By
Anthony Kola-Olusanya
On July 1st, 2013, the Academic Staff
Union of Universities (ASUU) embarked on an industrial strike to force the
federal government of Nigeria (FG) to implement the 2009 Agreement, which the
later had signed with the union. The agreement, which was largely about the
revitalisation of the university education system in Nigeria, is anchored on
FG’s massive fund infusion into Nigeria’s publicly funded universities (federal
and states owned).
Like previous agreements, the FG
decided it wasn’t going to honour the 2009 agreement. This decision not to
honour and respect an agreement it signed with ASUU was based on two reasons
which includes; a flimsy excuse that the Nigeria’s economy will shut down,
should the FG implement the content of the 2009 Agreement. Secondly, on the
arrogance that the FG will appear weak should it implement the agreement it had
signed with ASUU in 2009.
It is suffice to say that the FG took
this decision after it had conducted the needs assessment towards
implementation of the 2009 agreement through two separate committees like 2009
ASUU\FGN Agreement Needs Assessment Committee and ASUU\FGN 2009 Agreement
Implementation Committee. The later committee would round up its work later in
2011 with a commitment from the President and other stakeholders on the FGN
side promising that there would never be a strike in the nation’s public
universities for a long time.
While the university teacher strike was
going on, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation published its 2013 Ibrahim Index of African
Governance (IIAG) in October. Established in 2007, the IIAG is the most
comprehensive collection of quantitative data on governance in Africa. The
index is compiled in partnership with experts from a number of the continent's
institutions. It also provides an annual assessment of governance in every
African country.
The IIAG provides a framework for
citizens, governments, institutions and business to assess the delivery of
public goods and services, and policy outcomes, across Africa. The index is
classified into four categories namely; safety and rule of law; participation
and human rights; sustainable economic opportunity and human development.
Today, the IIAG is recognized as the barometer for measuring government
performance in Africa.
Overall, the index ranked Nigeria in
41st position out of 52 countries in Africa in relation to governance and
leadership in Africa. The implication of this present ranking is that Nigeria
ranked 9th when we talk about countries without good leadership and lacks good
governance. The sad point of the ranking is that many countries like Liberia,
Sierra Leone among others who are just coming out years of civil war, ranked
above Nigeria. Besides the overall ranking, Nigeria also showed poor ranking in
other specific arrears.
Within the West African sub-region, Nigeria also ranked a dismal 16th position out of 19 countries, overall in good governance and leadership. Of note is the country’s ranking in education, and human development, which are both sub-components of human resource development (HRD). Nigeria ranked 30th and scoring 49% below the African average (52.9) and lower than the regional average (52.5) for West Africa, in provision of education to its citizens.
With respects to human development,
Nigeria ranked 33rd in Africa, scoring 52.7%, a score considered lower than the
continental average (58.3) and 43.4 below than the regional average (52.5) for
West Africa respectively. Before going any further, it is instructive to note
that at the top three positions in Africa are countries Nigerians would
categorize as small nations like Mauritius (82.9%), Botswana (77.6%) and Cape
Verde (76.7%) in first, second and third position respectively. Whilst the top
three leaders at the west African sub-regional level includes Ghana (66.8%),
Senegal (61%) and the island nation of Sao Tome and Principe (59.9%). At
the bottom of the table on the continent are Somali and Chad at the
sub-regional level.
What is responsible for these
countries’ success in Africa and West Africa? Both Mauritius and Ghana cannot
and do not earn as much as Nigeria, but unlike the self-acclaimed giant
of Africa, the small African country - Mauritius education budget hovers around
13-15% of the annual budget in 2013. Ghana on her part allocated 33% of annual
budget to education during the same period.
What this suggests is that these two
countries placed huge emphasis on human capital development since only an
adequately-funded education sector can guarantee as well develop the much
needed human capital that will help transform these countries.
Sadly, Nigeria’s
2013 allocation to education is only a paltry 8% of the annual budget. In
essence, the IIAG leading ranked countries at both the continental and
sub-regional levels are doing some things which Nigeria is not doing;
especially when one considers the federal government (FG) much vaunted commitment
to ‘transformation agenda’ and the so-called vision 20:2020.
An assessment of the Mauritius economy
revealed a concrete demonstration towards national development. It is an
understatement to say that Mauritius has a strong human capital foundation
developed through consistent and equitable investment in human development. The
goal of the island country is becoming a knowledge economy.
This goal is not impossible given that
education is free and has been expanded in recent years, in order to create further
employment opportunities and ensuring inclusive growth. Return on investment in
education, shows that around 90% of entrepreneurs are Mauritian nationals, and
businesspeople had the human capital, education and knowledge needed to exploit
market opportunities. Interesting too Mauritius is one of the least corrupt
African countries.
