Against the backdrop of several political and socio-economic problems facing the Nigeria economy, government decided to fashion out a way to curtail the excessive expenditures that is characterized with the paper service.

            In the words of Ekaette, (2003), in a paper presented on waste control, discipline and monetization of fringe benefit, the immediate past government under the leadership of president Olusegun Obasanjo has come to realize that public officers had been extravagant in the spending of public funds. It has been discovered that such funds they usually spent are in the provision of enormous task of contending leaves little for capital project. However, it realizes that no government can function properly without a bureaucratic system of carrying out government activities in place.
            Since public service is inevitable, government decided to seek for a possible means of reducing unnecessary rising cost of running government business.
            It was the realization of this goals that prompted government to introduce the issue of monetization policy.

            Monetization generally according to wikipedia the free encydopedia (2002) is the process of converting or establishing something into legal tender. It usually refers to the printing of bank notes by central banks, but things such as gold, silver, diamonds can also be monetized.
            Though there are many types of monetization which includes debt monetization, business monetization, but the one applicable to Nigeria is the monetization of allowance and fringe benefits.
            Monetization of benefit according to Ekaette (2003) entails the reduction of all non-monetary allowances or fringe benefits, such as accommodation, cars, furnitures to eligible officers, some predetermined sum of money, regarded as the equivalent to such benefits are paid tot eh officers in lieu of such benefits.
            In the words of Adeyemi (2004:31) I have a problem of whether this agenda of monetization could be part of the imported idea from the world bank and IMF as an agenda because, I also believe, never mind all that has be said”. He further stated that, I am convinced that our economic polices are being dictated from the world bank and LUF.
            Agu (2003) observed that the country was not ripe for such a policy because of lack of effective mortgage system in the country. He was of the opinion that government should be very careful in borrowing a system that woks in developed countries where houses and infrastructures were already in place.
            Freddy (2004) viewed the monetization policy as a move to reduce the cost of running government. As far he knew, the monetization policy would introduce elimination of wastages of government owned property, the huge cost on hotel accommodations. He further state that the monetization policy was vital in effecting changes in the entire structure of the development of Nigeria public service, human resources and the general economy.
            According to Onu (2006), monetization policy is the process of converting fringe benefit attached to workers salaries into cash incentives. It is the quantification in money terms of those fringe benefits which government used to provide for its workers as part of their conditions of service, such as utility allowances, leave allowances, motor vehicle allowances, accommodation allowances, medical, furniture and domestic servants allowances etc.
            Eke (2007), noted that monetization is a policy which trice to minimize waste, missus and abuse of public facilities, corrupt practices was an endemic problem in the public service, which were also perpetrated through over-invoicing and submission of spurious bill, high maintenances cost, outright money laundry and general absence of accountability and probity.

2.3       AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF MONETIZATION                 
            Over the years, the cost of government has continued to rise, partly because of the in-kind benefits the government provides to public servants. These benefits largely a carryover from the colonial era include highly subsidized has electricity, water and telephone facilities transport facilities, free medical services, has become so large that little is left for capital projects. To check spring cost of providing these benefits for all categories of public servants the new policy was designed to stem the over rising annual out lag on benefits.
            According to Njoku (2003), the monetization policy is aimed at cutting down cost and wastages and equally minimize the rate of careless use of public facilities. He further stated that with the new policy, there will be equitable computation of rights and privileges, with government faithfully rendering to each that is his or her due, in a manner that ensures that none is discriminated against for whatever reasons.
            Making his own submission concerning the aims and objectives of monetization policy, Idonor (2003) assert that the policy will expose rent scan especially in cities where government rent private building as government quarters. He went further by re-asserting the bark drop against which the policy (monetization) was initiated by stating thus:-
            “Investigation have also revealed the more painful is the fact that over 80% of all privately owned houses presently being occupied by bubble (civil) servants actually belong to top civil servants in the rank of directors and permanent secretaries either serving or retired”. Still commenting on the negative effect of monetization, he further stated that these crop of public officers have continued to use their proximity to the corridors of power to encourage government to rent such houses a government quarters. It is also pertinent to state here that not all those monies paid by government actually go to the land-lords, the approving public officers have a share in the dubious deals.
            Okolo (2003) posited that there are other factors/forces other than monetization that will determine the prices of land/rents. He further stated that monetization policy as a factor the rental in cities.
            Aluko (2003) in his own view on the aims and objectives of monetization involves a systematic and immediate replacement of workers benefits with each payment. He furher stated that there are several reasons for the idea of monetization of fringe benefits. If considered writhing the framework of state policy. According to him these include:-

1.                  Equitable provision of amenities
2.                  Efficiency in resources allocation
3.                  Independence of beneficiaries
4.                  Increased productivity
5.                  Save of administrative cost
6.                  Stability of capital and budget
7.                  Non-misuse of government facilities.
            Based on the above premise, the monetization policy aimed at having net effect of reducing the cost of and enhancing financial prudence in government of the federation then, monetization will minimize waste, misuse and abuse of public facilities all these, he said we agree is a legitimate ransom d’ebre for monetization policy.
Share on Google Plus


The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin