This piece poses a very simple question that has a straightforward answer. The Office of the Chief Economic Adviser (OCEA) to the President is important and strategic. The success or otherwise of the government’s economic policies depend partly on the efficiency of the Chief Economic Adviser.
Economic success by way of growing the gross domestic product and improving the welfare of the citizens is a cardinal goal of any government. It is also a constitutional mandate as s.14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended provides that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.
The wellbeing of the populace is thus contingent on how the government is able to facilitate inclusive economic growth and development. Concerning security, it is known that strife, conflicts and other forms of criminalities are partly due to economic deprivation of the poor and middle class on the one hand, and the struggle for economic power amongst the upper class on the other.
There is also the aspect of food security, which is a function of the government’s policy direction, especially in agriculture. In all of these, the Chief Economic Adviser to the President performs very important roles.
Recently, President Muhammadu Buhari appointed Dr Doyin Salami, the head of the Economic Advisory Council, as his Chief Economic Adviser. While some analysts consider the appointment belated given that the government is nearing its end, others are of the view that it is better late than never.
The prevalent sentiment however is that the cool, calm and knowledgeable Salami is the right man for the job. Nevertheless, his success will not depend solely on his economic expertise, but on matters outside his control. Issues such as the President not listening to his counsel or the so-called cabal limiting his access to the President are common in the public discourse.
While these matters cannot be completely wished away, the view herein is that the major challenge facing the Chief Economic Adviser is the resources to do the job. This postulation is based on the meagre budgetary allocations to the OCEA over the years.
Successive governments, through the Ministry of Finance and the Budget Office of the Federation (BOF), have continued to relegate and undermine the strategic importance of the OCEA with budgetary provisions that can, at best, be set aside for meals and refreshment in ‘juicy’ agencies.
In the 2022 budgetary allocations to the presidency, a total of N46.8 million was provided as Overhead for the OCEA, the same as the 2021 allocation. This is two times lower than the second-lowest Overhead allocation of N95.3 million to the State House Lagos Liaison Office and constitutes only 0.3% of the total Overhead budget of N16.3 billion for the presidency.
More disturbing is the fact that there is no budgetary provision for the OCEA to engage in research activities. Reasonable economic counselling requires continuous policy-oriented research that will provide the empirical basis for advising the President.
Read also: After two recessions, Buhari taps Salami as chief economic adviser
Ironically, most of the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) have budgetary allocations under the research and development line in the 2022 budget, as indeed previous budgets. For example, the National Orientation Agency was allocated N230 million, Voice of Nigeria – 25 million, News Agency of Nigeria – N97 million, Federal Fire Service – 762 million, Hajj Commission – N400 million, Nigerians in Diaspora Commission – N80 million and the Auditor-General of the Federation – N19 million.
It is however important to explain that most MDAs activities under the research and development line are not research-related. This is because the MDAs usually subsume projects that cannot be directly linked to any of the ERGP codes under the research and development line. As such, it may be misleading to argue that some MDAs receive allocations for research and the OCEA did not.
What is needed going forward is for the BOF to create a research and development line for the OCEA in future budgets and make provisions that will enable whoever is the Chief Economic Adviser to perform efficiently.
Finally, when the Overhead allocation to the OCEA in the 2022 budget is put in the context of the three cardinal objectives of the government which are providing security, curbing corruption and growing the economy, it is obvious that the OCEA is relegated as its Overhead of N46 million is significantly lower than the N19 billion for the National Security Adviser and the N3.6 billion for the EFCC.
It is not clear if there are intervention or donor funds/grants that the OCEA benefit from, but it is imperative that future budgets make adequate allocations for research as this is central to the success of that office.
Typically, once appointed, the Chief Economic Adviser constitutes a team of trusted research analysts who he/she depends on to carry out his/her assignment. Based on the allocations to the OCEA over the years, working optimally to provide the President with the much-needed economic advice will be an uphill task.
The great Winston Churchill once said, give us the tools and we will do the job. Dr. Salami, and indeed any sound economist appointed to that office will succeed if adequate resources are made available for the job.
Dr. Ekor wrote from Abuja. 08053810403; [email protected]
