Editorial

Unity Schools: Release White Paper Now

Published

15 years ago

August 22, 2011

The recent visit by the Minister of State for Education, Chief Ezebunwo Nyesom Wike to Federal Government College, Apo, Abuja, and his lamentations on the physical condition of the school have once more brought to the front burner, the lingering frustration of how best to tackle the rot in the 104 unity colleges operated by the Federal Government across the country.

In an interview with newsmen in Abuja shortly after an inspection tour of the school, Wike was quoted as saying that, “if we do not have the funds, we should consider collapsing some of them (the unity schools). Wike’s remarks may sound tough but certainly it is not new. In January, this year, President Goodluck Jonathan inaugurated a Presidential Task Team on Education with the mandate to propose strategic measures to revamp education and address specific issues as contained in an eight-point term of reference.

The 42-man team, headed by Prof Pai Obanya, made far-reaching recommendations in the report that was submitted to Jonathan, last May.

On the 104 Federal Government colleges, the team’s 96-page report presented three options for consideration. The first is for the Federal Government to disengage from providing secondary education and leave the responsibility for basic and secondary education to states and local governments.

In furtherance of this option, the committee recommended the transfer of the 104 unity schools to the 36 state governments and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). It also advised that only two schools (one each for mixed sexes and girls only) in each of the six geopolitical zones and FCT, making a total of 14, should be retained by the Federal Government as model schools and run as such.

The committee further recommended an amendment to the Compulsory, Free Universal Basic Education Act 2004, to expand the purview of the Act to include senior secondary school education from SS1 to SS3. The UBEC Act currently covers the first nine years of a child’s education from primaries 1 to 6 and junior secondary school from JSS1 to JSS3.

In the committee’s thinking, the Federal Government should concentrate on coordinating policy and providing the catalytic (or perhaps even regular) financial assistance (matching grant) to the other tiers of government through an expanded UBEC. Under this, the Federal Government will focus on the tertiary sub-sector similar to what it is doing for water resources and healthcare.

The last option is the redeployment of the teachers, who are civil servants and are employed by the Federal Civil Service Commission, to a revamped Federal Inspectorate Service or to other ministries where their services may be required, so there will be no retrenchment of staff.

Justifying these recommendations, the team described the Federal Government colleges as “a special challenge, because their running has become the Federal Ministry of Education’s major pre-occupation.”

To give further insight into the findings of the committee, the report stated that out of the headquarters’ total staff strength of 27,227 in 2007, 23,110 were deployed in the unity schools. Only 4,117 were employed in Abuja and the zonal offices nationwide. This means that over 80 per cent of the headquarters’ staff were employed to run the then 102 schools (excluding the two established in 2008 at Dayi in Katsina State and Doma in Nasarawa State).

Again, the 102 unity schools had a total of 122,000 students in 2006/2007 academic session, out of 30.2million students undergoing secondary education nationwide. They, therefore, cater for a very insignificant fraction of Nigerians who are receiving secondary school education.

The committee also noted that over 80 per cent of headquarters’ budget is spent on the unity schools. For instance, out of a total capital budget of N24.2billion between 2000 and 2006, over N18.7billion was appropriated for the 102 schools.

However, in terms of performance, 85 per cent of the students in unity schools failed the West African Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination from 2000-2004 while the success rate for National Examination Council from 2000-2006 was 38 per cent.

The committee concluded that, “in their present condition, they do not appear to be sources of excellence in secondary education and cannot be models for the states and other school proprietors – one of the reasons for establishing them in the first instance.”

Irked by the continued decay in the system, the former minister of state for education, Kenneth Gbagi set up a 105-member ministerial committee to assess the unity colleges. The committee, divided into 12 groups – two for each of the geopolitical zones – with the former principal of King’s College and Kogi State Commissioner for Education, Sylvester Onoja, as the overall chairman, visited all the 104 colleges and came up with a report which validated the report of the presidential task team.

There is no doubt, therefore, that many things have gone wrong with the running of the unity schools, and that any of the above options will result in a leaner, more professional Federal Ministry of Education that would concentrate on front-end as against back-end development. With this, the use of resources will also be optimized.

What is not clear, however, is the reason for the continued delay in finding a lasting solution to the problem. Against this backdrop, we also lend our voice to the view expressed by Wike that the Federal Government has to divorce political sentiments in efforts to find a quick, concrete and practical solution to the problem.