On the contrary, the latest values of Human Development
Index (HDI) which provides a country’s measure of human capital development (in
areas such as income, health, and education) show that Nigeria is ranked 156
with the value of 0.459 among 187 countries. The value places Nigeria in the
bottom, meaning that Nigeria is considered to have low level of human
development. The comparative value for Sub-Saharan Africa is 0.475 and 0.694
for the world average and this places Nigeria a little below the continental
average with an HDI of 0.471.
Comparatively, two issues among others
speak to Nigeria’s dismal overall performance on the continent and in the
sectional areas of education and human development in this year’s IIAG
rankings. One is the lukewarm posture of the FG lip service to educational
development. Second is the gross underfunding of the educational sector.
These two issues underscores our poor
performance even areas in which Nigeria is noted to be doing well in
forty–fifty years ago. As well, both issues are directly linked to the ongoing
ASUU strike which is about to enter the sixth month. Another pointer to this
dismal performance is that no serious country desirous of meeting its
developmental goals don’t allow its university teachers to go on strike to
pressure government to do what governments in other sister African countries do
without pressure or prompting of any union.
A search through the internet failed to
reveal any strike action by the university teachers in the IIAG top countries
on the continent. In the West Africa sub-region for example, the university
teachers across Ghana on Monday, August 1, 2013, embarked on a nationwide
industrial action to protest unpaid market premium.
The notice of strike served
on the Ghanaian government prompted an emergency meeting of the Fair Wages and
Salaries Commission (FWSC) was called in order to avert the strike.
In addition, the deputy minister in
charge of tertiary education, Okudzeto Ablakwa would later assure university
teachers their outstanding premiums will be settled. The strike action was
resolved within a few days. What we see in this approach and prompt response by
Ghanaian authorities when compared to Nigeria’s is an example of good
governance and leadership. Little wonder Ghana is attracting students from all
over the world including Nigeria to her universities.
Meanwhile, rather than provide
leadership by either preventing or resolving the strike, FG has continued to
play the roulette game with future of the teeming youths in public universities
across the country. Instead of addressing the issues of non-implementation of
2009 agreement it signed with university teachers’ union, the federal
government has continued to behave like the proverbial ostrich that buries its
head in the sand by pretending that all is well with the public universities
system. Although, President Jonathan in November had personally intervened in
the fifth month of the strike, events following the meeting with ASUU have
further exposed FG’s unwillingness to respect and be bounded by its own
proposal.
At this juncture, it is necessary for
the FG and President Jonathan to know that Nigeria didn’t get this all-time low
in one year. The crisis of the educational sector, vis a vis university
education and by implication human development occurred as a result of the
decades of neglect, massive funding cuts as well as gross under-funding has
been with us for many decades.
The same way, I would like to note that
Mauritius, Botswana and Cape Verde did not just appear as African top three
countries, but after years of serious planning and commitment towards
greatness.
President Jonathan needs to be aware
that sacking all university teachers in one day does not portray him and his
regime in good light. Indeed, for a government who is laying claim to a
transformation agenda built on the back of the vision 20: 2020, mass sacking of
university teachers will not only deny Nigeria the much needed human capital,
his transformation agenda and vision 20:2020 will also suffer monumentally.
So rather than waste time sacking the
university teachers, the federal government and President Jonathan need to be
concerned about how to improve Nigeria’s position on the IIAG from 2014 and
beyond. The FG need to stand up and confront the monster called under-funding
that has reduced the once enviable Nigeria’s public universities to a shadow of
itself by huge funds towards the revitalization of universities. Doing this, will
lead to cascade of gains for the country, for which the FG and indeed President
Jonathan can celebrate.
Chief among the gains will be
brain-gain for the universities. Furthermore, Nigerian universities will become
the place to go for Nigerian youths who are daily leaving the country for study
abroad never to return and the nation would have saved the best for human
resource for the country. In addition, foreign students will also return
to Nigerian universities with the educational sector reaping some foreign
exchange from the international students.
I have concentrated on the educational
sector and indirectly university education because of the multiplier effect of
such benefits investment for any country desirous of growth and indeed
greatness. The successes and gains of investing in education including
universities would naturally reverberate through the whole system in
unimaginable ways. Finally, I urge President Jonathan to sit again with ASUU
and resolve this crisis once and for all.
Mr. President Sir, ASUU’s demands
which includes adequate funding to revitalize the university system,
progressive increase of budgetary allocations to the education sector to 26 per
cent, transfer of Federal Government property to universities, setting up of
research and development units by companies are strategic to Nigeria’s growth
and development.
Therefore, there can be no other alternative than to
resolve this lingering crisis, except you, Mr. President, and indeed your
entire administration is satisfied with Nigeria’s continued ranking among the
lowly performing governments of the world.
Anthony Kola-Olusanya is a teacher and
citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
No comments:
Post a Comment