From Ndubuisi Orji, Abuja
House of Representatives has re-introduced the controversial National Water Resources Bill withdrawn in September 2020 following disagreement over some contentious clauses.
The proposed legislation sponsored by Chairman, House Committee on Water Resources, Sada Soli, was re-introduced at yesterday’s plenary, amidst protestations by two members from Benue State.
Clerk of the House, Yahaya Danzaria, had barely finished mentioning the bill listed as item number two under presentation of bills in Order Paper when a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) member from Benue State, Mark Gbillah, raised a matter of privilege.
Gbillah expressed concern that the Bill, which was withdrawn after it generated so much concern across the country, was being re-introduced on the floor of the House.
The lawmaker said: “I am aware the matter listed for first reading, the National Water Resources Bill, generated a lot of controversy within this House and even across the country. And some of us wonder why this issues is still being represented on the floor of the House because some of us are not comfortable in support of this bill in the first instance Mr. Speaker. I thought I should bring that to the notice of the speaker.”
Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila, in his response, said he had posed similar question to the chairman, House Committee on Water Resources, earlier in the day, and that the latter assured him all the contentious issues in the bill have been addressed by the governors.
Gbajabiamila said: “I asked the chairman the same thing this morning and he told me the issues of controversy that were raised then have been addressed by the governors. Apparently it is a new bill, that all the governors of the federation both South and North participated on this bill and I want to take him by his word.
“I believe you raised a very cogent point. We live in a very diverse country and everybody sensitivity must be taken into consideration. I think we should leave it at that and be extremely vigilant. Talk to your governors from the North and South, and get their opinion on how it affects your states or your area of operation.”
However, Gbillah noting that his state governor, Samuel Ortom, has not agreed to the bill. The lawmaker added that whatever the governors may have agreed upon may not be acceptable to the parliament.
“Whatever the governors might have agreed upon may not be acceptable to us. I think is imperative that all of us collectively are given copies immediately of whatever this bill says because the contentious issue is that the Federal Government was going to be taking ownership and possession of water ways extending into certain kilometres extending to territorial state.
“So, I think as much as the governors may have discussed which is still subject to confirmation, because my governor in Benue State has not agreed to this bill, I can tell you categorically.”
Similarly, John Dyegh, who is also from Benue State, while kicking against the introduction of the bill, said it is not in the place of the governors to decide what should be part of a legislation.
Nevertheless, the speaker noted that why he was not saying the governors can dictate to the House, they (governors) were sometimes in a position to know what is good for their states.
“I agree with you that we are here to represent the people and their voices must be heard irrespective of what the governors say. But I am hoping we can work in tandem with the governors on this particular issue. Like I said, your governor (Ortom) was specifically mentioned as one of people that bought into it.
“So, I would ask that the chairman, business and rules make sure that before this matter comes up for second reading, every single member is given a copy to digest, read and consult widely. We cannot play the ostrich, knowing that the bill that almost threw this country up in flames is coming up again. Let members go through it and read it properly.”
Soli, on his part, said he would not support any legislation that would short-change any part of the country.
According to him, all the attorneys general of the different states as well as the attorney general of the federation, have all commented on the bill.
“I will not stand here to see a particular section of this country is short-changed by a legislation of this country. If that happens Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw the bill in the interest of this country,” he said.