One positive step that must be taken in this direction is for the government to urgently study the report of the presidential task team and publish a white paper that can be quickly implemented in tandem with one of the recommendations. This way, the government would be seen to be proactively re-inventing the education sector as a means of restoring the lost glory in the system. This is our stand.

Editorial

FG’s LIN Policy: The Missing Link

Published

1 day ago

April 27, 2026

The Tide

For decades, Nigeria’s education sector has lurched from one grand initiative to the next, each announced with fanfare and abandoned in frustration. The latest proposal, the Learners’ Identification Number (LIN) for primary and secondary pupils, has been presented as a solution to the chronic problem of school dropouts, particularly in the North. Yet before any new system is rolled out, citizens are right to pause and ask: have we not seen this play before?

The Minister of Education, Dr. Tunji Alausa, deserves some credit for acknowledging a genuine crisis. According to UNESCO data, Nigeria has an estimated 10.5 million children out of school, the highest number in the world, with the northern region accounting for over 60 per cent of that figure. The idea of tracking individual pupils from admission through to graduation is not, in principle, unreasonable. However, the gap between a sound principle and workable implementation has historically been a chasm in this country.

Consider the fate of previous education policies. The Universal Primary Education (UPE) programme of the 1970s collapsed under poor planning, inadequate teacher training, and a lack of sustained funding. The 6-3-3-4 system, introduced in the 1980s to emphasise vocational skills, never achieved its objectives because laboratories and workshops remained empty. More recently, the National Teacher Education Policy (NTEP) introduced in 2014 ran aground due to inconsistent enforcement and low morale among instructors. And presently the Universal Basic Education (UBE). Each policy promised a transformation; each delivered frustration.

The proposed LIN system raises a basic logistical question: does any school today admit a child without recording that admission? Every primary and secondary school already maintains enrolment registers. The challenge is not the absence of identity numbers but the absence of a functional national data collation system, reliable electricity for digital records, and administrative accountability in remote areas. Introducing a new number without fixing these foundations will merely add another layer of paperwork.

Furthermore, the Minister’s plan to phase out the common entrance examination in favour of Continuous Assessment (CA) requires careful scrutiny. While CA can reduce examination pressure, it demands well-trained teachers, standardised evaluation criteria, and rigorous oversight. In many public schools today, class sizes exceed 60 pupils per teacher, and marking is irregular. Without massive investment in teacher quality, CA will become as unreliable as the examination it replaces. Good intentions do not fill gaps in competence.

We must also confront the risk of financial exploitation. Nigeria’s history shows that every new education policy tends to generate new fees: registration fees for identity cards, processing fees for data entry, and renewal fees each term. The Federal Government must give an unequivocal guarantee that the LIN will cost parents and guardians nothing. Given the current economic hardship, with inflation standing at over 28 per cent and food prices soaring, any additional levy, no matter how small, would push more children out of school, not fewer.

The Minister states that the LIN will help identify dropouts. Yet we do not need a complex numbering system to calculate dropout rates. Simply comparing enrolment figures at the start of Primary 1 with attendance at the end of Junior Secondary School 3 would reveal the attrition rate. The real need is not more numbers but more action on the root causes: poverty, child labour, early marriage in some regions, and the poor quality of schooling that makes parents see education as a waste of time.

This brings us to the most direct solution, one the government continues to avoid: free, compulsory basic education nationwide. Section 18 of the 1999 Constitution and the Universal Basic Education Act already mandate free and compulsory education for the first nine years. Yet many states still charge levies for uniforms, parent-teacher association fees, and examination costs. Instead of introducing a tracking number, the government should enforce existing laws, fully release UBEC matching grants, and hold state governors accountable for out-of-school children.

The previous administration’s free school feeding programme showed what is possible when a policy addresses immediate material need. The programme increased enrolment by roughly 15 per cent in targeted areas, according to World Bank monitoring reports. However, it also demonstrated the nemesis of Nigerian policy: corruption. Food quality declined, contractors inflated costs, and political loyalists were favoured over competent caterers. No new number will stop corruption; only transparent auditing and harsh penalties will.

We therefore advise the Federal Government to collapse its many overlapping initiatives into one coherent strategy. The education sector currently suffers from a cacophony of policies: the LIN, Continuous Assessment reform, teacher professional development schemes, digital literacy programmes, and adolescent girls’ education initiatives, among others. Each has its own bureaucratic structure, funding stream, and reporting requirements. Schools, especially in rural areas, cannot manage this chaos. A single, well-funded, long-term plan with clear targets for 2030 would achieve more than a dozen fragmented policies.

