The Public Accounts Committee of the House of Representatives Committee, has raised issues with the the Bureau for Public Enterprises (BPE) for allegedly wasting over N10 billion to incorporate two companies for the Nigeria Postal Service (NIPOST), which reportedly folded up in just a year.
The Committee led by Bamidele Salam also at its resumed investigative hearing with federal MDAs on Monday, directed the Joint Admission and Matriculations Board (JAMB), as well as the Investment and Security Tribunal to within 30 days, pay into the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation, N3. 457 billion and N6. 327 million naira respectively, and provide the panel with evidence of the remittances.
The two companies, NIPOST Transport and Logistics Limited and NIPOST Property reportedly took off in May 2023 and folded up through a Presidential directive in May 2024, but Salam told the BPE that no reasonable Nigerian will believe that N10. 4 billion was spent to register the companies only for them to fold up barely one year after.
Head of Finance and Accounts of the BPE, Imam Rilwan who stood in for the Director General told the committee that while about N10 billion was given to the two companies for their take off, about N400 million was given to the BPE to prepare the ground for the take off of the companies.
According to him, registration of the two companies for NIPOST was approved in 2017, paving the way for the BPE to expend about N423 million in registering and carrying out other activities for the eventual take off of the companies, adding that when the money was released in 2023, the Bureau had to recover its money, and that the N423 million given to the BPE was used to rent office accommodation and carry out other essential services.
He said while the Bureau paid rent for the two companies from 2022, the companies took pocession of the offices in May 2023, but folded up in May 2024, adding that all property belonging to the two companies have been officially handed over to NIPOST management.
Salam however stated that to anticipatorily spend money from government coffers before the such is approved was a clear violation of the provisions of the Public Procurement Act.
He also expressed displeasure with JAMB management for its refusal to reply letters from The Fiscal Responsibility Commission informing them of their liabilities, ruling that it was tantamount to admittance of the indebtedness.
