Connect with us

Opinion

Education,ASUU And The Globalist Agenda (I)

Published

on

Professor Lukman Diso

 

L. I. Diso
BUK

When William Saint, the World Bank Education Consultant, came to Bayero University, Kano in 1999/2000, he hadn’t had the slightest idea that ASUU was ready for him. He was shocked by the level of mobilization and the ambush set to give him the terrifying welcome. The naive mindset people on such missions usually have about Africans being complacent, or having short memory and lacking a sense of history, was clearly visible in his mien. The apparent sudden realization that, contrary to his expectation, ASUU seemed to know the agenda they had been implementing in the last three decades (1970s, 1980s & 1990s), was, perhaps, what terrified him the more.

Let us take a short trip through these decades to see the picture that provides the logical context to this discussion. We shall return to Mr Saint to see who he was, what his mission in Nigeria was, how he planned to accomplish the mission, his encounter with ASUU at Bayero University, Kano, and part of his report recommendations to the World Bank.

All these may help to unravel the critical questions of why education has been systematically accorded diminishing national priority, and its role in Nigeria’s national development been consistently receding in the last 60 years. They would also help to deepen our insights into the trajectory that has shaped ASUU’s evolution and its struggles through the decades. Arising from all this may be the temptation to raise and tackle the following questions:
– Why has ASUU, of all the education stakeholders, decided to be the only consistent defender of education in Nigeria?
– Why do different Nigerian governments invariably respond to education crisis in the same pattern?
– What are the implications of government’s brazen hostility to education and the intermittent disruptions that follow as a consequence?
– What lessons could be learnt from ASUU’s consistent struggles for decades?

ASUU Strike And Posterity-Ameer Abdul Aziz

The 1960s, the decade of Nigeria’s independence, was afflicted with crippling political crisis, so turbulent that the new nation was shaken to its very roots. Whether it was an inevitable corollary of colonial vestiges that characterized such emerging nations, education, especially university education, seemed to remain relatively insulated, and as robust as it was anywhere in the world. The university teaching and learning environment, infrastructure and facilities were of high standard and comparably as good as anywhere in Europe and North America. Conditions of service were equally good and attractive. Staffing policy, in terms of staff-students ratio and staff mix, was based on best-practice standards, which produced a cosmopolitan environment and a vibrant academic culture necessary for university to thrive.
Therefore, the need for coming together as a body to represent the academics was not felt until 1965 when the Association for University Teachers (AUT) was formed. AUT was not political. It was formed to cater only for the welfare of the academics. Other variables that define university seemed to have been taken for granted.

However, in the decade of prosperity and consolidation, as the 1970s were referred to, Nigerian Universities began to slide gradually, at the beginning, as the military consolidated their firm grips on the country. Suddenly, though consciously, as if jinxed to a morgaged future, Nigeria decided to embrace a policy that marked the beginning of the cascading crisis that has bedevilled education, particularly university education, to this day, and likely, to a distant future. AUT protested to the extent of a strike to press for the Government to address the deteriorating conditions of education – teaching and learning, and welfare of staff and students.

However, the Gowon Military Government responded ruthlessly and crushed the strike. That experience served as an eye opener for the academics, and they moved to change the dynamics.

Despite the relative obscurity of the policy’s source and contents, it triggered a warning from concerned visionary and farsighted Nigerian citizens, scholars and the ASUU, which was formed in 1978 from the National Association of University Teachers (NAUT). They warned that the policy was clearly meant to serve the master and to rule over the target with all ruthlessness, to forcefully impose its contents, and ultimately emasculate the university system and education in general. However, as the decade was largely characterized by military culture, and the government, itself remotely manipulated by the same forces that had designed the policy, the warning was ignored. This explains why Obasanjo Military Regime witnessed a lot of crises in the education sector.

The NPN civilian government under Shagari (1979-1983) was a bit cautious towards university education, although there were largely unsuccessful attempts to violate university autonomy in order to implement the same surreptitious agenda. ASUU’s spirited resistance thwarted the implementation of the agenda. As the dogged struggle deepened, the first agreement that gave the academic staff the USS scale with 20% differential relative to civil service scale, was signed in 1982.

