THE CAUSES AND IMPLICATION OF DELAYED PASSAGE OF 2018 BUDGET ON THE NIGERIA’S ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND GROWTH PLAN

The study utilized descriptive techniques in the assessment of the impact of sectoral allocations of Nigeria’s 2018 annual budget on selected macroeconomic variables of; GDP growth rate, Exchange rate, Inflation, Oil prices, Oil production, Debt servicing among others and the 2016 Nigeria’s Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP). We identified some gray areas in the budget, budget padding, constitutional lacuna, non-compliance with fiscal responsibility Act, late preparation and consideration of medium-term expenditure framework, political face-off between the National Assembly and the executive, lack of patriotism as the causes of the long delay in the consideration and passage of the 2018 budget by the national Assembly. The study therefore recommends amendment of the 1999 constitution, sanctioning of erring Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and deployment of ICT in budgeting tracking by civil society groups, communities and the general public.

The study utilized descriptive techniques in the assessment of the impact of sectoral allocations of Nigeria's 2018 annual budget on selected macroeconomic variables of; GDP growth rate, Exchange rate, Inflation, Oil prices, Oil production, Debt servicing among others and the 2016 Nigeria's Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP). We identified some gray areas in the budget, budget padding, constitutional lacuna, non-compliance with fiscal responsibility Act, late preparation and consideration of medium-term expenditure framework, political face-off between the National Assembly and the executive, lack of patriotism as the causes of the long delay in the consideration and passage of the 2018 budget by the national Assembly. The study therefore recommends amendment of the 1999 constitution, sanctioning of erring Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and deployment of ICT in budgeting tracking by civil society groups, communities and the general public.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….... Introduction:-
A budget is described as a plan expressed in quantitative and mostly monetary terms covering a specified period of time usually a year. It is a statement of expected income and expenditure of a government within a specified period of time. It explains the programs, projects and policies of a government. According to Oshisami (2004) a budget is a plan that that determines the revenue and expenditure of government over a period of time. While Hamilton (1986) described a budget as collection of numbers that reflects a nation's priorities, needs and promises. It could be deduced that a budget is any legal document that contains plans, projects and programs of any organisation expressed in monetary form.
A budget is viewed as a legal and economic document that helps a nation, a government or a council in deciding how much to spend, what time it should spend, and where government intends to spend monies available within a specified period of time. It represents proposed allocation of resources to various units and sub units of a nation. It is expected that, a budget provides information to citizens on where and how a government intends to generate its revenue, is an avenue with which societal needs would be met, as well as the goods and services government intends to procure. It should serve as an aid to plans, a device for communicating plans, is a motivating document, is a controlling tool, is a basis for evaluating performance, and explains responsibilities to managers (Oshisami, 2004) 371 Delay in the consideration and passing of budget in Nigeria started in 2016 financial year, which was largely attributed to the face-off between the executive and the legislature arm of government. It took the national assembly five months to consider and pass the budget and it took another 2 to 3 months before its active implementation started. Many researchers argued that, the delay was one of the critical factors that triggered the 2016 economic recession in Nigeria. While the 2017 Budget was passed into law by the National Assembly on the 11 th of May, 2017 Five months after it was presented by the President Muhammadu Buhari. These calls for serious concern over the trend of delay in the consideration and approval of a national budget. The main question is: if it takes the legislature five months to consider and approve a budget, then how long would it take the executives to prepare and present the same budget particularly in a large country like Nigeria. This paper examines the basic factors that caused the long delay in the consideration and passage of 2018 Nigeria's budget as well as the suspicious and unrealistic assumptions of the 2018 Nigeria's budget.

