes it puzzling that they are left out of contention for the coveted positions listed in the Bill. This is not to say that the emphasis on qualifications is not essential, but the Bill places undue weight on educational and professional credentials without considering other critical factors such as experience, leadership qualities, and ethical standards. This narrow focus thus excluded competent candidates who possess the necessary practical skills and integrity to excel in these roles.

Beyond the content of the Bill, there is the simmering resentment among National Assembly Staff who do not belong to the elite Legislative Clerk Cadre. They see themselves as being limited and the Bill as an attempt by politicians, lawmakers, to limit the career prospects of these staff and fully politicize the appointment of Clerks by hard coding the requirement of serving in the chambers before being eligible for such appointments. This resentment could potentially manifest as protracted strikes and protests that would ground National Assembly, cripple the government, and disrupt service delivery. A scenario that must be avoided.

In conclusion, the House of Representatives is invited to note that while the House Bill 2056 is a commendable effort to streamline and professionalize the administrative framework of the Nigerian National Assembly, it should be discarded unless there is significant refinement to address its identified pitfalls. This includes removing the contentious sections that seek to create an exclusive cult of those who can become the Clerk of the National Assembly to the exclusion of other competent persons. Only through such enhancements should the Bill be allowed to progress; otherwise, it should be jettisoned in favour of a more efficient, professional, and accountable National Assembly Service that does not create fresh problems for Nigeria.

The House must thus retrace its steps. It should distance itself pursuing a bill that projects political office holders as being in a power grab to hijack the Management of the National Assembly through a legislation that makes it easy for them to handpick the Clerk of the National Assembly.

Ossai is a retired NASS staff member writing from Abuja.