The National Social Investment Programme is perhaps one of the best known initiatives of the Muhammadu Buhari administration. It is one of its kind in Nigerian history, designed to directly assist citizens who are either vulnerable or are struggling for everyday survival. Programmes like the SIP can be as vulnerable as the citizens they are designed to rescue. It was, therefore, not a surprise when last week the Special Adviser to the President on Social Investment, Mrs. Maryam Uwais, issued a warning that saboteurs of the programmes would be prosecuted.
In a statement signed by the Communications Manager of the National Social Investments Office, Justice Bibiye, Mrs. Uwais emphasised that while the principles of transparency, accountability and probity must be the watchword of the programmes, she would work with security agencies to ensure that those found wanting would be punished.
The SIP encompasses four separate schemes: the N-Power, which helps young Nigerians in skills acquisition to enable them start their own enterprises or to be more employable; the Conditional Cash Transfers (CCT) designed to support citizens in the lowest poverty bracket; Government Enterprises and Empowerment Programme, a micro-lending scheme to assist traders, artisans, farmers, and women in particular with loans between N10,000 and N100,000 at no monthly cost to the beneficiaries. These interest-free loans are helpful at a time the interests on commercial bank loans range from 18 to 30 per cent.
The Home Grown School Feeding Programme promises a meal a day to school pupils. The scheme has a specific focus on increasing school enrollment, reducing incidents of malnutrition among children who ordinarily would be unable to eat a balanced meal a day; empowering community women as cooks and by supporting small farmers. These schemes have a great deal to commend them. The devil, as the saying goes, is always in the details. N-Power is already beset with scandals reflecting our incurable inability to tightly administer public programmes with any certainty of probity and accountability. The CCT is always problematic in terms of the qualifications for cash transfers.
How would Nigerians believe that the managers of the programme have not made a list of their relations who may not qualify. The micro-lending ought to be easy since it is a loan. But how do we ensure that it gets to all those that qualify and that the loan is not seen as a national cake? The school feeding is the most problem-prone. Even in the SIP’s description of its objectives, it is wrong to tie this scheme with school enrolment. This country has promised its children and, indeed, should provide free and universal primary education at all times. School enrollment should not be a crutch for the SIP’s school feeding. The prevention of malnutrition among these children is enough cause for the feeding. We agree with Mrs. Uwais that anyone who sabotages these programmes should be prosecuted. However, we suggest that they be fine-tuned to remove or reduce those things that mask fraud and abuse.
The money for these programmes can easily be diverted given the nature of the schemes. A great deal of cash is bound to be involved. But this programme should be a litmus test for the Buhari administration. It must endeavour to run it without the usual scandals which have already begun with N-Power. This means that a great deal of searchlight must be beamed on the SIP to ensure the transparency, accountability and probity of the schemes. A government sworn to fighting corruption must not tolerate the saboteurs in the scheme.
This means instituting checks and balances and where possible double-checking. Except the old and people with severe disability, the cash transfer should have a term limit. Programmes like the SIP are not original to Nigeria. Many countries have tried them and the nation should learn from such experiences. They are easily turned into political tools. ‘Trader-Moni’ took on such appearances during the last election season. In some cases, they are like an addiction and citizens become dependent on them.
One of the basic weaknesses of the scheme is sheer lack of facts and the unwillingness of the SIP to give out facts and figures and the individuals running the schemes. It would be advisable to give Nigerians adequate information to avoid suspicion. How many children and in which states are being fed? How much does each meal cost in each state and how many cooks are employed? What is the recovery rate of the loans? How many debts have been declared irrecoverable? The survival of the schemes depends on how well they are run.