By Daniel Kanu
Senator Abba Moro is the Senate Minority Leader and the Chairman of the 10-Man Elder’s Advisory Committee on Tax Reforms.
In this interview with Sunday Sun, he speaks on the controversial tax reform bills presented by President Bola Tinubu, which is before the National Assembly, and how ignorance and politicising the process have affected people’s perception of the bills, among others. Excerpts:
As the Chairman of the 10-Man Elder’s Advisory Committee on Tax Reforms, take us through the terms of reference and perhaps, why it is now that it just occurred to the government that the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice should be consulted?
Thanks for this question. It’s indeed my pleasure to shed light on some of the issues that have arisen and concerns that have been shown by some critical stakeholders. The main thrust of the terms of reference is to examine the proposed tax reform bills and identify grey areas. Look at areas where critical stakeholders have raised some concerns. And I think in the wisdom of the government, there is a need to interface with the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice because some of the issues raised border on the constitution. And he, as the chief law officer of Nigeria, certainly is in a very good position to bridge the gap of understanding between those who have shown some concerns and the government that is proposing these bills. I think essentially that is what the task is. Somehow, let me say here, I think that our focus at this point should be how to move forward, how to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s in these bills in the interest of Nigeria. I am not sure that Nigerians would want to go back as to the reason certain things were not done before now. I think the most important thing for us now as concerned citizens of this country is to see how we can put right what is perceived to be wrong. And understandably, the president has shown some exemplary understanding of the concerns of Nigerians and demonstrated that he is a listening president because, at the time that the National Assembly, especially the Senate, was contemplating on how to go around the issues that have been raised, Mr. President also understood the need for all Nigerians, especially those who have shown some concerns, to carry all Nigerians along in the process. After all, the law is made for Nigerians. And so I think it is on this happy note that I want to say that we will do everything that we can to ensure that we address all the areas of concern and advise the government appropriately.
The thrust of my question was, shouldn’t the Attorney General of the Federation and the Attorney General of the states, have been consulted before now?
That is a question that somebody somewhere ordinarily should answer. But as to the case of the National Assembly, particularly the Senate, for instance, we have a process of lawmaking. And that process starts with the presentation of the bill. And in our system here, we prioritize executive bills, that is, bills coming from the government. And the first step in the process is the first reading of the bills. And then, of course, the second reading, the second reading which involves a lead debate, that is bringing out the pros and cons of the bills that are before the Senate. After which the bill is referred to the committee for proper scrutiny. It is at that stage that if it becomes necessary, a public hearing is scheduled. In the public hearing, all critical stakeholders, people who should know, are usually invited to come and contribute or make imputs in the process. It is the aggregation of these views vis-a-vis the bills that have been presented that comes back to the Senate or the National Assembly for a third reading. And the third reading is an examination of the compendium of views vis-a-vis the bill before it is finally passed. And so I want to think that as far as the process is concerned, the Senate has not done what it should do because the process was on. But I think to the benefit of the government and the Nigerian people, concerns have been raised. And like I said, Mr. President has listened to Nigerians and has agreed that there should be an interface between the government and the National Assembly and, of course, the people of Nigeria. So, I think that the outcome of this interface will certainly bring out the bills that are acceptable to all or at least to the majority of Nigerians.
Why is there kick and why can it not be resolved through the public hearings that were initially instituted or asked to be done by the Senate and now we’re asking for a total halt for further study of the bill?
The Senate is not kicking against the bill as perhaps I understand your question very well. In the process of lawmaking, there is no doubt that not everybody understands or agrees with everything. But in the end, it is the opinion or the agreement of the majority of the people that in a democracy carries the vote. And that is what we’re doing here. I want to say here that no document, not even the constitution of the Nigerian nation that is a grundnorm is perfect. And so, yes, the government says they have consulted widely, but here we are. Some people say no, this thing is not as perfect as it should be.
What are the issues identified by those against the bills?
