Economic and financial experts have
warned President Muhammadu Buhari to exercise caution over his
administration’s plan to borrow $29.96bn from external sources.
Similarly, the opposition Peoples
Democratic Party called on Nigerians to stop Buhari from borrowing the
amount and moving N180bn appropriated for special intervention to fund
critical recurrent and capital items.
It also asked the two chambers of the National Assembly not to approve the request by the President.
Buhari had on Tuesday asked the National
Assembly to approve the external borrowing plan to enable his
government to raise funds to execute key infrastructural projects across
the country between now and 2018.
But experts said on Wednesday that the
amount was too huge and that the Buhari-led administration needed to
tell Nigerians the specific infrastructural projects in exact locations
across the country that the money would be used to finance.
A professor of Economics at the Olabisi
Onabanjo University, Ago Iwoye, Sheriffdeen Tella, described the
external borrowing plan of the Federal Government as too bogus.
Tella also asked the government to give a
detailed breakdown of the proposed projects the funds would be used
for, and specific plan of how it intended to pay back.
He said, “The money is too huge. We need
to know the breakdown of the projects it will be used for. If it is for
project financing whereby it is tied to specific projects in certain
parts of the country, then fine. We need to also specify how much will
be borrowed each year over the next three years of the borrowing plan.
“To me, the money is too huge. We do not
manage our debts properly. We need to specify the repayment plan and
what is going to be our income over the next five years or more. We are
not good managers of resources; we are going to run into serious
problems with this. If all these details cannot be given, then the
National Assembly should approve just $10bn from it. Already, we know
that we can’t borrow to finance recurrent expenditure. ”
An economic analyst at Ernst &
Young, Mr. Bisi Sanda, also said the government needed to carry out
reforms of its financial management system before embarking on such a
borrowing.
Otherwise, he said it would be tantamount to borrowing to finance the ostentatious living of some corrupt government officials.
Sanda said, “Borrowing, in principle, is
not wrong. But if you are using it to finance the corruption or
ostentatious lifestyle of public officials, then there is a problem. It
has been said some time ago that Nigerians only get 45 per cent value
from all government expenditure. This is unlike in the USA where the
people get 100 per cent value.
“Our public financial management must be
transformed first. Seventy per cent of the budget in Nigeria goes on
recurrent expenditure. What about the budget padding allegation and the
huge bill of the legislature? We need to address the public financial
management system, otherwise, we will find ourselves in the debt trap
and leave huge debts for coming generations.”
The Chief Executive Officer, Cowry Asset
Management Limited, Mr. Johnson Chukwu, said there was nothing wrong
with borrowing, but the government must specify the projects the money
so raised would be used for.
“We need to tie this borrowing to
specific infrastructural projects we know of in the country. We should
say this rail line or highway will be financed with such an amount from
the borrowing. This money must be tied to specific projects,” he said.
The Chief Executive Officer, Financial
Derivatives Company Limited, Mr. Bismarck Rewane, said, “I agree with
borrowing, but it must be tied to specific projects. The amount is a
huge amount. That is about 140 per cent of our current external
reserves.
“It is almost double the amount of the
current external debt of the country. We need to know specific projects
that the money will be used for. Until we know that, I can’t say it is a
right step in the right direction.”
Reject proposal, PDP tells NASS
The PDP asked Buhari to explain to
Nigerians what his administration had done with the recovered looted
funds and how the 2016 budget was faring.
The spokesperson for the Senator Ahmed
Makarfi-led faction of the party, Prince Dayo Adeyeye, stated this in a
statement in Abuja on Wednesday.
Adeyeye said that the President must
itemise what he intended to finance with the proposed borrowing of
almost $30bn instead of lumping everything up in a coded term “and to
plunge the nation’s future into a burden of debt”.
He said that the President’s approach
could not be the preferred solution to the economic quagmire, which he
alleged was created by the present government.
Adeyeye, a former Minister of State for
Works, said, “This government budgeted N6.07tn for the 2016 fiscal year
with a deficit of N2.22tn, and according to the breakdown, N1.8tn was
budgeted for capital expenditure and President Buhari is now seeking to
borrow over N9tn ($29.96bn) for ‘critical infrastructure’.
“This is absurd and way outside the
government’s budgetary provisions for capital expenditure and must be
rejected by all well-meaning Nigerians.
“Nigerians will recall that the Minister
of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, in June made public
through a press statement an account of recovered looted funds between
May 2015 and May 2016 amounting to N78.3bn, $185.1m, £3.5m and €11,250m
in cash, while others were under interim forfeiture. What happened to
the recovered funds?”
Adeyeye added that the Chairman of the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, recently
said that the commission had recovered more money in the last eight
months than it did in 12 years.
He said that Nigerians needed to know
how much revenue the government had been able to generate from crude
oil, non-oil and independent revenue sources since assumption.
The PDP leader said that the
clarification would boost the confidence of Nigerians on the management
of their resources, especially in this period of recession, and was
necessary before thinking of engaging in external borrowing.
“The APC-led Federal Government is again
taking Nigeria prior to year 2005 when the external debt burden
derailed the growth of Nigeria’s economy and weakened the GDP before the
total cancellation of her debt,” he added.
Adeyeye also said that the proposed
action of the Federal Government would be a great injustice to the
citizens now and in the future if they were plunged back into debt.
He said, “Let us state unequivocally
that history will not forgive this APC government and its collaborators
if they allow this injustice and maladministration of our economy and
citizens to stand.
“We, therefore, call on the two chambers
of the National Assembly to reject this anti-people request by an
anti-people government that has no genuine interest for the growth and
development of the people of this country.
“We again call on all Nigerians to speak
with one voice and stop President Buhari from further destroying of our
great nation, Nigeria, and by extension, Africa.”
DMO sets borrowing limit
Meanwhile, the Debt Management Office
has said the maximum amount that Nigeria can borrow in 2017 from both
local and foreign sources without breaching the debt threshold it has
set for itself is $22.08bn.
The DMO said in its debt sustainability
report that Nigeria could afford to borrow $22.08bn next year,
equivalent to 5.89 per cent of the projected Gross Domestic Product, if
it wanted to keep the overall borrowing under the limit of 19.39 per
cent of the GDP that had earlier been set.
For this year, the total public debt-to-GDP ratio is projected at 13.5 per cent, the DMO said in the report, seen by Reuters on Wednesday.
It said the total public debt stood at
28.10 per cent of revenue in 2015, slightly above the 28 per cent
threshold set by the government.
As of June 2016, Nigeria’s public debt stood at N16.29tn, up from N12.60tn at the end of last year.
The DMO said, “Although the level of
debt stock is still appreciably low relative to the country’s aggregate
output, the debt portfolio remains mostly vulnerable to the various
shocks associated with revenue, exports and substantial currency
devaluation.
“This highlights a potential risk to the
debt portfolio, which could be exacerbated by the developments in the
international oil market, as further decline in global oil prices would
exert undue pressures on the already fragile economy, including the debt
position.”
It proposed that the new borrowing next
year be split as $5.52bn from the domestic markets and $16.56bn from
offshore, subject to local market conditions and the options available
abroad, adding that foreign borrowing should have a minimum maturity of
15 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment