After much dithering by the government of the day, and battering from critics, the former has finally begun its own form of social security programme, the Social Investment Programmes Conditional Cash Transfer, SIP-CCT. By the programme’s procedures, government will disburse N5,000 each to the poorest and most vulnerable members of the society. In some of the nine pilot states to test run the programme, evidence of gratitude and joy was palpable in the countenance of the beneficiaries?
Although this is belated, coming almost two years after it came to power, any form of relief in the face of biting inflation, high cost of living, abject poverty occasioned by the administration’s flip-flop economic policy is welcome.
For the rich and privileged, N5, 000 is nothing. So, many of them have faulted the concept. However, experience from other parts of the world where the World Bank model had been tried, shows that little sum can be far reaching in ameliorating the extreme poverty in which majority of Nigerian families are living. Earlier on, the government had introduced N-Power, a skill-building and acquisition initiative to make graduates between the age of 18-35 more employable; with the focus areas being health, agriculture, teaching, community service, and technology. Beneficiaries are to collect N30, 000 each for a period of two years. Well intentioned as these two flagship programmes are, there are problems associated with their implementation, sustainability and logistical nightmares.
The selection process for the CCT was done on community based targeting model of the World Bank-supported Youth Empowerment and Social Support Operation, YESSO, started by the previous administration. Laudable as both programmes are, there are fears they cannot adequately address our souring unemployment rate and pervasive poverty. There is also the question of sustainability and perhaps misplaced priority. For example, government will be spending N60B per annum on the SIP-CCT programme, when it becomes fully operational in all the 36 states of the federation. N10B can be invested in building factories based on local raw materials in each of the six geo-political zones. If each factory employs 3,000 youth, 18,000 jobs will be created plus the value chain arising therefrom. It’s a more ingenious and more enduring solution to unemployment and economic woes.
Yet, another snag in the arrangement is government is only distributing existing wealth, which is no longer adequate anyway, with the overriding aim of fulfilling a political promise. Instead of investing in laborious engagements that could create wealth and leave a legacy, the government’s new package, to say the least, is just for political correctness. Government should rather encourage the beneficiaries to come together in form of cooperatives, initiate a purposeful revolving of the money to generate more money and teach themselves how to fish, instead of waiting for manna to fall from heaven.
And there is the question of sustainability. N60B in a year is no small money for a mono-product and import dependent economy as Africa’s most populous country. Previous governments’ poverty alleviation programmes failed because, they were not structured to regenerate and corruption was inherent in the system. Sadly, this government has not departed from that way. Again the N-Power programme is expected to last only two years. What happens to beneficiaries if they fail to get jobs after two years? With no industries to absorb them, they would just return to swell the unemployment market.
In comparison with such well-thought out social welfare system in the West, we have not even started. In the UK, unemployed youth and even unemployed couples can apply for job seekers’ allowance and go into an agreement in what is referred to as ‘claimant commitment’ to indicate the steps you would take to get a job. The allowance is stopped if the job seeker does not make efforts or fails to get a job. And of course, there are other welfare programmes such as health insurance, catering for the aged etc.
In our system, one working mum or dad may have up to four dependents. This same fate may befall CCT beneficiaries who might be forced by circumstance to share the meager amount with other dependants; and then fold his arms to wait for another round of sharing. This is a lazy approach in a country where the citizenry is ready to work with their hands, earn a living and provide for themselves and their dependents if the enabling environment is there. Providing this environment is one reason why government exists and over the years, governments have failed in this respect. And this is why there are apprehensions about the SIP-CCT.