Advert

The deepening contradictions in the Shagari Civilian administration provided the excuse that brought Buhari/Idiagbon military regime (Dec.1983- Aug. 1985) in a bloodless coup D’tat. Immediately they settled the military authoritarian culture began to manifest: the repressive policy mills were hastily deployed to launch a direct assault on the University and draconian decrees arbitrarily manufactured. Under this regime, the University was subjected to a torrent of attacks including:
– Termination of university cafetaria services
– Withdrawal of subsidies on accommodation in universities
– Workers retrenchment and wage freeze
– Transfer of university senate’s powers to NUC through Decree 16 of 1985
– Workers retrenchment and wage freeze
ASUU never relented in its strong resistence to these authoritarian policies despite all the harrassment and intimidation the union faced as a consequence.
The palace coup that toppled Buhari and brought Ibrahim Bodamasi Babangida (IBB) regime (1985 – 1993) was a continuation of the military and their repressive anti-intellectual culture. IBB regime never pretended that it was there to serve interests other than Nigerians’. Shortly after settling, the regime dropped the bombshell, unveiling a World Bank/IMF-packaged economic policy with fanatical determination to implement. While the regime initiated a national debate as to whether or not to take the IMF loan, it contemptuously ignored the process and silently took the loan with all the conditionalities before the public final verdict (a clearly overwhelming rejection). Nigerians were shocked by the regime’s stunning insensitivity in this reckless disregard for the far reaching and devastating socio-economic and political implications of this action.
ASUU became the intellectual light, in the forefront leading the resistance movement, providing an incisive critique of the regime’s economic policy and presenting simplefied but thorough analysis of the policy’s implications. The duo of ASUU and the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), the former being an affiliate of the latter, became the most consistent and vocal critics of the policy, vigorously mobilizing the nation with the dogged insistence, to force the government to reverse its decision. As the government intentensified the commitment to the ruthless implementation of this anti-people economic policy, ASUU, NLC, NANS and other pro-people organizations turned the situation into a season of revolutionary activities: intellectually scathing public lectures and production of mobilizational publications to galvanize public opinion against government’s submission to the oppressive policy.
Sensing the massive public support and reaction and the obvious likely consequences, the IBB Regime bared its fangs, unleashing all the repressive instruments at their disposal. Barely one year into IBB’s tenure, the Regime started the full implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) as a package of the IMF conditionalities. NLC, ASUU and NANS started to organize mass protest. NANS, using the Commemoration Day of “Ali-Must- GO”, staged a mass protest, in which many students were shot and killed in ABU, Zaria. The Government’s crackdown was widened and started in full swing:
– Arbitrary arrest of NLC leaders and “bombardment” of NLC offices started across Nigeria
– Plans to Weaken ASUU were hastily hatched and implemented
(1) ASUU was de-affiliated from the NLC by Decree 16 of 1986
(2) Payment of check off dues was made voluntary for ASUU and NANS
(3)The Abisoye Panel set up on ABU Crisis recommended sacking of lecturers for “…not teaching what they were paid to teach”
– A Year later (1987) UniBen VC, Prof. Grace Alele Williams, acting on the contrived report of visitation panel, announced the sack of ASUU President, Dr.Festus Iyayi, from the University. (ASUU Leadership Training Manual 2017).
By the time Dr Attahiru M Jega (Dr Iyayi’s Vice-President) was elected ASUU President in an early NDC in 1988, the IBB regime, following the World Bank Agenda, had added more to the list of its atrocities. In fact, a reign of terror was unleashed:
– Government’s plans to retrench lecturers and rationalize courses had already reached advanced stages
– Dr. Patrick Wilmot (ABU, Zaria), a Scholar and vocal critic of Western imperialism, and Ms. Firinne N.C. Adelugba (BUK) had been covertly abducted and deported from Nigeria
– Government was blatant in its refusal to implement the earlier negotiated EUSS (Elongated University Salary Structure)
– As fuel prices were hiked by the Regime, students protested and the Government responded with massive crackdown on their leadership and on other activists across the country
– NLC was summarily dissolved and sole administrator appointed. (ASUU Leadership Training Manual 2017)
These constituted Dr Jega’s immediate challenges as the new ASUU President, and his EXCO set out to confront them head on. They formed Joint Action Committee (JAC) with the Senior Staff Association of University Teaching Hospital, Research Institutes and Allied Institutions (SSAUTHRIAI) to present a united front. JAC submitted its demands to Government, which were expectedly shunned. Joint strike commenced nationwide on July 1, 1988. Curiously, only ASUU was immediately banned. The leadership of SSAUTHRIAI immediately capitulated, dissociated itself from the JAC and called off the strike. ASUU continued with the strike under University Lecturers’ Association (ULA). Government immediately launched a crackdown on national and local leadership of ASUU. Drs Jega, Iyayi, and other national officers were arrested and taken to unknown location (which was later learnt to be Lagos) for over a month. Many branch chairmen, secretaries and activists of the Union were arrested across the nation. Yet, the declared strike was kept alive by, more or less, leaderless members; it lingered for sometime, but finally fizzled out unofficially.
Signature campaigns for the release of all the arrested ASUU leaders and members were initiated nationwide. A legal action was instituted in Kano High Court for their freedom. A day to the verdict, Dr Jega was produced and presented to the court; and all others were released. Case closed, but ASUU remained officially banned (1988-1990). Despite this situation, academics never ceased to organize. They continued to network and organize under different names. It was remarkable, given the circumstances, to be able to stop the World Bank University Sector Loan Facility and consequential staff rationalization. The Loan Facility was carefully packaged to sow the seed for Nigerian University System Innovation Project (NUSIP), which popped up later as Obasanjo Administration’s initiative.
