The Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Anti-Corruption, Professor Itse Sagay, put it aptly recently when he observed that our National Assembly members no longer fear Nigerians in the light of their recent moves to secure life pension for the principal officers of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

These are the President of the Senate, the Deputy President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Deputy Speaker, House of Representatives. The Federal lawmakers canvassed the inclusion of this and the granting of immunity to the same officials in the ongoing constitutional amendment. The parliamentarians are also neck-deep in making constituency projects part of the annual Federal budgets. Already, they have arm-twisted President Muhammadu Buhari to approve N60 billion for the controversial projects in the 2016 Appropriated Act.

It is instructive that many of the lawmakers pressing for these unacceptable demands to be included in the ongoing constitutional reforms were once state governors. Many of them had compelled their state Houses of Assembly to grant them stupendous severance packages, including life-long entitlements. Some of them have been occupying high offices in the National Assembly for years and have developed a government-dependency syndrome which they are unwilling to give up even after service.

We have so many grounds to say no to these demands. In the first place, the economy is not in any shape to absorb any more on-loading of official perks. We cannot accept the life pension demand in an atmosphere where the parlous economy has forced many companies to lay off thousands of workers with more to go, while others are forcing their employees to accept deep pay cuts in the midst of a steeply rising cost of living.

Secondly, immunity for elected officials has become generally unpopular, and the mood of the people demands the removal of the immunity granted to the President and Vice President, as well as Governors of States and their Deputies.

Thirdly, the constitution amendment we envisage is tailored at cutting down the cost of governance, which these demands will surely exacerbate. We cannot support a constitutional amendment that will feather the nests of people in elected offices and grant them an opulent lifestyle that is far removed from the realities of grinding poverty and suffering that those who elected them face on the streets.

The Legislative arm of government is not just created to make laws. It is meant to act as a check on the Executive to prevent excesses and bad governance. It is meant to mirror the moods, needs and aspirations of the constituents at the grassroots. Our lawmakers’ demands do not show they are alive to these responsibilities.

And this we find unacceptable.