Connect with us

Headlines

Again, Lagos Assembly Invites Ambode, Lists His Five ‘Deadly Sins’

Published

on

The Lagos State House of Assembly has listed five ‘sins’ allegedly committed by a former governor of the state, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode.

The ‘sins’ include alleged unauthorised discounting of promissory note and purchase of 820 buses without due authorisation.

The Assembly, therefore, asked the former governor to appear before it by 1pm on Wednesday.

This made it the second time the governor was summoned.

He was first summoned about two weeks ago alongside former government officials, including the former commissioners for Finance, Economic Planning, Justice and Attorney General, and Permanent Secretary, Economic Planning.

The House had set up an ad hoc committee to investigate some financial misappropriation during the Ambode administration.

However, according to a statement by the House, Ambode and the former government officials refused to appear before the House committee.

The House has now issued another invite to the former governor, as contained in an advert in some national dailies, including Sunday PUNCH.

The invite was titled, ‘Notice of summons: Mr Akinwunmi Ambode (the former Governor of Lagos State),’ and signed by the Clerk of the House, Mr A. A. Sanni.

In the new summon, the former governor was reminded of the importance of appearing before the House to shed light on a five-point infraction raised by the Assembly.

The fresh notice stated, “The Lagos State House of Assembly, pursuant to Section 129 (1)(c) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) hereby summons His Excellency, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode, the former Governor of Lagos State (May, 2015 – May, 2019) to appear before the Committee of the House on Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at the Lateef Jakande Auditorium, Assembly Complex, Alausa, Ikeja by 1 pm.”

Ambode was asked to appear to clarify the following: (1) Unauthorised discounting of promissory note; (2) Purchase of 820 buses by his administration without due authorisation; (3) Misappropriation of Special Expenditure Funds; (4) Improper implementation of the Appropriation Law; and (5) Non-adherence to the Financial Regulations of the state.

The notice urged the former governor to provide the Assembly’s committee with documents to justify that the above transactions did not violate constitutional provisions.

It read, “You are kindly requested to furnish the committee with 15 copies each of all relevant document(s) relating to the issues raised through the Office of the Clerk of the House on or before Tuesday, October 29, 2019.

“It is pertinent to state that your presence at the proposed meeting would give you the opportunity to shed light on issues that are material to the investigation.”

Operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had in August raided the Epe country home and Parkview Ikoyi residence of the former governor.

He had also denied that certain accounts said to have been frozen by the EFCC were linked to him, adding that no account of his contained N9.9bn as the said accounts belonged to the state government.

The state Assembly had set up a committee to investigate the purchase of 820 buses out of the 5,000 buses proposed by the embattled former governor because the lawmakers had originally objected to the idea.

In a motion titled, ‘Lagos State House of Assembly Motion Number 2,’ the member representing Eti Osa 2, Gbolahan Yishawu, stated that the then administration proposed to spend N17bn to purchase the buses in the 2017 budget, which was not approved by the Assembly.

Meanwhile, efforts to speak with the media aide to the former governor, Mr Habib Aruna, proved abortive as he had not picked calls or responded to a text message sent to his mobile telephone number as of the time of filing this report.

The Punch

Continue Reading
Advertisement


Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headlines

Oyedele Denies Hinting FG’ll Introduce Fuel Tax In spite of Video Evidence

Published

on

Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, has denied saying the Federal government will introduce a fuel tax when the economy stabilises and income levels improve.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Oyedele said his remarks during an interview with ARISE News was misrepresented, insisting that a “fuel tax is not on the table.”

However, during the interview with Rotus Odiri, ARISE News Business Correspondent, on the sidelines of the 2026 International Monetary Fund and World Bank annual meetings in Bangkok, Thailand, Oyedele said the tax would come when income levels improve enough for Nigerians to accommodate it.

He said taxes account for between 20 and 80 percent of pump prices in some countries, while many African countries impose between six and 10 different taxes on fuel products.

He said introducing fuel tax while petrol was still subsidised would have been counterproductive because government would effectively be paying the tax itself.

According to him, imposing the tax immediately after removal of petrol subsidy would be insensitive to Nigerians.

“The objective should be that instead of trying to suppress prices, which hasn’t worked for us, it hasn’t worked for any country in the world, not one. Instead of trying to suppress prices, think about how to grow income faster than prices rise,” Oyedele said.

“That’s how you bring prosperity and grow the middle class and that is exactly what we are doing as led by Mr. President himself.

“At the appropriate time, when the economy has stabilizes and income level will be able to accommodate it, those taxes will come. Not because we want to impose taxes,” he added.

In his Tuesday post, the minister reiterated that introducing a fuel tax at this time would be insensitive following removal of petrol subsidy, describing reports that government will introduce the levy when the economy stabilises as “fake news.”

Continue Reading

Headlines

2027: Atiku, Most Nationally Formidable, Experienced – Dele Momodu

Published

on

A chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and Deputy Director of the Presidential Campaign Council, Chief Dele Momodu, has described former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as the most nationally formidable and experienced among the leading contenders for the 2027 presidential election.