The occurrance of an interesting coincidence in 1990 helped to expose the desperation of the IBB regime to implement the IMF/World Bank policies. A day after the Association of University Teachers (AUT) – name adopted by the banned ASUU – had held a National Conference on the World Bank in OAU, Ile-Ife, the Orka Coup took place, April 22, 1990. In his coup speech, Major Gideon Orkar made apparently innocuous reference to the prevalent repressive tendencies of IBB and his Government. He adduced three reasons for the coup, part of which included:
“(d) The intent to cow the students by the promulgation of the draconian Decree Number 47.
(e) The cowing of the university teaching and non-teaching staff by an intended massive purge, using the 150 million dollar loan as the necessitating factor.”
Given the contemporary issues against which the ASUU, NLC and students were consistently united, and that which informed the core of their struggles against the government, it was easy for a sensitive government like IBB’s to perceive a connection between the coup and the conference. Hence, the conferene organizers, Prof. Omotoye Olorode and Dr. Idowu Awopetu (ASUU National Treasurer) were immediately arrested and detained as alledged coup suspects.They were subjected to military trials (Court Martial) but were found innocent and released. Yet, they were compulsorily retired “in public interest”. They were reinstated by the court when Prof. Aliu Babatunde Fafunwa became Education Minister.
After a long spell of unease between the Government and AUT (the former still defiant to address ASUU’s demands), September 1990 became a new dawn for ASUU as it was deproscribed. ASUU intensified its demand for collective bargaining – to negotiate the conditions of service and other work-related issues for its members. The IBB Gvernment remained adamant and invariably hostile whenever ASUU made attempt to push its demands, until May 1992, when Dr Jega was reelected President. After several failed efforts to get the Government to start negotiation, ASUU commenced the suspended strike. However, as if that was the Greenhouse conditions desperately needed, the Government readily submitted to start negotiation as the strike subsisted. What an irony! No sooner had the negotiation commenced than it was unilaterally suspended by the Government! ASUU had no option than to commence the strike.
On May 25, the strike commenced, but had to be suspended on May 30 as Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP) stepped in. That marked the beginning of a series of crowded activities as ASUU responded to every Government move to arm-twist its way. ASUU continued to checkmate the Government’s unsavory litiny of absurdities until one by one they reached their climax and crumbled with a bang. Follow the labyrinth of tragicomedy of industrial relations as it unfolded:
– On June 1, the IAP found Dr Jega guilty of contempt of court, but the judge, apparently considering the weighty political implications, decided to waive it.
– On July 20, with Government irresponsibilty, ASUU had to commence the strike
– On July 22, ASUU was banned again, but the strike continued under Academic Staff of Nigerian Universities (ASNU)
– The situation remained until the Government was forced to negotiate through a committee it constituted
– On September 3, 1992, the two parties reached an agreement on Funding, Conditions of Service [with University Academic Salary Scale (UASS)], and Autonomy and Academic Freedom
– On September 4, the 4-month old strike was suspended and academic activities commenced.
Immediately the Agreement was signed, other university workers were instigated to ask for “parity”, insisting that whatever was given to ASUU must be given to them. Even some of their members reasoned and questioned the basis of their leaders’ claims to parity, pointing out that they had been part of JAC when the struggle had begun, but unilaterally decided to ditch the JAC, capitulated and called off the strike when the chips were down. With our union preserved and intact, and without any collectively bargained agreement, what justification do we have to claim parity? – these SSANU members rationally queried.
However, as implementation of the ASUU Agreement commenced SSANU intensified its parity demand, which led to another round of the “Theatre of the Absurd”. The new vicious cycle started with the appointment of Professor Ben Nwabueze as Secretary (Minister) of Education. He contrived a new concept of “the Agreement of Imperfect Obligation”, meaning that the FG/ASUU Agreement was not (legally) binding on the Government to implement. He therefore directed universities to stop implementing the UASS/USS. Without any provocation, Prof Nwabueze continued his vicious attacks on ASUU with systematic breaches of the Agreement. It was obvious that he was deployed to do the hatchet job, and he was certainly doing it with utmost efficiency. ASUU’s voice of protest was drowned in a wirlwind of blackmail and intimidation. Its persistent demand to stop the breaches of the Agreement came up against a brick wall. With most aspects of the Agreement rolled back and no sign of de-escalating the breaches, ASUU had no option other than to take action.
– ASUU resumed the strike on May 3, 1993, and all member universities joined
– Three days later, the Government announced the dismissal of all striking lecturers and salary stoppage
– A Decree making teaching essential service, retroactively prohibiting teachers from going on strike, was enacted
– All lecturers on strike were given sack letters
– In some campuses, lecturers were ejected from their houses, despite the argument that residency of campus quarters was governed by the rental law.
– A particular case of UniAbuja Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Isa Muhammed, was pathetic. He went to the extent of sending the estate staff to tear off the roofs of lecturers’ houses, and then the security personnel to eject them.
– Even after the reinstatement of all lecturers later, Prof. Isa Muhammed refused to reinstate the EXCO of UniAbuja.