Until the government addresses the fundamentals—free tuition, adequate classrooms, and trained teachers—the LIN policy will be remembered as yet another well-intentioned distraction. No identity number ever kept a girl in school when her family could not afford transport. No database ever persuaded a hungry child to stay for afternoon lessons. The missing link in Nigeria’s education sector is not a digit; it is the political will to spend honestly and act decisively. Let the Minister drop this proposal and pick up the harder, older task of enforcing free education for every Nigerian child.

Editorial

Domesticate FG’s Exit Benefit Scheme

Published

3 weeks ago

April 10, 2026

The Tide

The recent approval of the “Exit Benefit Scheme” by the Federal Executive Council (FEC) stands as a landmark achievement for the administration of President Bola Tinubu. For many observers, this remains one of the most impactful and compassionate policies introduced by the current government. By restoring a sense of financial dignity to those who have dedicated their lives to national service, the administration has demonstrated a clear commitment to the welfare of the Nigerian workforce.

Under this new framework, retirees of the Federal Civil Service are set to receive a gratuity equal to 100 per cent of their last gross annual pay upon retirement. This policy, which officially comes into effect on 1 January 2026, ensures that Federal civil servants are not left stranded the moment they exit the office. It provides a vital financial cushion that has been sorely missing from the lives of many public servants for over two decades.

The primary objective of this scheme is to bolster financial security by providing a significant lump sum payment to eligible employees who have served for at least 10 years. Crucially, this benefit does not exist in isolation; it is designed to work alongside the existing Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). This dual-layered approach ensures that the immediate transition into retirement is as seamless as the long-term pension disbursements that follow.

It is important to clarify that this new benefit is intended to complement, rather than replace, the current CPS managed by Pension Fund Administrators (PFAs). For years, the pure contributory framework left a void where the traditional gratuity once stood. By reintroducing this payment, the Federal Government is addressing a long-standing grievance regarding the adequacy of the total retirement package available to civil servants.

This policy marks a historic return to gratuity payments for Federal Civil Servants after a lengthy hiatus. Since the pension reforms of the early 2000s, the focus has been strictly on contributions, often leaving retirees with a “waiting period” that can be financially devastating. The return of the gratuity signals a shift back toward a more holistic view of worker appreciation and social security.

Indeed, this payment comes exactly 22 years after the introduction of the Contributory Pension Scheme in 2004. The two-decade gap saw many retirees struggle to adjust to life after service without a substantial initial payout. This intervention demonstrates the Federal Government’s ongoing commitment to policies that promote improved welfare and secure the future of the civil service in a tangible, measurable way.

By reversing the lack of gratuity inherent in the previous purely contributory model, the government has earned the rare and resounding praise of organised labour. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has rightly described this move as a major welfare upgrade. This endorsement highlights the alignment between the government’s policy direction and the actual needs of the Nigerian worker on the street.

We commend President Tinubu for this watershed approval. The new gratuity payment is a sincere reflection of the administration’s recognition of the dedication, sacrifice, and professionalism inherent in the Federal Civil Service. It acknowledges that those who build the nation’s administrative backbone deserve more than just a handshake and a promise of future monthly stipends when they finally step down.

However, the pursuit of social justice must not end with Federal workers alone. We strongly advocate that this initiative trickles down to the various states. The Governor’s Forum should meet as a matter of urgency to approve and adopt the Federal Government’s template. If the central government can find the means to honour its retirees, the states—who are the primary employers of the bulk of the nation’s workforce—should follow suit.

It is a painful reality that many workers retire from service today with nothing to take home on their final day. Pensions frequently take months to process, and in many jurisdictions, gratuities take “forever” to be disbursed. This is why the Exit Benefit Scheme is the true embodiment of Tinubu’s “Renewed Hope Agenda.” There is perhaps nothing that offers more hope to a weary worker than the certainty of a dignified exit.

Shamefully, several state governments are still battling with legacy gratuity payments from years past. Adopting a scheme like this would serve as an essential cushion while long-term arrears are settled. No citizen should face destitution or death simply because they rendered service to their government. It is time to end the era where retirees survive on mere trickles; even a modest lump sum can be the difference between a dignified retirement and a tragic one.

Specifically, we call upon the Rivers State Government to adopt this scheme to give life to its pensioners. The Federal Government has already provided the successful template; there is no need to reinvent the wheel. We must ask: if political office holders are entitled to generous severance benefits after just four or at most eight years, why should civil servants who serve for 35 years go without a similar “severance” package?

