Balanced scorecard
Performance measurement is principally based on measured inputs and outputs. It is a reliable mode for determining the performance of an agency. The dual potential of a score card lie in its ability to become a measurement instrument to guide performance in public administration and to enhance democratic accountability and responsibility. The Presidential panel on Rationalisation and Restructuring of Federal Government Parastatals submitted its 800-page compendium recommending inter alia that 38 agencies be done away with, 52 agencies be merged while 14 should be converted to departments in ministries. The committee dredged up details that reveal the factors leading to high cost of governance and recommend the reduction of Nigeria’s 263 agencies to 161.
Not surprising, the reactions to this report have ranged from blazing saddles to lukewarm leather. From the ICT sector, the report has been viewed as irrational and capable of rewinding the country 10 years backwards since the National Information Technology Development Agency was established to fast pace the socioeconomic development of the country. The argument goes further to state that the creation of National Information Technology Development Fund absolves the government of funding liability.
Not too many Nigerians are computer savvy, so that portion of the report may not mean much; but how about the recommendation to scrap Anti corruption Agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission(EFCC) or the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related practices Commission(ICPC)?the recommendation has understandably raised dust. This is because economic offences do not only incur individuals with pecuniary loss but have dire consequences on the national economy; moreso as the impact on the nation’s security and governance is enormous.
Insecurity is an important dimension of human welfare.However, in our local circumstance, there appears to be a relationship between law and economic crime. This relationship appears not to be driven by placement or proliferation of law enforcement personnel who may track crime but fail to reduce feelings of insecurity but by isolation of factors that predispose individuals to crime. Hence while there are multiple Law enforcement agencies, there appears not to be any significant effect on people’s subjective feeling of insecurity.
In the words of the pioneer chairman of the ICPC, Justice Mustapha Akanbi (rtd), ICPC and EFCC would not have been established if the police were effective in handling corruption cases as such; doing away with the two agencies will weaken the fight against corruption. Former President of the Nigerian Bar Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) and EmekaNgige(SAN) belong to this school of thought howbeit with slight modifications. While Ngige asserts that the agencies should be strengthened rather than scrapped; Agbakoba suggests a merger of both Anti-corruption agencies to avoid waste.
Let us attempt to balance both sides of the equation: According to the reports submitted by Transparency International, Nigeria’s corruption perception index has witnessed some improvement since the establishment of the anti-graft agencies. EFCC, under the leadership of Farida Waziri was reported to have secured 600 convictions and recovered assets worth $ 12 billion. ICPC was said to have recovered N13billion.You may consider that an outstanding performance but save your breath and put the recoveries of the two agencies to a ratio of the N124.8 billion sought to be saved as running costs for these agencies and see what we’ve got.
Whatever side the pendulum swings, Orosanye’s report is an accurate depiction of Nigeria’s reality one way or the other and before we chose what side of the divide we belong, we cannot deny that the agency arrangement is in a less than ideal state. Our points of departure will vary.First, the conspiracy theory will be thrown up by workers of those agencies who will imagine their agencies were penciled because they were the ‘easy fall’; add that to imminent loss of jobs and you will have the proponents of this theory viewing the report through coloured lenses.
Another Theory is the Governmental Theory.Government; having set up this committee may have their already-tailored resolutions, using the committee only as vehicle. However the recommendations will be implemented, Michael Ross’s analysis must be borne in mind when he says that limiting service ‘does not remove the need for the service, nor the expectation by the consumer”. He points out that by reducing staff levels or budgets, the government is reducing the level of service provided. Financial reform alone cannot fully capture performance.
I couldn’t agree less with Ross and this is the point we must put Nigeria into perspective: Successive governments put these agencies in place. It is clear that the objectives for the creation of some of these agencies were less than stellar. Inspite of the anti-corruption agencies; we are still high on the corruption index. It’s not hard to see why. We do not have a comprehensive picture of how well Government prepares an agency to handle current and future challenges. There is no conviction on institutional maintenance and resilience of ministries and agencies. If the government capriciously decides who to prosecute(or vilify?) and who to let off the noose, if the staff at the anti-corruption agencies are there not as a result of their performance but as reward wouldn’t this be another uphill race with broken tennis shoes? There is the need to consider collateral consequences when taking certain decisions.
The way out of our dilemma is simple: Before we catalyze let us first cauterise.
Performance measurement is principally based on measured inputs and outputs.It is a reliable mode for determining the performance of an agency.The dual potential of a score card lie in its ability to become a measurement instrument to guide performance in public administration and to enhance democratic accountability and responsibility. The Presidential panel on Rationalisation and Restructuring of Federal Government Parastatals submitted its 800-page compendium recommending inter alia that 38 agencies be done away with, 52 agencies be merged while 14 should be converted to departments in ministries. The committee dredged up details that reveal the factors leading to high cost of governance and recommends the reduction of Nigeria’s 263 agencies to 161.
Not surprising, the reactions to this report have ranged from blazing saddles to luke warm leather. From the ICT sector,the report has been viewed as irrational and capable of rewinding the country 10 years backwards since the National Information Technology Development Agency was established to fast pace the socioeconomic development of the country. The argument goes further to state that the creation of National Information Technology Development Fund absolves the government of funding liability.
Filed Under: Law and Society
