Understanding the Idea of ‘Local Government’ and grassroots development [A Citizen’s analysis]

The local government is so-called because it is expected to be closest to the people. It is not a foreign imposition; it is an arrangement that is familiar with the people it is governing. Not only is it familiar, but the people can also as well identify with it.

The national government is ideally seen through the prism of a local government people can easily see and make complaints to, hence apart from it carrying out core responsibilities that benefit the local people, it also liaises between the people and the farther government.

The structure of the central government is replicated at the local level, why you have lawmakers at the federal or state assemblies, you have councillors at the local government level, and there is certainly no spending the LG wants to undertake that is done without the approval of these councillors, the councillors are elected and represents various wards within the grassroots community.

The development at the grassroots ideally facilitated by the local government is a concerted agreement since it is expected that there is a deep understanding of the people’s needs. It is a small administrative structure responsible for a minimal number of people compared to the central government, hence it is easier to aggregate demands and ascertain local needs first hand.

It is ideal that it could be inclusive of its own security system with a considerable level of control over its own economy, thus enjoying a coordinated autonomy that enhances citizens lives.

The local administration headed by the local government chairman is expected to be accessible and responsive to the demands and complaints of the people it is governing.

The nature and workings of any local government determine the level of support it receives from citizens. In the long run, the citizens fund this government either through their tax or economic involvement.

In an ideal federal system, the constitution legitimizes the local government and also guarantee its autonomy, it is not only administratively autonomous but financially autonomous, by this, it is able to perform its responsibility to the people at the grassroots without fear or intimidation.

The implication is that because it is a constitutional arrangement devoid of interference, it allows the best of the best to compete to run it, it also gets the people involved in its processes, it also prevents it from being ruling party machinery to compensate hoodlums, touts and political jobbers.