|
EFCC report exonerated me –
Nnamani
By PADE OLAPOJU
Thursday, October 5, 2006
 |
|
• Gov.
Nnamani |
|
|
Contrary to the belief that Enugu State was indicted by the
report of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC),
Enugu State Governor, Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani, says that the
EFCC report rather exonerated him.
According to the
governor, who spoke in Enugu, the EFCC report only said that
there was variation on contracts and did not take into
consideration many things.
“The EFCC report is an
exoneration. It shows clearly that these contracting companies
do not belong to government officials. You can see that they
were commended, exonerated in the sense that the EFCC report
had commendation for the contractors. We had statements in the
report saying that the contract prices were under-priced, we
had statement saying that the roads were done very well and
the quality of the job, the building fine and commendable. So,
if you look at the EFCC report, if you really look at it, not
the first reading, not even the second reading, the third
reading, forgetting the theatre and drama which is of course,
inherent in African culture… it is an exoneration of the
government of Enugu State,” Nnamani said.
The governor
spoke on these and many other things.
The EFCC Chairman was
before the Senate recently and made some allegations against
Enough State. What is your response?
I will like to stay on
the positive side to talk about the progress and development
here in Enugu State. However, if you insist, and the fact that
the issue is on the front burner, as it were, I can respond.
The EFCC reports, as you know, borders on three major issues.
One is the issue of contractual obligation. Two is in the
issue of my estimated net or asset value. Third, the issue of
local government allocations.
On the first issue, we see
the EFCC report as an exoneration, an exoneration in the sense
that we feel that with what appears to be a price variance in
the value with which the government awarded the contract and
the value of the assessment of their experts or consultants,
the total contract value is about a little over N30 billion.
The EFCC engineers or experts who spent three days in
Enugu admitted they saw about 70 percent of the projects and
said that, contrary to that, the projects should have been
valued about N2.8 billion less. We believe that that variance
is not statistically significant and could be subject to
either an increase or decrease based on the valuation of other
consultants or experts. In addition, as you know, clearly, the
contract value could be subject to energy cost, in terms of
fuel, diesel. It could be subject to labour cost. The rate
could be subject to availability of materials. It could even
be subject to climatic changes, vis-ŕ-vis, and the weather.
For us, it is an exoneration. If in this age of all sorts of
accusations about contract inflation, there is price variation
of N2.8 billion on a N30 billion total contract value, I
believe it is something that is commendable and within the
norms.
Also, part of the accusations is one regarding the
ownership of the contracting company. You can see clearly that
the government was exonerated in that regard. Certainly, the
report did not have any finding regarding the ownership of
this company by government. On the issue of the wealth of the
governor, people say there is an estimated N50billion asset
value that is about 400 million dollars. EFCC reports suspects
that N2.8 billion was the contract variation. When you look at
the net allocation between 1999 and 2003, which amounted to
about N30billion, you find out that it just defeats that
argument. Between 1999 and 2003, we got about N30 billion.
From there, we paid salary and other emoluments and ran the
government.
Remember, these were the early days of
allocation of N100 million a month, N400 million a month, N500
million a month and now N1.5 billion a month, with
expenditures of about N800 million to N1 billion. About N250
million goes for teachers’ salary per month, N250 million for
civil servants’ salary, the rest took care of other leave
allowance facilities, pension, subventions to parastatals and
service, which will give you about NI billion. It is only
about 500 million left to pay for contract obligations and
other emergencies of the government. It is not possible. That
is certainly not correct.
Then the third issue has to
do with the local government. We have stated, repeatedly, that
local governments are issues within the purview and authority
of the state government as confirmed by the constitution and
the Supreme Court. It therefore, becomes a constitutional
paradox as to whether an agency that cannot oversee an
institution can have its sub-agency undertake the same
responsibility. Therefore, if the Federal Government cannot
oversee or supervise local government, I doubt whether sub-if
its agency can do that. Having said that, outside the issue of
legalities, I can say clearly that when it comes to issue of
fraud, embezzlement, even the man in the street, even the NGOs
can
ove |