Literature Review:-
There a number of studies that examined Budget preparation and implementation and the relationship between budget and economic growth and development.
Oke (2013) examines the effect of budget implementation on the Nigerian economic growth. The study adopted OLS regression test to analyse a time series data on GDP, Public total Expenditure (PTE), Public Recurrent Expenditure (PRE), Public Capital Expenditure (PCE), External Debt (EXD). The findings indicate that budget implementation has a positive impact on the economic growth of Nigeria. Similarly, a positive relationship between GDP and PEX, PRE, and EXD, a negative relationship between GDP and PCE. The study recommends the enactment of enabling law that will make budgets to work. Nwaorgu (2015) examines the effect of dominant individual on Budget implementation in Nigeria. It adopted a content analysis of literature and secondary data. The study revealed that the activities of dominant individuals range from manipulation of budget items before and after approval of annual estimate, embezzlement, and fraudulent activities. Absence of proper budgeting processes are responsible for the failure of budgeting in Nigeria. The study recommends the need for budget reform in Nigeria based on thorough evaluation of revenue, needs, transparency probity and accountability.
Adekunle (2018) assessed the factors responsible for budget failure in Nigeria. The study deployed ANOVA on time series data from 2010-2015 to examine the relationship between GDP, poverty index and government expenditure. It reported a positive and significant relationship between Budget and poverty index. The findings show that Budget in Nigeria has become a mere yearly ritual affair without appreciable result. The study recommend that government should enact enabling law that ensures the functioning of its budget according to plan and increase in the proportion of capital expenditure.

ISSN: 2320-5407
Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(09), 370-  The breakdown of the capital expenditure shows an allocation of N555.88 billion naira to works power and housing ministry, being the highest allocation of 20.9%. Secondly, is an allocation of N263.1 billion naira to ministry of transportation representing9.82% of the total budget figure for the year. Thirdly, is the special intervention programme which had an allocation ofN150 billion naira representing 5.6%, the fourth allocation is to the ministry of defense which had the sum of N145 billion naira representing 5.46%, while the fifth is the zonal intervention programme with an allocation of N100 billion naira representing 3.77%. Figure 2 presets a pictorial distribution of the N2.652 trillion to capital expenditure.

Comparative features of 2018 Budget
The total size of 2018 budget is N8.612 trillion naira, with a deficit of N1.699 trillion naira. This is 15% higher than 2017 Budget which was N7.488 trillion naira. It shows a drastic shift from oil-based sources of revenue to non-oil sources; a projection of N2.442 trillion naira from oil revenues, and N4.165 trillion from non-oil based sources; There is a decline in the level of deficit from N2.3 trillion naira to N1.699 trillion-naira, accounting for 26% decline.
In the same trend all the capital allocations had a marginal increase in 2018 except the OGONI cleanup. The zonal intervention project has an allocation of N150 billion; comprising of N9.8 billion for Mambilla hydro power project, N12 billion naira for transmission lines and distribution substations, N35.41 billion for national housing programme, and N10 billion for 2 nd Niger bridge.

Methodology:-
The methodology adopted in this paper is content analysis of the 2018 Budget documents, the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP), the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 and the relevant laws regulating the preparation and approval of Nigeria's Budget.

Challenges and Suspicious Items in the 2018 Budget
There is a strong doubt as to the reliability and realisation of the assumptions of 2018 budget in the areas Education, Health and Agriculture. for instance, the allocations to education, agriculture and health sectors has contradicts UNESCO recommendations, the Abuja declaration and the Maputu declaration. Similarly, the allocation to these sectors are grossly inconsistent with the contents and projections of the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan Priorities. The projected recurrent expenditure has been allocated the sum of N3.49 trillion against N2.99 trillion allocated in the previous year, this translates to 16% increase over last year 2017. In addition, there is no allocation to North East Development Commission (NEDC) which was established to facilitate the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the North East which was ravaged by extremist Islamic sect (Boko Haram) crisis.

Other suspicious items in the budget includes:
1. An allocation of N308.42 million for the procurement of riot control equipment under the police formation and command headquarters. This is grossly suspicious.

Factors responsible for the Delay in 2018 Nigeria's Budget
There are a number of reasons that could be related to the preparation, presentation, consideration and approval of the 2018 Nigeria's budget. Some are institutional while some are legal while others are due to ineffective and inefficient arms of government. The notable ones in this paper include: 1. Corrupt and inefficient dominant officers within the civil service of the federation, the statutory executive bodies of the federation as well as the National Assembly who always benefit from the funds fraudulently appropriated for ghost and white elephant projects.