QUINTESSENTIALLY, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
which was created by the UN-General Assembly on 11 December
1946, to provide succours to underprivileged children and
mothers originally in countries devastated by World War II, is
extensively, in its characteristic interventions making headway,
touching more lives.
A two-day media dialogue on Educate-A-Child (EAC) Cash Transfer
Programme in Birnin-Kebbi, Kebbi State on 8-9 April, 2019
unwittingly, exposed extreme wickedness, exploitation and egotism
of the ruling class against the people. Steve J. Stowell notably
said, “Great leaders find ways to connect with their people and
help them fulfill their potential.”
An exploratory field-trip by about 40 journalists representing a
diverse range of frontline media outlets in the country alongside
related government agencies particularly Federal Ministry of
Information and Culture, and Federal Ministry of Education, which
climaxed the summit compellingly, raised critical questions for
political leaders vis-à-vis future of the society. In brief, is
democracy pragmatically, a representative government or abysmally,
survival-of-the-fittest scheme?
However, a question that may curiously, reasonably come from
officious bystanders is; why the Cash Transfer Programme (CTP)?
Could an arm of the UN still be dishing out cash in 21st
century for effectual economic empowerment? And if affirmative, to
what extent can such initiative go considering that in a society
like Nigeria, majority lives below average? And how much can the
global agency afford for a significant impact to its beneficiaries?
Remember, in 2018, a report by Brookings Institution had
pigeonholed Nigeria as the nation with the highest number of
extremely poor people. Factual or otherwise; a story for another
day. However, the bottom line is – the polity direly calls for
strategic synergic interventions.
An American labour leader, attorney and President of the 1.7
million-member American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, which
represents teachers; paraprofessionals and school-related
personnel, Randi Weingarten, once said, “A rich, robust,
well-resourced public education is one of the best routes out of
poverty and a pathway to prosperity”. Then again, former UN scribe,
Kofi Annan on one occasion said, “Extreme poverty anywhere is a
threat to human security everywhere”. By these remarks, the concept
of UNICEF-CTP is largely buttressed.
Thus, the CTP is strategically aimed at decisively fighting
poverty by means of promoting child-education in the society. By
this, UNICEF provides stipends primarily to encourage
underprivileged mothers to enroll their children in schools. As
designed, mothers are encouraged to utilize the funds for petty
businesses, and then cater for their children’s needs from the
proceeds. In other words, UNICEF sagaciously, conscientiously
targets killing two birds with a stone; boosting child-education
and then, family empowerment by making idle and underprivileged
mothers become economically active for family’s sustenance.
Arguably, President Muhammadu Buhari’s innovative policy on
child-education synchronically complements the UNICEF
Educate-A-Child initiative. For example, while UNICEF-CTP
encourages mothers to enroll their children in schools alongside
provides supports for basic school needs, Buhari’s
School-Feeding-Programme on the other hand, convivially boosts
pupils’ interests vis-à-vis attendance in school. These
strategically designed mechanisms are therefore, phenomenally
compatible. Any meaningful fight against poverty demands
multi-dimensional tactics and collective responsibility.
The cheering account of the field-trip to Kawara-Manu Model
Primary School, in Maiyama LGA, Birnin-Kebbi; a beneficiary-school
of the UNICEF CTP is; Cash-Transfer-Programme is significantly,
exponentially yielding the target goals; promoting child-education
with pupils’ population multiplying in triples. The bad news, on
the other hand – the positive result is tragically metamorphosing
to a secondary crisis which requires a state of emergency.
To be straightforward, the classrooms and teachers are
consequently, insufficient to meet the upsurges. A classroom that
designedly, accommodates maximum of 30 pupils presently
disgustingly squeezes over 100 pupils sitting on the floor as
chairs impede available spaces. Imagine a breakout of infectious
disease; apparently, no child will escape infections due to their
proximities. Parenthetically, how would a teacher effectively
control such a high number of pupils? Thus, the goals invariably,
may be defeated if not complementarily remedied. Nevertheless, the
momentum should be sustained.
These quagmires bring us to; “What next after CTP?” UNICEF
target is clearly to inculcate the idea to policy-makers, and never
to takeover governments’ responsibilities. Indisputably, UNICEF
cannot fund the programme eternally but as presently operative; a
timeframe of two years for an area due to financial implications.
Similarly, Buhari’s Feeding programme is yet to spread to the
entire nation; hence, if left for federal government alone, it may
realistically suffer defects. Thus, for sustainability, a pragmatic
remedial mechanism points to Section 14(2)(b) of the 1999
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended – “the
security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of
government”.
Philosophically, in-depth sense of security hasn’t been
effusively figured out by leaders. Security etymologically includes
social security which is synonymous with welfare. English
Dictionary defines security as “the condition of not being
threatened, especially physically, psychologically, emotionally or
financially”. In other words, the Constitution understandingly,
circumspectly used ‘security and welfare of the people’
simultaneously. Unfortunately, leaders often, negligently limit
insecurity to hostilities with guns, bows and arrows. And where it
didn’t occur, diversion of security votes mischievously to private
accounts and for luxury property abroad eccentrically follows suit.
Security votes, noteworthily, is distinctly accountable public
funds for general security and cannot be misconstrued as
‘unaccountable’ funds for leaders in power. Even in Freetown, there
is no free lunch, they say.
Emphatically, Article 26 of the UN Convention on Child’s Rights
(CRC) provides, “Every child has the right to benefit from social
security. Governments must provide social security, including
financial support and other benefits, to families in need of
assistance.” Thus, exclusion of children’s development in the
security votes is fundamentally, a gaffe. Loudly! Security vote
isn’t only for physical security; social security is prominently
inclusive. Possibly, state governments could, in addition
judiciously constitute Security Trust Fund particularly to
replicate UNICEF-EAC policy as a proactive security strategy.
Knowledge is power.
Umegboro, a public affairs analyst, participated in the
UNICEF-EAC media summit on 8-9 April, 2019 at Birnin-Kebbi in Kebbi
State. 08173184542-SMS only.
(Https:www.carlumegboro.com)