I also want to at this point agree with you that going through the bills, at least to the extent that some of us have, the bill is okay. It’s good for Nigeria. Don’t forget that at one of the budget presentation sessions, Mr. President had promised that he would plug all the loopholes, and all the leakages in our revenue system. And so I think this is one of those steps that have been taken to do so. And, of course, like I said, no document is perfect. The complaint is generally from what also we have seen so far, because we have had one or two plenary meetings at the level of the committee, and the concern that people have indicated so far is about the VAT, the collection and distribution. And people generally are saying, look, VAT is a constitutional matter. As far as the constitution of Nigeria is concerned, what is known as VAT and its distribution is in the oil and gas industry or sector. And so this VAT postulation which seeks to shift the model of distribution based usually on equity and equality and population to consumption is to the disadvantage of certain communities, especially in the North, which is purely agrarian, that contributes collectively about 25 per cent of the VAT in this country against states like Lagos, for instance, that is the commercial hub of Nigeria that contributes 55 per cent. And so first it is assumed that if you introduce derivation in sharing VAT now, you are going against the constitution because there is no constitutional provision for that. And so if you jettison population and equality, it will significantly affect certain sections of the country. So these are the grey areas that have been identified so far.
Did they provide any empirical documents to back up their claim that if you charge VAT based on consumption it was going to reduce how much they get in numbers?
As at the point that I am talking to you now, we are in the process of collecting this information. One of the problems that we have with the current scenario is the fact that a lot of hype has been introduced in the whole process. Going by social media accounts and some publications that have come out so far, the whole process has been so politicized that it is trying to introduce some kind of dichotomy between the North and the South. This is what we want to address. And so I will be in a better position if, don’t forget that this committee was set up only recently, if we go round and invite critical stakeholders to a roundtable, I will be in a better position to present to you the position. But I can tell you that since this controversy arose, very many persons who were even against the bill have even come to say, hey, this thing is beautiful after all. And so I think that by the time further advocacy and sensitization is carried out, very many people who out of lack of understanding may have been kicking against this bill will come to realize that the bill means well for the entirety of Nigeria.
Do you honestly think that it’s really about the VAT or about 2027 politics?
First of all, let me tell you that it is not too much to ask. And I can promise you that by the time we collect all the statistics and information that we are going to present to Mr. President and the Attorney General that we are going to discuss, I will make myself available to present those facts, figures and statistics to you. It is not too much to ask. Two, I’m not given to conjectures. I’m a Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. And I won’t want to hazard a guess that it is all about 2027. Well, aides and the rest of them can go about that on their own. But for me as a distinguished Senator, and given what I know, I want to look at this thing from the point of view of the concerns raised. Whatever the ulterior motive is, it’s not before me. And so I want to insist that it is all about VAT and if political insinuations are introduced, fine and good. But I again want to say that it is the politicization of these bills that is in the first place responsible for where we are now. So, I don’t want to look at the political side of it. I’ve been given an assignment to identify areas that are of concern to Nigerians or some part of Nigerians and to see how we can reconcile them. Perhaps at the end of the day, I can assure you that some of these concerns may be deemed to even be unnecessary.
The assignment you have been given, what is the timeframe?
I want to say here that my assignment is not about political negotiation. It is about the economic implications of the bills that have been presented by Mr. President. And that is how I will look at it. And you know me too well, I will not accept an assignment if I know that I cannot undertake it. This is not going to be an endless exercise, That is why there is some level of fierce urgency in the decision resolution of the Senate that we must start today to meet with the Attorney General. The bills that we are talking about here after the second reading were referred to the Committee on Finance and to report back to the Senate within six weeks, therefore, any other incidental activity that is taking place now must take place within the ambit of that period, because we must be able to present our findings to the Senate to give a go-ahead for the continuation of the legislative process. Definitely, after this exercise, there must be a public hearing where everybody willing and prepared will be given a chance at the public hearing to ventilate his or her position on the issue. But I want to assure you of one thing, we will find answers to the questions that have been asked.
