Aiyedatiwa’s mass appointments, misnomer for cutting governance cost

The appointment of over 300 political aides in one fell swoop by a state governor should, justifiably, be considered bizarre and needless; more so in the light of the popular clamour for a drastic reduction in the costs of governance. It is therefore not unexpected that the announcement of 344 political aides; comprising 28 senior special assistants (SSAs) and 316 special assistants (SAs) by Ondo State Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa would spark criticisms from the opposition camps and as well elicit outrage from concerned Nigerians. It is recalled that, before the recent announcement of 344 aides, Governor Aiyedatiwa had made several appointments upon assumption of office in December 2023; following the demise of his boss, Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu. His latest action in making such block appointments raises serious concern over sweeping political appointments that have become fashionable across the country and fast assuming alarming proportions with some aides parading designations that could best be described as comic. Unfortunately, as the struggle for political appointments as entitlement heightens, the contentions for recognition and co-optation thereby imbuing an aberrant culture of patronage that is unsustainable for governance in the long run.

It is no longer in contention that politics, in the last 25 years of democracy in Nigeria, has become more intensely transactional; and perhaps the most thriving business in the country. Despite growing concern over the ballooning costs of governance attributable to expenses incurred from servicing the paraphernalia of elected political office holders and their appointees, the proliferation of political aides continues unabated at the federal and state levels. More worrisome is that governors are turning political appointments into major cardinal projects despite the growing challenge of revenue shortfall that has rendered the majority of states prostate. Unfortunately, most governors prioritise large bureaucracy rather than commit adequate resources to implement human capital development as well as other critical projects that would translate into productive engagement for earning stable incomes. Rather than promoting a culture of political hangers-on through political appointments, state governors should be more interested in creating an enabling environment that could be leveraged for pursuing productive careers for decent income beyond politics.

While the appointment of political aides may be desirable in bolstering governance, recruitment of a large number of aides as political patronage, particularly when the sitting governor is faced with the compelling challenge of winning an election, should not be encouraged. The overarching implications of turning appointment into a bazaar would, no doubt, worsen the challenge of deploying scarce revenue to deliver essential services to the public. It is sheer delusion for governors to continue to pretend that states with low revenue-generating profiles could sustain the frenzy of outlandish political appointments without the untold consequences. The reality is that most states are already overburdened with the payment of salaries and the associated perks that make political appointments attractive. As it often turns out after the exit from office of the appointing governors; most of the states have had to grudgingly grapple with the settlement of severance allowances owed to political aides whose services hardly impacted governance, and were at best, duplication of efforts. Therefore, increasing the recurrent expenditures of states that survive mainly on allocations from the federal government as well as loan facilities, on account of political appointments that are mostly self-serving, cannot be in the overriding interest of the public.

Ideally, the appointment of aides by elected public officials should be solution-driven. In addition to ensuring that such appointments are strategically designated to add tangible values to governance and developmental goals, such appointments must be predicated on prudence and sustainability. As the Ondo State Governorship election scheduled for November 2024 approaches, it is nonetheless worrisome that the large number of aides already appointed by the governor does not suggest such a decision reflects the current economic reality which has rightly prompted mounting calls for considerable reduction in the costs of governance in the country. Certainly, the appointment of a large number of aides should not be the priority of a government faced with the prevailing challenge of unfulfilled expectations as stakeholders in Ondo State yearn for the transformation of the state’s abundant mineral resources to create employment opportunities.

Without a doubt, the appointment of hundreds of political aides in the face of dwindling public revenues could hardly be rationalised beyond the narrow political interest of governors. To ensure that political appointees add value to the business of governance, the relevance of their designations should be convincing enough to imbue public confidence and to demonstrate clarity of purpose by the government. The political appointment should not come across as time-serving patronage not designed for concrete value addition in governance. It has therefore become imperative to anchor political appointments on pedigree and required expertise for meaningful impacts on governance.