In Rivers State, the need for clarity is urgent. Workers who left the service after June last year face the uncertainty of whether they fall under the Defined Benefit Scheme or the Contributory Pension Scheme. The state government must resolve this administrative ambiguity immediately to prevent a full-blown pension crisis. Domesticating the Federal “largesse” should be straightforward, as Rivers is a state blessed with the necessary resources.

Governor Siminalayi Fubara, a former civil servant, understands the plight of the worker better than most. While we commend his administration for paying one of the highest minimum wages in the country, he has the opportunity to go further by becoming the first governor to implement the 100 per cent Exit Benefit Scheme. With this, he can ensure that Rivers State workers, who deserve the best, are truly rewarded for their service.

Let Rivers lead where others have lagged.

Editorial

Task Before New IGP

Published

4 weeks ago

April 2, 2026

The Tide

The appointment of Olatunji Disu as Inspector-General of Police following the resignation of Kayode Egbetokun marks a significant turning point for the Nigeria Police Force. Announced by President Bola Tinubu, the change in leadership comes at a time when the country is grappling with serious security concerns. Disu’s emergence has already drawn national attention, given both the urgency of the situation and the expectations placed upon him.

Upon confirmation of his appointment, Disu pledged to justify the confidence reposed in him. Central to his promise is a firm commitment to end impunity and enforce a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption within the force. Such assurances, though commendable, will ultimately be judged by the practical steps he takes in the coming months.

The new IGP also emphasised the importance of public cooperation in effective policing. He rightly noted that no police force anywhere in the world can succeed without the support of the people it serves. This acknowledgement highlights the critical relationship between law enforcement and the community, a relationship that has long been strained in Nigeria.

While congratulating Disu on his elevation, it is important to recognise the enormity of the task before him. He assumes office at a particularly difficult time, as underscored by the President during the decoration ceremony. Nigeria’s security landscape remains fragile, requiring decisive leadership and immediate action.

President Tinubu described the appointment as coming at a defining moment for national security. He urged the new police chief to restore public confidence and improve the institution he now leads. The expectation is not merely to maintain the status quo, but to leave the force better than he met it.

The security challenges confronting the nation are considerable. From banditry and terrorism to organised crime and communal conflicts, the threats are diverse and deeply entrenched. These issues have not only endangered lives and property but have also heightened public anxiety across the country.

Ironically, the police, who are meant to be at the forefront of restoring law and order, are themselves beset by internal challenges. Issues such as poor welfare, inadequate training, and systemic corruption have weakened the institution’s effectiveness. This dual burden makes Disu’s assignment even more complex.

A key priority for the new IGP must, therefore, be to restore peace and rebuild confidence, both within the force and among the general public. For many Nigerians, the police are no longer seen as protectors but as adversaries. This perception, whether wholly justified or not, must be urgently addressed.

Cleaning up the force and restoring its credibility will require more than rhetoric. Disu has already made the necessary commitments, but Nigerians will expect tangible results. Institutional reform must be thorough, transparent, and sustained if it is to yield meaningful change.

Equally important is the welfare of police personnel. Many officers operate under extremely poor conditions, with inadequate facilities and insufficient resources. Numerous police stations across the country are in a deplorable state, lacking basic equipment needed for effective policing.

No organisation can function optimally under such circumstances. If the police are to fulfil their constitutional mandate, they must be properly equipped and motivated. Addressing issues of welfare and infrastructure will go a long way in boosting morale and enhancing performance.

The list of challenges before the new police chief is extensive. From modernising equipment to improving training and discipline, the reforms required are wide-ranging. It is hoped that Disu will take the time to carefully assess these issues and implement practical solutions.

His appointment also comes amid growing calls for the establishment of state police. There is now a broad national consensus that the current centralised policing system is inadequate for addressing local security challenges. This debate has brought renewed attention to constitutional provisions governing policing in Nigeria.

While concerns about the potential pitfalls of state policing remain, its advantages appear increasingly compelling. Managing this transition, if it materialises, will be another critical responsibility for Disu. Ultimately, he assumes office with considerable goodwill, but his success will depend on his ability to translate promises into measurable improvements.

The success or failure of Olatunji Disu will be measured not by promises made but by results achieved. Nigerians yearn for a police force that is professional, accountable, and truly committed to their safety. If Disu can rise to this moment, confront entrenched challenges with courage, and drive meaningful reform, he will not only justify his appointment but also leave a lasting legacy in the annals of policing in Nigeria.