There is tension within the National Assembly as the Senate considers a bill to extend the retirement age of National Assembly Service staff from 60 to 65 years and from 35 to 40 years of service. The staff of the National Assembly has expressed dissatisfaction with this development, describing it as counterproductive.
The current Clerk to the National Assembly, Sani Tambawal Magaji, who joined the National Assembly Service in April 1990, stands to benefit from this extension, remaining in office until the age of 65 and completing 40 years in service if the bill passes.
This move by the Senate follows several attempts since 2017 to extend the retirement age for National Assembly staff. Previous attempts faced opposition from the Parliamentary Staff Association of Nigeria (PASAN), which rejected the bill, emphasizing the need for the full implementation of welfare and allowance packages as outlined in the service’s Conditions of Service.
The rejection was based on concerns that extending the tenure would stagnate career progression, mainly benefiting management staff due for retirement. PASAN argued that the bill contravenes the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and runs counter to the Federal Government’s policy on youth development and empowerment. They highlighted the importance of creating opportunities for Nigerian youths instead of perpetuating individuals who have served for 35 years or attained 60 years.
In a letter to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, PASAN denounced the bill and threatened industrial action if it were passed. The bill, previously sponsored by Sunday Akon in the House and Senator Stella Odua in the Senate during the 9th Assembly, faced opposition from the union, leading to its discontinuation.
Despite past rejections, the current management, led by the Clerk to the National Assembly, Magaji Sani Tambawal, is pushing for the extension. The bill has already passed in the House of Representatives and is now before the Senate for concurrence. Some staff members have rejected this move, questioning the urgency and motivations behind the bill.
However, a top management staff member defended the extension, suggesting that it is a collective decision by staff under the parliament and not solely driven by the Clerk of the National Assembly. The argument presented is that the National Assembly risks losing valuable knowledge and expertise with the retirement of experienced hands, justifying the need for an extended tenure.
