Last week, the major news that hit the political landscape was the movement of 5 of the 7 nPDP governors popularly referred to as G-7, to the APC. ADESUWA TSAN writes that despite the anticipated move by their loyalists in the House of Representatives to the APC which will put the majority PDP on the other side, the leadership of the House under Aminu Waziri Tambuwal remains intact. Also in this report is the setting up of a harmonisation committee on the controversial oil bench mark for the 2014 budget prososal by the executive arm.

When the G-7 governors and the leadership of the faction announced their break-out, the response of members of the National Assembly was swift as their loyalists, 57 of them in the House of Representatives, openly declared their allegiance to the splinter group.

But despite the rising number of opposition in the House of Representatives, one sure thing for now is that the leadership is safe in the interest of the stability of the House.

Leader of the nPDP, Hon Andrew Uchendu said this much, saying there is no plan to shake the House.

He said the threat of losing their seats was a misplaced and baseless one. According to him, the fear of losing their seats if they defected is not the reason for the delay in defection but that the process was being firmed up at the appropriate level and that a decision would soon be reached on the issue.

"No member of the nPDP is entertaining such fears. Those who are peddling the story may possibly be unsure and conscious of the swing of political pendulum. I have been, since 2003, in the chamber and have seen a good number of lawmakers defect from their parties to others and they didn't lose their seats so why would any defection now be different?

"The procedure will be met and at the appropriate time, my colleagues and I will let the world know".

Hon Ali Ahmad (nPDP, Kwara) who is the chairman of Justice in the House, also voiced his agreement, saying he challenges anyone who thinks they should lose thier seats to refer to Section 68(1)g.

"There is no question of losing seats because the constitution in section 68 (1)g provides the basis for us to move if we choose.

This government is not known to following the tenets of law. We are not rushing to take any decision, we will move when we are set to do so".

Adding that it will be best for the PDP not to compel them to remain in the party under any guise, Ahmad noted that "it will be in their interest to let us go".

"Our body may be in the PDP but our souls have left the party and it is better they let us go because if they insist that we stay, we will just be causing trouble for them.

We are definitely moving and I will be surprised if anyone would say because they of the fear that they would lose their seats they will stay. I am prepared for anything, if losing my seats is the price to pay, some people have to sacrifice," the lawmaker stated.

Any Deal With Jonathan?

In what may seem like jittery signs in the nPDP, some members of the nPDP in the House of Representatives have begun a systematic back-down from the party following the defection of five of the G-7 governors to the All Progressive Alliance (APC).

Recall that last Tuesday, governors Rotimi Ameachi of Rivers, Murtala Nyako of Adamawa, Rabiu Kwankwanso of Kano State, Ahmed Abdulfatah of Kwara State and Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano State dumped the PDP as a whole and announced their decampment to the APC.

The meeting of the lawmakers, of the nPDP and mainstream PDP, in a closed door meeting presided over by the deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon Emeka Ihedioha and leader of the House, Hon Mulikat Akande-Adeola, is an indication that they have decided it is best to protect their stakes and work in the overall interest of the country, rather than follow the commands of their governors.

Tambuwal Raises Harmonisation Committee For MTEF

The speaker of the House, Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal last week, set up a committee from the House to meet with that of the Senate to reach a common agreement on the benchmark of crude oil in the 2014-2016 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). A common benchmark is one of the requirements requested by President Goodluck Jonathan before he could lay the 2014 proposals before the National Assembly.

Recall that Goodluck had cancelled a scheduled appointment to present the budget to the National Assembly citing conflicting figures in the two versions of MTEF passed by the House and Senate. While the Reps agreed to a $79 crude oil benchmark, the Senate pegged it at $76.5, a figure agreed to by the two finance committees of the National Assembly before the debate in the chambers.

Headed by chairman of the House Committee on Finance, Hon Abdulmumin Jibrin (PDP, Kano), other members are Adeyinka Ajayi (APC, Osun), Ibrahim Shehu Gusau (PDP, Zamfara), Fort Dike (PDP, Anambra), Abdulrahman Terab (ANPP, Borno) and Daniel Reyenieju (PDP, Delta).

I will be recall that the leader of opposition in the House, Hon Femi Gbajabiamila (APC, Lagos) had explained the rationale behind their decision to go against the agreed $76.5 benchmark price and opt for $79 as contained in 2013 budget.

"The House of Representatives has maintained that the benchmark should be maintained at last year's figure of $79 per barrel whilst the executive agreed to $76.50 with the joint committees of both Houses of the National Assembly even though they (the executive) had wanted it fixed at $74. The Senate has passed a $76.50 benchmark. However the some members across party lines in the House insisted on $79 and carried the day on the floor during the debate and consideration of the joint committee report.

"For the purpose of accountability, those of us in the House with a progressive bent feel it is necessary to explain to Nigerians reason for the position we have taken.

1. The Medium Term Expenditure Framework is a 3 year rolling plan and not an annual plan or guide to the budget. It is conceptualized to be the basis for the budget for the next 3 years and unless there is a major and compelling reason for a change in assumptions and projections in any given year, there cannot and should not be any material change to the MTEF especially within its first year. Indeed section 16(2)of the Fiscal Responsibility Act states:

"Any adjustment to Medium Term Expenditure Framework shall be limited to:

The correction of manifest error

Changes in the fiscal indicators, which in the opinion of the President are significant.

Justifying their actions further, the leader argued that nothing has changed since this year in price that could warrant a change from the previous $79 price. In his words, "the parameters and assumptions for last year's $79 have not changed with the price of oil maintained at over 100dollars per barrel. As a matter of fact, the overall oil and non-oil revenue projection was met and surpassed in spite of the crude theft claimed by government. For us therefore to suddenly change the benchmark from $79 to 74 or 76.50 as proposed by the Executive and the Senate respectively seemed whimsical at best. What then was the point of a MTEF based on a 3 year rolling plan......to accept to drop last year's benchmark by about 4 or 5 dollars when nothing has changed may also suggest that a House that fought and argued passionately for a higher benchmark just a few months ago was unserious, did not understand the issues and lacked the courage of its conviction. It could also suggest underhand dealings as is often the accusation levelled against the National Assembly.

Also taking a shot at critics who say the lawmakers' decision was based on selfish interests, Gbajabiamila said "though the national interest is what is most important in our decisions, we also represent states in a true federal structure. To this end, we took cognisance of the fact that a lower benchmark necessarily in the way the federal government operates our revenue, means less money to the states and more money to the Federal government.