Releasing $1bn from ECA without deducting the 13% derivation actionable—Dickson
…As confusion trials non- listing of debate in Senate on Thursday
A new twist is emerging from the recent announcement by the federal government that it the National Economic Council has approved the release of $1bn to deepen the fight against insurgency in the North East.
In an interview, the Governor of Bayelsa State, Mr. Henry Seriake Dickson, said so far the Excess Crude Account (ECA) comes from oil earnings; the law provides that 13 per cent derivation shall be deducted and shared accordingly to producing states.
He therefore advised the federal government to obey the law and do the needful in the appropriation of the $1bn.
The governor demanded that the derivation component of the $1bn should be deducted and sent to the various oil producing states to prevent them from making double contributions to the security fund.
Besides, it was an issue of conspiracy theory as rowdy session trailed non-listing of discussion on the controversial $1bn withdrawal from the ECA as the Deputy Senate, Ike Ekweremadu, drew the attention lawmakers to the fact that Thursday’s Senate Order Paper did not list a motion on the $1 billion, despite the fact that the Senate had, on Wednesday, agreed to debate it, on Wednesday.
Senate President, Bukola Saraki almost could not persuade his colleagues that the Senate would debate the matter upon resumption from Christmas and New Year recess.
For over one minute, Saraki’s appeal was rejected. Lawmakers grumbled in an apparent display of disapproval of the withdrawal.
Analysts’ say with what played out at plenary on Thursday and the general body language of senators, the withdrawal may not pass the test of time at the National Assembly come next year.
Still on the position of the Bayelsa State Governor on the matter, a press release signed by the State Commissioner for Information and Orientation, Mr. Daniel Iworiso-Markson, quoted the governor as arguing that the implication of the withdrawal of the $1bn from the ECA was that the oil producing states would be making double contributions to the security fund.
Dickson added further that the oil producing states would be contributing not only their statutory allocations like other states, but also their 13 per cent derivation constitutionally designed to address special circumstances, including security occasioned by the hazards of oil production.
According to Mr. Dickson, “I have discussed the issue with Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, who is also the Chairman of the National Economic Council”.
Dickson noted that while Bayelsa was not against the withdrawal of the fund to enhance national security, it should, however, benefit the entire security agencies and services, and cover every part of the country.
In his voice, “Our position generally has been that leaders should collaborate on issues of national security and the economy. On these matters, there should be no partisanship or showmanship, because these issues touch on the core of our nation and the individual well-being of everybody.
“Secondly, as it has been done before, Bayelsa has no opposition to the withdrawal of money for national security expenditure targeted at improving the capacity of our military and security agencies to protect the territorial integrity of the country and all Nigerians.
“Our position is that the 13 per cent derivation element be deducted and sent to the states. Not doing so means that the oil producing states will be contributing from both ends: we will be contributing our statutory allocations like every other state, and then the 13 per cent derivation, which is meant to address special circumstances as oil producing states, including security challenges,” Bayelsa Governor noted.