(TO BE CONTINUED…..)

Opinion

IDP Is More Than A Humanitarian Case-Ekanem Joan

Published

on

 

 

By
EKANEM JOAN

When discussions about Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) arise, attention often turns to numbers and relief packages. Yet behind every statistic is a family that has lost a home, a child whose education has been disrupted, and a community torn apart by conflict. While compensation may replace damaged structures, it cannot restore the memories, dignity, and sense of belonging that displacement takes away.

Recompensation does not make it fine; How do you compensate a child staring at the fire and iron as it takes their lands, while uniforms hang up in a room? How do you price the memory of a mother who once called these lands home. She cuddled her children and the savoury flavour of meals each smiles on her family’s faces, or, the men who spent decades building a life, a family, a shelter, only to watch unconventional disasters take it away. The youths! With their lives sketched on a rough map, all gone – indefinitely. IDPs are just victims of a conflict or a humanitarian crisis waiting to be part of a scheme but humans with lives.

Nigeria is transitioning into durable solutions and we must remind the policy makers that a house is not merely a structure to be replaced but a sanctuary that has been entirely erased, some are memories. These compensations do not weigh the emotional fabric of what has been torn away. At first, it was a crisis to put an end to but then the plan changed, by the end of year 2023, statistics recorded by United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to about 1.1 million IDPs (approximately 1,134,828 persons) with 50.3% below 18 years old and 49.7% above 18 years old. The same year saw 81.2% Boko Haram insurgency, 1.6% banditry and 16.2% herder clashes. This crisis was most prominent in the North-West region. The issue was worsening, leading to a humanitarian disaster and as the years grew the IDP numbers rose to 3.5 million persons.

Advert

This rise in persons is alarming. An increase of 2.4 million estimated is not fine. Compensation is not enough! as the number of internally displaced persons increased the government shifted its focus from protection and curbing the disaster to putting infrastructure in place. These infrastructures included the 2025 financial injection and the African Union Convention for Protection and Assistance of IDPs into law to provide food and shelter (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees). The policy makers have decided to place these infrastructures but numbers alone cannot capture the true weight of internal displacement. Statistics do not feel hunger, do not grieve the sudden loss of an ancestral home, and do not carry the psychological weight of an uncertain tomorrow.

