Fayose, Yari disagree openly over $1bn ECA fund

The Chairman of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, Alhaji Abdulaziz Yari; and the Ekiti State Governor, Mr. Ayodele Fayose, on Tuesday disagreed openly on the $1bn the governors recently asked the Federal Government to withdraw from the Excess Crude Account to fight insurgency.

While Yari who is also the Zamfara State Governor insisted that the resolution was reached at the forum’s meeting in November, Fayose insisted that he was not part of such decision.

The two governors took the different positions while addressing State House correspondents at the end of an emergency meeting of the NGF held inside the old Banquet Hall of the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

Yari said the decision taken by the governors was not new, saying similar decision to withdraw $2bn from the same account was taken during the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

He said, “Nigeria Governors Forum discussed this issue at our November meeting and we agreed across party lines that this thing has been done in 2014 where $2bn was withdrawn in agreement with the governors at that meeting. Governor Akpabio was the one that moved the motion.

“This time, we realised that there was the need to purchase equipment for the military. So, we felt we should not compromise the issue of security for the entire country.

“We said as governors, we agreed to forfeit $1bn out of our own share of excess crude which we are going to back up with state assembly resolution at a later time.

“This is not the first time a decision like this is being taken. It happened during Jonathan’s era when they took $2bn . We all agreed at that time collectively in the same chamber to withdraw $2bn to procure equipment for the military and also for logistics for the military because they were telling us whether it was true or false that our soldiers were being killed.

“Some came on the social media saying that they were being killed like rats because they didn’t have the training and the equipment. That was what generated discussions at the same Chamber and there was no controversy, there was no opposition to the decision at that time.”