By Anokwuru C. U. Ph.D
It is laughable yet morally disturbing how the PDP attack dogs in Abia state have carefully organised themselves to dish out falsehood simply and primarily to hoodwink the unsuspecting masses into believing that black is white and that what is wrong is right. One such brazen falsehood is that the former PDP administration led by Governor Okezie Ikpeazu built, completed, and commissioned Abia State’s new Government House.
To start with, in these modern days, a Government House worth the name should consist of the following:
1. The Governor’s Lodge which must be a standalone building as it is expected to house the Governor and his family members.
2. The Deputy Governor’s Lodge which operates like that of the Governor.
3. The Executive Chambers for Exco meetings which is usually domiciled under a different structure that houses other offices of the Governor and his immediate aides.
4. The Chief of Staff’s Lodge.
5. The Banquet Hall for government’s official events.
6. The Government House Chapel for religious activities.
7. A Security Quarters where the Camp Commandant, and key security officers of the governor are expected to live permanently.
8. A Staff Quarters where key appointees of the Governor, their aides, drivers, etc. are expected to live, among many other structures.
There is glaringly nothing like the aforementioned structures in the so-called new Government House. And this leaves a lot to be desired in the rationale for building the so-called new Government House.
More so, if former Governor Victor Okezie Ikpeazu ever built, completed, and commissioned the so-called new Government House, it logically follows to ask some very pertinent questions such as:
1. At what point did the commissioning take place?
2. Why did he not pack into his well-built, well-furnished, and commissioned new Government House?
3. Who exactly did the past administration build that single but staggering structure for? The Governor, his Deputy, the Chief of Staff, the Governor’s aides or for everyone to live and operate from?
4. Was the so-called new Government House too good or too bad for a person of his social standing to live in?
5. Was it a case of producing what one cannot eat?
Again, for those arguing that the current government should complete the new Government House if the former did not complete it, even more questions will be begging for serious answers:
1. When is it right to commission a project?
2. Is it right to commission government projects at the start, halfway into the project, or when the project is completely completed? Pardon my choice of words, please.
3. Why was the rush to commission an uncompleted government project?
4. Why arrogate to himself as having completed and commissioned a new Government House when in reality there is nothing like that?
5. Is it morally right or should it be a priority to rush into completing a Government House a former government claimed to have finished and commissioned, when a whopping sum of Five Hundred Million Naira (₦500,000,000) meant for the renovation of the same Abia State Government House is yet to be accounted for by the former government?
It is imperative to understand that in the realm of governance, the commissioning of incomplete projects stands as a stark ethical dilemma characterised by hypocrisy, self-deceit, and moral bankruptcy. This practice not only raises concerns about the integrity and transparency of the previous administration but also questions the foundational principles of responsible leadership. Examining the reasons behind such actions and their consequences reveals a troubling pattern that goes beyond mere inefficiency.
At its core, commissioning incomplete projects can be seen as a deliberate attempt to present a deceptive facade of progress. This illusion of achievement does not align with the stark reality of a project in its unfinished state. It becomes a performative act, where the optics of progress are prioritised over and above the genuine advancement of the community.
The allocation of public funds to incomplete projects constitutes a misuse of valuable resources. Funds that could be channeled into completing these projects or directed towards more pressing community needs are instead expended on endeavours that fall short of expectation. This misallocation not only undermines the financial health of the community but also breaches the trust placed in the government’s responsible stewardship of public resources.
Incomplete projects, by their nature, may lack essential safety features and adherence to building codes. This raises critical concerns about the well-being of citizens who may be exposed to potential hazards. Needless to mention that every responsible government ought to prioritise the safety and security of its people, making the commissioning of incomplete structures a betrayal of this fundamental moral duty.
The cornerstone of effective governance lies in the trust that citizens place in their elected leaders. Commissioning incomplete projects fractures this trust, breeding skepticism about the transparency and sincerity of government actions. A government’s credibility, once tarnished, becomes a challenging terrain to reclaim as citizens may continue to question the integrity of promises made and projects undertaken.
Beyond eroded trust, the government’s overall credibility takes a significant hit. The commissioning of uncompleted projects is an image of leadership that is either incapable of effective project management or willing to compromise ethical standards for short-term gains. The long-term consequences may extend beyond a singular project, influencing perceptions of the government’s competence and overall commitment to the welfare of its citizens.
Addressing this ethical quagmire necessitates a fundamental shift in governance principles. Governments must prioritise the completion of projects before showcasing them to the public to foster a culture of honesty, responsibility, and trustworthiness. Increased accountability, transparent communication about project timelines, and a commitment to ethical governance can help rebuild the trust that has been compromised.
In conclusion, the commissioning of incomplete projects is not merely a bureaucratic oversight but a breach of the social contract between the government and its citizens. To regain the confidence of the people and uphold the principles of responsible governance, a commitment to transparency, ethical conduct, and a genuine interest in the welfare and betterment of the community must be at the forefront of government’s decision-making processes.
It is therefore incomprehensible how a government can rush to commission a project that was never completed and at the same time lack the moral shame and penitence to add its wrongdoing.
The so-called new Government House completed and commissioned by the PDP Okezie Ikpeazu led administration is there for everyone to see and assess and pass a genuine judgment on whether it is a Government House befitting for human beings or some lower animal species.
Anokwuru C. U. Ph.D