The last IDP count done in 2026 by United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees shows total displaced persons as over 3.7 million. The causes still remain armed insurgency, farmer-herder conflicts, banditry and climate change across the affected regions including the North-East, Middle Belt and North-West (Borno, Zamfara, Sokoto and Benue).
87% of the IDPs live below the international poverty line and 60% face high levels of food insecurity, close to decades of displacement leads to limited access to healthcare and schooling. How do we fight a problem without digging out its roots. Across Nigeria millions of Nigerians have lost their land, homes and monuments of memories because of armed conflicts, terrorism, communal clashes, flooding and other disasters.
This does not end in loss of structures but lives too. Imagine a mother who carried a child for 9 months – nurtured and bred, that child wasted! or a father who struggled to give a child all that is needed to watch his own flesh and blood lay on the floor, lifeless.

Displacement hits the most vulnerable demographics hardest. Children are exposed to interrupted education and emotional distress or what about gender-based violence? The uncertainty and emotional weight of being displaced in your own country, your own land.

The Government must address the security gap. There must be increased, professionalized, and transparent security presence in vulnerable regions to prevent the “unconventional disasters” that turn citizens into refugees in their own country. Banditry and herder-farmer clashes are often hyper-local. Success requires empowering local traditional leaders, civil society, and grassroots peace committees to mediate disputes before they escalate into armed conflict.

As the policy makes provision for emergency food, clean water and canvas tents. Yet we know that the deepest wounds of displacement are ones that don’t bleed. Displacement is not just a change of address; it is a sudden, violent fracturing of life, identity and dignity. It is the theft of a person’s yesterday and the total blinding of their tomorrow. The approach is shifting from short term “crisis management” to long term poverty reduction and healing but our main focus should be the roots – reduce or eradicate banditry, set infrastructure to settle communal crisis and provide resources for all citizens, it is not just about moving the CSR to invest in vocational rehabilitation but removing the cause for a better Nigeria.
Fight for IDP and fight for a better Nigeria! It could be you and it could be I. Together we fix this humanitarian crisis.

EKANEM JOAN
200LVL STUDENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION, UNIVERSITY OF ABUJA.
1ST JULY, 2026.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Arewa Media Summit:A Political Jamboree-Tijjani Sarki 

Published

on

 

By Tijjani Sarki

The recently concluded Arewa Media Summit in Kano was presented as a platform to redefine the role of the media in Northern Nigeria. From my observation, however, it fell short of the expectations of a summit and looked more like a political jomboree than a strategic forum for regional renewal.

A summit that claims to speak for Arewa should reflect the diversity of the region’s media ecosystem by bringing together journalists, editors, broadcasters, communication strategists, digital influencers, academics, policymakers and development partners. My observation is that many of these critical voices were either missing or insufficiently represented, giving the event the appearance of a gathering of familiar faces rather than the North’s broad media constituency.

Another observation is that no communiqué or clear resolutions emerged in the public domain after the event. If a summit ends without publicly outlining its decisions, implementation framework or policy direction, it becomes difficult to measure its value beyond the speeches and photographs.

Advert

I also observed concerns that the Honourable Commissioners of Information and Internal Affairs from the Northern states, particularly Kano State’s Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya the host state, were not visibly integrated into the programme. If that perception is accurate, it represents a missed opportunity to build a truly inclusive regional media agenda.

Politically, this was also a missed opportunity to provide an inclusive platform for constructive engagement on national issues, including the policies of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. Genuine dialogue requires broad participation, not selective representation.

Arewa deserves a media summit defined by vision, inclusiveness, measurable outcomes and institutional credibility, not by optics alone. Until those elements become evident, many will continue to question whether the gathering advanced the North’s aspirations or merely added another event to the calendar.

Tijjani Sarki
Good Governance Advocate and Public Policy Analyst
Can be reach via responsivecitizensinitiative@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Allocations Triple, Yet Hardship Deepens Across Nigeria

Published

on

 

Despite a dramatic increase in federal allocations to states and local governments in recent years, millions of Nigerians continue to grapple with worsening poverty, inflation and a declining standard of living.

Across markets, offices, motor parks and homes, many citizens say the rising government revenues have done little to improve their daily realities. While states now receive significantly higher allocations through the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), families are struggling to afford food, transportation, housing and healthcare.

The growing concern has raised questions about how public funds are being managed and whether the benefits of economic reforms are reaching ordinary Nigerians.

