Thread by @MrAbuSidiq

Something happened in the National Assembly today, particularly in the chambers of the House of Representatives, and everything points to some sinister plot by the leadership of the House.

#Thread

The National Assembly as an arm of govt has a commission called the National Assembly Service Commission. It is an equivalent of the civil servant established by an act of parliament.

Under the law setting up the commission, there is what is called “Condition of Service” the guides the Operations and actions of every staff under the commission.

One of such ‘condition of service’ is that retirement age for all officers of all grade in the service shall be 60 years or 35 years of pensionable service whichever comes first.

However, the leadership of the National Assembly in their ‘wisdom’ thought it necessary to review the conditions of service including that concerning the age of retirement or period of service.

Both arms of National Assembly therefore set the ball rolling by constituting committees to review the condition of service.

While the Senate maintained the 60 years of age and 35 years of service respectively as obtainable elsewhere, the House of Representatives reviewed the retirement age and years of service to 65 and 40 years respectively.

At the presentation of the report by the two chambers (Senate and House of Reps), a conference committee was set up to harmonize the decision of both chambers to reach a final decision.

The conference committee at the end of its exercise adopted the version of the House of Representatives which recommended 65 years of age and 40 years of service for all officers whichever comes first.

Information available to me indicates that the adoption of the version of the House of Representatives is a plot to extend the tenure of certain officer(s) overseeing the administration of the National Assembly

Well, whatever the motive could be is not the issue here. The issue is the way and manner the report was adopted at the House of Representatives today without the due process follows, thus raising suspicions that there just may be sinister motives for the review.

At the sitting of the House of Representatives today, the report of the conference committee was to be tabled for deliberations by members as listed in the order paper for Thursday.

The conference committee report as a matter of fact was listed as the 26th item in the order paper for Thursday, May 2. But guess what happened?

The report was never deliberated. When they got to item 26 on the order paper which is the conference committee report, they skipped it deliberately and went to item 27 on the order paper. But that is not even the shocker.

When it was time to adopt all the report that was treated as contained in the order paper, item 26, which is the conference committee report was listed amongst those adopted even when it was skipped during deliberation.

There is a video which clearly shows that item 26 being the conference committee report was not only skipped but also listed as one of those adopted even when it was never deliberated upon.

As I said earlier, there is a credible information that the reason for the adoption of 65 years of age and 40 years of service as against normal 60 years of age and 35 years of service respectively is a plot to extend the stay of some official(s) of the NASS Commission

As a matter of fact, fingers point to the Clerk of the National Assembly whole sources said is due to have gone on terminal leave since November 2018 in preparation for his exit. If true, this review will keep him in office for another 5 years.

Are you asking why they may have done this? Your guess is as good as mine

Some other review of the condition of service of the National Assembly Service Commission