MR Toby Ikechukwu is the representative of the people of Aninri/Agwu/Oji-Uzo of Enugu State and Deputy House Chairman on Ethics and Business. In this chat, the former Economic Adviser to the Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu bared his mind on some national issues bordering on the fuel subsidy removal, a general assessment of the House of Representatives, the 2012 budget and other sundry issues in the country.

What is your assessment of the House of Representatives so far, will you say they have impressed Nigerians?

I think the House has lived up to the expectations of Nigerians, the seventh National Assembly has set out its agenda and they have followed through interactions with the executive arm of government, which has been very brilliant, we have been very active and in terms of representing our constituents, the conduct and performance of the House has been reflective of the aspirations of Nigerians. In terms of performance I will score us 90 percent without mincing words.

In what areas do you think urgent improvement is needed to steer the House out of troubled waters?

I would have loved the House to do more in the area of oversight function, so I believe that with effective oversight function from the House the implementation of the budget will be better. We are true representatives of the people via such functions as this will adequately help our people to know what is due to them at every given time.

We are because of the people we represent without them we can never be here so there interest must be properly protected and remember this is the only weapon that can expose corruption in the system. I am a very strong advocate of effective oversight functions.

How will you assess the 2012 budget after President Goodluck Jonathan's presentation recently to both Houses?

The budget presentation of Mr President was very good, but there is a saying that the devil is in the detail, so I would rather say until we go through, but the principle of the budget as enunciated by Mr President are meant to activate the critical sectors of the economy, the emphasis on capital expenditure, the effort and aspiration to reduce the recurrent expenditure, particularly the overheads and personnel emoluments.

I believe that once emphasis is laid on capital expenditure you would have gotten Nigeria to a good start but whoever tells you that they can spend 60 percent or 70 percent of our earnings, of our appropriation on recurrent expenditure, those are things that are not tangible, it does not drive the economy and it cannot take us to the promise land, so I believe the emphasis on capital expenditure will be much more appreciated by Nigeria. Capital expenditure will ensure that people get employed as such projects run for sometime thereby creating jobs within the duration of such projects and still retain some of the workforce once it takes off.

Don't you think the Budgetary allocation for security was rather too high and scandalous?

When you talk about security, it does not just address one security arm of government, you are talking about the entire country, but more importantly, you know we have had a lot of security challenges and by the time we break down the budget who know what the details are, you can spend any amount to protect Nigerians, but we must make sure that it is justifiably done, it is prudently done it should not be just money for the boys. Every kobo tailored towards security must be properly accounted for not another jamboree fund for the boys like I said earlier. And do not forget that security is an issue for everybody not only government.

The budget was silent on Fuel subsidy removal, do you think this was appropriate?

Well the House will jointly take a position on fuel subsidy and at the end of the day we will take our stand on it.

My own take is that you don't subsidize consumption, if you check the preponderance of people who are benefiting from subsidy, they are just small fraction of the country, but the important thing is that the executive arm should be very clear and market the issue to Nigerians.

There are areas where other countries subsidize, if you are talking about subsidy, you are talking about subsidising the agricultural sector because that is the area that employs about 70 percent of Nigerians. So subsidy in essence is not bad, but you must be subsidizing for the right purposes, you don't subsidize consumption if you are talking about fuel subsidy, who are you subsidizing? How many people are using 10 cars?

The majority of people who are living in the rural areas are they getting the benefits of the fuel subsidy? How many of them enter commercial vehicles in a year? So you must be subsidising for the right purposes. In Europe they subsidise agriculture, in America they subsidize agriculture, you must subsidize those things that will drive the momentum of the economy, it is not an emotional issue, we should place it on the table, analyse it and come to a clear understanding of where we want to be. So I do not believe that agreeing or disagreeing on fuel subsidy removal that is simplistic. The question is what do you subsidize?

If it is the research, If it is production, you do that to ensure that you don't have an invasion of your economy by other countries or you subsidise an area that will be of benefit to vast majority of Nigerians and as far as I am concerned we still have a long way to go, but the executive arm and various government parastatals that are directly involved should market the idea, if they want fuel subsidy to go they should tell us why?

But personal opinion or no personal opinion it does not really matter but what is important is the interest of Nigerians.