The Rise In FAAC Allocations

Over the years, allocations from the Federation Account have steadily increased. In May 2022, FAAC shared N680.78 billion among the three tiers of government, representing a 6.94 per cent increase over the previous month. By July 2022, the amount had risen to N954.1 billion, while N990.19 billion was shared in December 2022.

The trend continued after the removal of fuel subsidy and the floating of the naira in May 2023. According to available data, the 36 states collectively received N3.35 trillion in 2022. By 2025, that figure had increased to N8.19 trillion, nearly tripling within three years.

Several states recorded substantial increases:

– Kano State: N99.31 billion in 2022 to N279.69 billion in 2025-

– Lagos State: N161.29 billion to N531.51 billion

– Taraba State: N51.74 billion to N157.56 billion

– Zamfara State: N56.62 billion to N167.20 billion

– Kogi State: N60.78 billion to N176.24 billion

– Akwa Ibom State: N314.18 billion to N497.98 billion

In March 2026 alone, FAAC distributed N2.04 trillion among the federal, state and local governments, reflecting a further increase in government revenue.

Analysts attribute the growth to tax reforms, improved revenue collection by agencies such as the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), higher crude oil earnings and policy changes directing more revenue into the Federation Account.

A Different Reality for Nigerians

While government revenues continue to rise, many Nigerians say their living conditions are moving in the opposite direction.

In Kano, civil servant Musa Abdullahi says his monthly salary can no longer sustain his family.

“Food prices have doubled. We hear that allocations are increasing, but we are not seeing the impact in our daily lives,” he said.

Advert

For traders, the story is much the same. Zainab Sani, a petty trader, said customers now buy less because household incomes have been stretched beyond their limits.

In Lagos, many families have been forced to make difficult adjustments. Dayo Oluwa, a resident, explained that items such as meat and fish have become luxury goods in many homes.

“Before, N2,000 could cook a decent pot of stew. Today, even N5,000 may not be enough,” she said.

Workers say transportation costs have also become unbearable. Some civil servants now limit their movement or seek additional jobs just to meet their basic needs.

In Kogi State, several workers have reportedly taken up commercial transportation, farming and small-scale businesses to supplement their incomes. Similar stories have emerged from Taraba, Zamfara and Akwa Ibom states, where residents describe an economy that continues to squeeze the average citizen.

Poverty Amid Rising Revenue

The contradiction between increasing government revenue and growing hardship has become one of Nigeria’s most pressing economic concerns.

According to the World Bank, about 140 million Nigerians were living in poverty by 2025, representing approximately 63 per cent of the population. Earlier reports by the National Bureau of Statistics also showed that millions of Nigerians lacked adequate access to food, healthcare and decent housing.

Economic experts argue that while subsidy removal boosted government earnings, inflation and currency depreciation have significantly weakened the purchasing power of citizens.

As prices continue to rise, salary increases and government interventions have struggled to keep pace with the cost of living.

The Accountability Question

The increase in allocations has also renewed calls for transparency and accountability.

Experts insist that the issue is no longer about whether governments have enough money, but whether those resources are being effectively utilised.

Development economists have repeatedly argued that increased revenue should result in better roads, improved healthcare services, stronger educational systems, job creation and targeted support for vulnerable populations.

Civil society groups have also urged citizens to take a greater interest in how public funds are spent. They argue that taxpayers have a right to know how government revenues are allocated and utilised.

The editorial position expressed by several policy analysts is clear: rising allocations should not merely exist as figures on paper; they should translate into measurable improvements in people’s lives.

Beyond the Numbers

The growing FAAC allocations represent a positive development for Nigeria’s public finances. They demonstrate that revenue generation has improved and that the country is gradually diversifying beyond its traditional dependence on oil earnings.

However, for millions of Nigerians struggling to afford daily necessities, the true measure of success is not how much money enters government accounts, but how effectively those funds improve the quality of life of citizens.

As governments continue to receive larger allocations, expectations will continue to rise. Nigerians increasingly want evidence that public resources are being invested in meaningful development, economic opportunities and social welfare.

Until the benefits of rising revenues are reflected in households, communities and businesses across the country, many citizens will continue to ask the same question: if government allocations are increasing, why is life becoming more difficult?

Written By: Mfe Mesuur Perpetual (Abuja),
200 level student of Development and strategic communication, University of Abuja.

Continue Reading

Trending