Political office holders’ salary review: Time to entrench equity in remuneration
The announcement by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) that it is considering an upward review of the remuneration of political office holders is, in many ways, a welcome development. It presents a unique opportunity for the issue of remuneration for public officials to be reviewed with the intent of addressing how equitable […]
The announcement by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) that it is considering an upward review of the remuneration of political office holders is, in many ways, a welcome development. It presents a unique opportunity for the issue of remuneration for public officials to be reviewed with the intent of addressing how equitable it is.
For one thing, it will end what may be considered an anachronism in the reward system of our public service, as their salaries have remained static since 2008, some 16 years ago. A child born then is either in the university now or preparing to enter. That indeed is too long a period to hold people’s salaries constant.
We must compensate our political office holders well, and that compensation must keep pace with the economic trends. They bear the burden of managing the country, making decisions on our behalf, and ensuring that the citizens have a good life and live in peace. The job of political leadership is a tough one; only those who are involved in it know the extent of the challenge of planning for the entire nation each day. It could be quite burdensome, which is why not many can assume that responsibility.
Ordinarily, leaving employees’ salaries or incomes unchanged for such a long time could give rise to all kinds of unethical conduct. Those involved could go searching for ways to increase the static salaries. Over time, a fixed amount of income loses its purchasing power because of the impact of inflation. This is why the public insists on a regular review of salaries to enable salary earners, who are fixed-income earners, to withstand the impact of inflation over time.
- 7 dead in Damaturu-Maiduguri road crash
- By-election results show exit of appointees from Kaduna govt insignificant – Gov’s spokesman
In this context, Nigeria’s political office holders must be commended for enduring such a long time of inflation-devoured salaries. Going by the power of inflation and what it can do to nominal monetary values, the real worth of such salaries must be extremely low by now. In a class on a course titled Reporting the Economy recently, I discussed the concept of economic indicators with third-year journalism students. When it came to inflation, I told them that inflation steals people’s money while their money is still in their pockets or bank accounts. That was a way of explaining the fact that in an inflationary period, people go to the market with a given amount of money, hoping to buy a certain quantity of goods. But they end up buying less because part of the money has been ‘stolen” by the force called inflation.
This explains the reason governments must see inflation as an enemy, not only of the ordinary people but also of the government officials. This is so because the naira spent by the roadside vulcaniser is the same as the one spent by the politician. Both are subject to the same gnawing impact of inflation. At least in theory, this is or should be so.
But the truth is that this is not the case, really. In the context of our discourse here, it is correct to say that inflation impacts more on the poor than the rich or higher-income earners. Many have been in government since 2008, and for such people, there has been no negative material change arising from the corrosive impact of inflation on their static incomes. Neither their purchasing power nor their lifestyles has fallen despite the rise in the price level. Yes, while officially their salaries may not have been raised, the system we operate is such that “pads” their earnings in such a way that immunises their incomes or salaries against inflation. Not everyone enjoys this salary immunity.
This brings us to the knotty issue of basic salary and allowances. It is significant that in its presentation on this matter, the RMAFC only talks about the basic salary of the officials, leaving the more serious aspect of their allowances and other perks of office. It is a deliberate framing that distorts the real picture. In a situation where the allowances are carefully structured to be several times over the basic salary, it is deceptive to base the argument for a salary review on the basic salaries, which are just an insignificant fraction of the total emoluments.
Perhaps the best illustration of this is found in the rewards of our lawmakers at the federal level. In a lead story on Monday, August 18, 2025, Daily Trust reported that Nigeria’s 109 Senators earn about N2.354 billion, made up of their monthly salaries and the cost of running their offices. This amount, the paper said, is enough to pay the monthly wages of 4,708 professors at universities across the country.
In this case, quoting the Senators’ low basic salaries as the basis for raising their pay will only amount to deception. Their real monthly emoluments are stashed under various allowances, some indescribable.
As RMAFC tinkers with the proposed salary reviews, the questions must be asked: What they take as salary is it equitable? Is it justified in a society riddled with poverty? How can 109 lawmakers be equivalent in earnings to 4,709 professors? If this is true, it shows where we are headed.