Niran Adedokun
Amongst many other things, the late sage said in that speech: “It is axiomatic that man can create nothing. But, by an intelligent and purposive application of the exertions of his body and mind, he can exploit natural resources to produce goods and services for immediate consumption and for capital outlay. Therefore, other things being equal, the healthier his body and the more educated his mind, the greater will be his morale and the more efficient and economical he becomes as a producer and consumer” — Obafemi Awolowo (Man is the Sole Dynamic in Nature, 1974).
Probably due to poor articulation of its objective, last week’s ministerial press briefing by Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management, and Social Investment, Sadiya Umar Farouq, left Nigerians with nothing to cheer.
At the end of the event, which was held at the Presidential Villa in Abuja, two major soundbites emerged, none of which does any credit to the understanding of the problem at hand by the minister and possibly the government she serves.
The first major gist of her briefing is that the N5,000, which the government claims to distribute to people living in extreme poverty in Nigeria, can lift these poor people out of poverty.
In answering a question on whether she truly believes this handout can bail people out of poverty, the minister waxed proud about how much the beneficiaries appreciate the money to the extent that “when you give them this N5,000, they cry and shed tears because they’ve never seen N5,000 in their lives; so, it goes a long way, it changes their status, and by that, it lifts them from one stage to another.”
When I saw the minister utter this statement on television, my heart broke. Here is a minister of a country that has pauperised the majority of its people through leadership incompetence and policy flip-flops, glorifying the failure of governance and celebrating the dehumanisation of citizens, albeit unwittingly.
If Nigerians cry for being handed the equivalent of maybe $10 a month for a family of God knows how many people, then it is not a thing that should make any government official proud. But we can even interrogate this point further as the importance of N5,000—if any—would depend on the recipients’ location.
When the minister says N5,000 changes the status of the poor, we should then ask the question: Are we mindful of the fact that Nigeria has the rural poor and the urban poor? And that the latter, in particular, are subjected to economic realities that they have no control over. Talking about the cost of fuel, electricity, water and other such elements, would N5,000 also change these people’s lives? But I digress.
The first thing that hit me was whether this lady implied that crying on the receipt of N5,000 is an indication of how it impacts on the lives of people? Does she really understand the import of poverty and the multiplier effect it has on the country? How exactly are the recipients of this money selected? Is there any difference between what the rural poor and the urban poor get from this Federal Government largesse? Is there any hint of compassion in these people who think it is elitist to suggest that N5,000 is too little to lift people out of poverty? Most importantly, I felt that the minister failed to understand the depth of the question that was thrown at her.
The issue is not so much about the sum but about the intent and structure behind its distribution. Why does the government give these families N5,000? Is it the money to feed themselves or do business? If the purpose of this transfer is subsistence, how do we equate that to lifting people out of poverty? Aside from the fact that N5,000 is insufficient to make a significant difference in Nigeria’s current economic realities, there is also the question of how it addresses poverty sustainably. For instance, any family that desires to exit the poverty club would strive to educate its children and not just the capacity to feed them in the instant. So, does this monthly stipend provide an opportunity for families to educate their children and prepare them for the future?
There is also the eternal wisdom of teaching people to fish rather than handing them fish. And in introducing this, Nigeria does not even need to reinvent the wheel. This was the idea behind the Bangladeshi Muhammad Yunus intervention when he started lending village women $27 each from his personal funds. When he discovered that these women not only returned his loans but made profits, he sought a loan from a government bank and started the Grameen Bank, a place where the poorest women had access to microcredit. What the government is currently doing does not seem to have any enduring or generational value. It looks like an attempt to alleviate today’s problem and, as is becoming the character of this government, transfer the problem to future governments!
And that brings us to the other significant point the minister made last Thursday. This is to the effect that the out-of-school children is no longer a solely northern Nigerian problem. One does not know what elicited this information, which was provided at the press event by the Coordinator of the National Social Investment Programme, Dr Umar Bindr. Still, it is doubtful that anyone has ever suggested that it was an exclusive problem of northern Nigeria. Most analysts say that the North bears the greatest burden of the malaise, which is as true today as before. Even though a significant number of out-of-school children in other parts of the country are of northern parentage, the reality is that literally every state in Nigeria now deals with this dangerous issue. Madam Minister and Mr. Coordinator should be answering what the government is doing to tackle this impending explosion of evil as part of its determination to lift 100 million Nigerians out of poverty. So, is there a nexus between our N5,000 giveaway and dealing with this scourge of out-of-school children?
Government cannot afford to see poverty eradication as an act of generosity or an instrument of political patronage. As things stand in Nigeria, it is a soul-saving strategy, with the dichotomy between the rich and poor becoming more expansive by the day. When Yunus and the Grameen Bank won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, the Norwegian Nobel Committee noted that “lasting peace cannot be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty…across cultures and civilisations…” Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that even the poorest of the poor can bring about their own development. Poverty is a factor in the increasing level of insecurity in Nigeria as much as it is critical to the increasingly diminished chance that democracy will prosper in Nigeria. The man with a hungry stomach has little or no choice but to follow the money in a democracy. This is why government’s initiatives must do a lot more than just give fish to the poor to avoid the chance of being seen as a vote-buying machine.
So, what can the government do?
The first thing is to take this initiative out of the hands of the government. Given the levels of official corruption and lack of data in Nigeria, accountability will continue to be a problem if this initiative remains with the government.
Going forward, providing compulsory and quality education for all Nigerian children, whether female or male, must be part of any poverty eradication programme. In addition, rather than dash money out for feeding, the government should consider micro-credit schemes that involve communities and co-operatives to which beneficiaries can be accountable. Healthcare delivery must also be on the front burner of a country that intends to eradicate poverty. As they say, the health of a nation is its wealth. Finally, Nigeria’s population swells up by the day without even so much as deliberate advocacy on population control. A country that is not very productive cannot continue to bring children into poverty the way Nigeria is and expect change. As Chief Obafemi Awolowo said in the quote above, we must rethink our strategy to have an enduring impact.
Twitter: @niranadedokun
