Connect with us

Opinion

Sports Minister’s Blunders: Time for a Change

Published

on

By Sylvanus Ofekun

The 2024 Paris Olympics have come and gone, leaving a trail of disappointment and disillusionment in their wake. Nigeria’s performance was nothing short of disastrous, with the country failing to win a single medal despite participating in 12 sports with 88 athletes. The approved budget of 9 billion Naira, courtesy of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, seems to have been squandered under the watch of Senator John Owan Enoh, Nigeria’s Minister of Sports Development.

Enoh’s response to the debacle has been a masterclass in deflection and blame-shifting. Instead of taking responsibility for his ministry’s failures, he has chosen to blame everyone else – the Sports Federations, the Nigeria Olympics Committee (NOC), and even the “toxic environment” in Nigerian sports. His recent quote, “The stage after the Olympics has been very toxic… Nigeria has failed in the Olympics before with nothing happening, but I have been subjected to all forms of harassment,” showcases his lack of accountability and penchant for playing the victim.

Enoh’s defense has been weak, blaming both the living and the dead, except himself, for Team Nigeria’s poor outing. He has referenced past performances, citing the fact that Nigeria did not win a medal in London 2012, but won a bronze in football in 2016, and silver and bronze in wrestling and long jump in Tokyo 2020, all these were done by luck.

However, this is not a time for excuses or justifications. The fact remains that Enoh promised a better performance than the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, and he failed to deliver.

His numerous television appearances have only served to highlight his lack of concrete plans and solutions, replaced by outbursts of venom towards his subordinates. It is clear that Enoh is out of his depth, and his incompetence and greed-driven blunders have exposed him as a novice in sports administration.

The time has come for President Tinubu to take decisive action. Enoh must be replaced with a competent and experienced individual who can restore Nigeria’s sports glory. Furthermore, the sports ministry has proven to be a failed experiment. It is time to scrap it and replace it with the National Sports Commission, which will operate under the presidency. This commission will be run by experts with a clear legislative framework, ensuring accountability and efficiency.

Nigeria deserves better. Its athletes deserve better. They deserve a sports administration that is competent, accountable, and transparent. They deserve a system that will nurture and support them, rather than hinder their progress. It is time for a change.

The sports-loving public is watching, and they will not forget the failures of the current administration. President Tinubu must act now to restore Nigeria’s sports glory, and ensure that the country’s athletes are given the support and resources they need to succeed. Anything less is unacceptable.

sleekysly5@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Business

Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Published

on

Ismaila Ahmad Abdullahi Ph.D

The public hearings conducted recently by the two Chambers of the National Assembly have elicited positive responses from a broad spectrum of Nigerians, cutting across regional interest groups, government agencies, civil society groups, concerned individuals, the academia, and Labour Unions, among diverse others. Contrary to a few dissensions hitherto expressed in the media, almost all the stakeholders who spoke during the week-long sessions were unanimous in their declaration that the hallowed Chambers should pass the tax reform bills after a clean-up of the grey areas.

The public hearings were auspicious for all Nigerians desirous of economic growth and fiscal responsibility. They were also a watershed moment for the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which had been upbeat about the tax reforms. Indeed, the public hearings had rekindled hope in the tenets of democracy that guarantee freedom of expression and equitable space for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Without gainsaying the fact, the tax reform bills have been unarguably about the most thought-provoking issues in Nigeria today, drawing variegated perspectives and commentaries from even unlikely quarters such as the faith-based leaders, student bodies, and trade unions, which speaks much about the importance of the bills.

In the build-up to the public hearings, not many people believed that the bills would make it to the second reading, much less the public hearings. Even the Northern stakeholders who seemed unlikely to support the passage of the bills have softened their stance and have given valuable suggestions that would enrich the substance of the bills. The Arewa Consultative Forum came to the public hearings well-prepared with a printed booklet that addressed their concerns. It concluded with an advisory that the bills should be “Well planned, properly communicated, strategically implemented and ample dialogue and political consensus allowed for the reforms to be accepted.”

The concerns of ACF ranged from the composition of the proposed Nigeria Revenue Service Board as contained in Part 111, Section 7 of the bill, the unlimited Presidential power to exempt/wave tax payment as proposed in Section 75(1) of the bill, the family income or inheritance tax as contained in Part 1, Section 4(3) of the bill, to the issues around development levy and VAT. On the development levy, the ACF stated that unless the Federal Government is considering budgetary funding for TETFUND, NASENI and NITDA, it does not see the “wisdom behind the plan to replace (them) with NELFUND”.

The position of the North was equally reinforced by the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, Northern Elders Forum, Kano State Government, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, and the FCT Imams. Like the ACF, these stakeholders lent their respective voices to the Section on the Inheritance Tax in Part 1 of the bill and the use of the term ‘ecclesiastical’, which, in their views, undermines certain religious rights and beliefs. The Kano State Government, represented by Mahmud Sagagi, affirmed that “we support tax modernisation” but cautioned that “we must ensure that this process does not come at the expense of states’ constitutional rights and economic stability”. Professor Auwalu Yadudu, a constitutional law professor, drew attention to the use of the ‘supremacy clause’ and cautioned that the repeated use of “notwithstanding” in the bills would undermine the supremacy of the Nigerian constitution if passed as such.

Other stakeholders that made contributions at the sessions included the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Nigeria Customs Service, and a host of others. While most of their concerns bordered on technical issues requiring fine-tuning, they were unanimous in their support for the bills. They aligned with the position of the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, Ph.D. and the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, which is that the extant tax laws and fiscal regulations are obsolete necessitating reforms aimed at creating a fair and equitable tax and fiscal space to grow Nigeria’s economy.

In one of the sessions, Dr Zaach Adedeji expounded on the criss-cross of trade activities in the Free Trade Zone whereby companies misuse tax waivers as exporters to sell their goods or services in the Customs Area at an amount usually less than the price the operators in the Customs Area who pay VAT and other taxes sell theirs thereby disrupting business transactions. This way, the operators in the Free Trade Zone shortchange the government in paying their due taxes by circumventing extant regulations, which are inimical to the economy’s growth.

Overall, the presentations were forthright, foresighted, and helpful in elucidating the issues contained in the bills. According to the statistics read out at the end of the hearings at the Senate, 75 stakeholders were invited, 65 made submissions, and 61 made presentations. At the House of Representatives 53 stakeholders made presentations. By all means, this is a fair representation. Given the presentations, it is evident that the National Assembly has gathered enough materials to guide its deliberations on the bills. As we look forward to the passage of the bills, we commend the leadership of the National Assembly for their unwavering commitment to making the bills see the light of the day.

Abdullahi is the Director of the Communications and Liaison Department, FIRS.

Continue Reading

Trending

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)