Momodu said Atiku’s experience at the national level distinguishes him from President Bola Tinubu and former Anambra State Governor, Peter Obi.

He stated this on Wednesday during an interview on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, in Abeokuta.

“If you look at the antecedents of the three major candidates, between Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, you will see that Atiku is the most experienced. He has managed our country at the highest level,” he said.

Momodu traced Atiku’s political journey to the 1992 Social Democratic Party (SDP), presidential primary where he contested against late MKO Abiola and stepped down for him.

He said Atiku accepted the outcome without crisis even after he was not picked as Abiola’s running mate, describing it as a mark of true democratic temperament.

“He is the only one who started from around 1992, contested the SDP primary against Abiola and stepped down with uncommon equanimity. He did not make any noise,” Momodu said.

He noted that Atiku was among the founders of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and served as Vice-President from 1999 to 2007.

Comparing Atiku with Obi, Momodu argued that while Obi’s best was demonstrated in Anambra, Atiku’s was at the presidency level managing the national economy.

“Peter Obi has tried his best in Anambra, while Atiku’s best is at the level of vice president controlling the economy of Nigeria. The difference is clear. He has matured in experience and exposure,” he said.

Momodu also said President Tinubu’s experience was largely limited to Lagos.

“What I’m trying to say is that Tinubu’s experience was limited to Lagos, and that is why when he became president, he thought Nigeria was Lagos. And he has found out now that Nigeria is not Lagos,” he said.

He argued that the current economic hardship under the present administration did not show prosperity, insisting Atiku remained better positioned to lead the country.

“Well, we are yet to see that prosperity, and if yesterday would determine today and tomorrow, it is obvious that Tinubu should retire now and let someone else do it,” Momodu added.

DailyPost

Continue Reading

Headlines

No Going Back on Subsidy Removal, Other Economic Policies – Tinubu

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu says he has no regrets over the removal of petrol subsidy and other economic reforms introduced by his administration, insisting that Nigeria could not borrow its way to greatness.

Meanwhile, Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, has warned Nigerians against returning to petrol subsidy. He said the backtrack could trigger capital flight, undermining investor confidence and pushing the Naira to N3,000, N3,500 or even N4,000 per dollar.

But the Director of Media and Publicity of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) Presidential Campaign Council (PCC), Kola Ologbondiyan, challenged Oyedele to publish the economic model behind his warning that a return to fuel subsidy could push the naira to N4,000 per dollar.

The President spoke on Monday during the City Boys Movement retreat in Abuja, where he charged members of the group to mobilise support for his administration ahead of the 2027 general elections, insisting that the country’s future mattered more than the ambition of any individual candidate.

“No regrets,” Tinubu said, insisting that his administration would not be pushed back from its reform agenda.

He took a swipe at his political opponents, promising to restore the petrol subsidy, saying Nigeria could no longer afford to pay the fuel subsidy, and warning that reversing the policy would take the country back to an unsustainable economic path.

Defending his decision to remove the subsidy on his first day in office, Tinubu said the country was on the verge of financial collapse and could no longer afford the policy’s cost.

Tinubu also sought to reassure Nigerians about the direction of the economy, arguing that growth was steady and that the sacrifices associated with his reforms would ultimately offer citizens a future worth believing in.

Oyedele disclosed during a press briefing of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank Annual Meetings in Bangkok, Thailand, yesterday, that investors had repeatedly questioned whether the government would abandon its reforms ahead of the next election cycle.

Ruling out the reversal of the government’s economic reforms, he maintained that any signal that Tinubu’s administration was contemplating or reinstating the subsidy would immediately affect financial markets, raise borrowing costs and worsen economic pressures on households.

“In all the meetings I have had, I came to a conclusion that the markets, including the domestic market, which you can read from the capital market, and the international market, have largely written off the opposition in Nigeria as unserious.

“If, for any reason, the President were to say we are merely considering the return of fuel subsidy, capital would react immediately, airfares would struggle, the naira would come under severe pressure, potentially moving towards 3,000, 3,500 or even 4,000.

The very fuel people want subsidised would become far more expensive in Naira terms,” Oyedele warned.

However, Ologbondiyan accused the Federal government of using fear to discourage debate on fuel subsidy, insisting that Nigerians deserve evidence, not alarming projections, on the potential economic consequences of restoring the policy.

Speaking to journalists, he described the minister’s warning as scaremongering and demanded that the government explain how it arrived at the projected exchange rate.

“The Minister of Finance is merely scaremongering. He cannot claim that a return to fuel subsidy will cause the naira to depreciate to N4,000 to the dollar without showing Nigerians the model behind that projection,” he said.

He questioned the reliance on investors’ concerns to oppose a subsidy’s return, challenging the government to identify the sources of the projections and disclose their calculations.

Continue Reading