Editorial

SIP: Time For Forensic Audit

Published

6 years ago

April 17, 2020

Recently, the leadership of the National Assembly (NASS) blew the lid off the Social Investment Programme (SIP) of the Federal Government when it faulted the way the programme was being implemented and called for an enabling legislation in line with global best practices, particularly with respect to the disbursement aimed at assuaging the plight of poor Nigerians against COVID-19.
According to its leadership, NASS noted that “The SIP has gulped over N2 trillion since 2016 when the special intervention fund was created as annual budgetary allocation targeted at the poor. The sum of N500 billion was provided in the budget every year since 2016. Also, in the wobbly 2020 budget, the sum of N500 billion was voted for the SIP, unfortunately, the conditions set by officials most times excluded poor Nigerians for which the initiative is intended.”
Making their reservations about the scheme at a meeting with the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development, Hajia Sadiya Umar Farouq, and top officials of the ministry, President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila, made it clear that the SIP established in 2016 under the Presidency but which is now under the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, needed a reform to make it more efficient and effective.
But in a swift response, the Presidency debunked the claim attributed to the Senate President and Speaker of House of Representatives that N2 trillion had been expended on the National Social Investment Programmes (NSIPs) of the Buhari administration and tried to give hints on why the programme was being attacked by lawmakers.
Explaining further on the allegations, the Special Adviser to the President on Social Investments, Mrs. Maryam Uwais, in a statement claimed that although the total appropriation by NASS from inception, for the 4 NSIPs, is N1.7 trillion, the actual funds released for the NSIPs between January 2016 and October 2019 (when the NSIPs were handed over to the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development), amounted to N619.1 billion, constituting 36.4% of the total appropriation from the NASS.
According to her, “The monies released for the N-SIPs can be further broken down into 14.03% (2016); 35% in 2017; 43.5% in 2018 and 57.8% (as at Sept 2019) of the N500 billion in 2016 and N400 billion appropriated for the subsequent years. It should be noted that for 2017 to 2020, the sum of N100 billion was appropriated specifically for the National Housing Fund hosted by the Federal Ministry of Finance.
“The National Cash Transfer Programme (including the development of the National Social Register by the National Social Safety Net Coordination Office) 1,491,296 poor and vulnerable households comprising 6,056,872 individuals in 33 States and 620,947 cash transfer beneficiaries; and the Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (managed by the Bank of Industry); a total of 2,279,380 TraderMoni, MarketMoni and FarmerMoni beneficiaries.” Uwais said her response was to set the records straight and clear the misrepresentations created by the comments attributed to the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Without prejudice to the claims made by the Presidency in defence of the allegation of the NASS leadership, The Tide is of the view that the Federal Government under President Muhammadu Buhari has finally demonstrated that its Social Investment Programmes (SIPs) have failed. This is evident in the slashing of allocation to the SIPs by a massive 94 per cent in the proposed 2020 budget. It will be recalled that the projects had been the flagship of the Federal Government’s claim to be a progressive government, a government which cares for the poorest of the poor. Indeed, the government had presented them consistently as evidence that it is committed to ensuring inclusive and equitable sharing of economic prosperity.
Regrettably, for over three years, the government has claimed that they are the largest social protection programme in Nigeria’s history supposedly to be massive empowerment programmes designed to meet the needs of poor and vulnerable Nigerians. The government claimed that it had directly provided employment, supported small businesses and alleviated poverty through the SIP’s four main projects, namely: N-Power, Conditional Cash Transfers, National Home-Grown School Feeding, and Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programmes (GEEP).
The cash transfer and school feeding programmes sought to promote school enrolment and reduce absenteeism in school or promote health through immunizations. Unfortunately, they never went beyond the pilot stage in the states. What is more, the government’s enterprise and empowerment scheme became notorious for the ‘Tradermoni’ initiative which saw Vice President Yemi Osinbajo visiting local markets and sharing money to select traders during the election season. Not a few considered it a form of vote buying.
In spite of the limited coverage, problems of wrong targeting and leakage issues, we doubt that the programmes have been beneficial to the disadvantaged Nigerians who have had the opportunity to participate in them. Indeed, in many countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia, such intervention programmes have been used to break the vicious circle of poverty and improve the productivity of the poor. Nigerians expect the government to strengthen and expand the roll out of the programmes, given the increasing level of poverty in the country.
Indeed, a study by the Brookings Institution showed that Nigeria overtook India as the poverty capital of the world last year. While the number of Nigerians falling into extreme poverty grows by roughly six people every minute, poverty in India continues to decrease. At present, an estimated 5.3 per cent of Indians or 71.5 million people live below the poverty line. The World Poverty Clock puts the number of Nigerians below the poverty line at 91.9 million.
While we sympathise with the government that the SIPs have not delivered as promised, we think the solution is to institute a forensic audit to ascertain the actual amount sunk into the programme since inception and its level of impact on poor Nigerians. From every indication, it is clear that the whole scheme was not properly conceived and the programmes have been riddled with corruption.
As Maryam Uwais, the special adviser to the president, noted, 80 per cent of payments for social investments have come from the looted funds recovered from former Head of State, Sani Abacha. The remaining 20 per cent came from credit from the World Bank. The forensic audit should address all these issues. Social protection for the vulnerable is a must for any government that aspires to decent citizenship and inclusive growth and development.

Editorial

FG’s LIN Policy: The Missing Link

Published

2 days 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.