Since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a ‘public health emergency of international concern’ in January 2020, and as a pandemic on March 11, 2020, its differential impact on nations across the globe has been palpable based on the strength of their health systems, resource endowment, human resource capability and political will. As WHO also rightly said, COVID-19 ‘is not just a public health crisis, it is a crisis that will touch every sector’.
Indeed the scourge is already touching every sector in Nigeria, as educational institutions at all levels have been closed, public worships in Churches and Mosques have been suspended, non-essential businesses are under a lockdown, and people’s cultural way of lives are being modified to conform to social distancing etiquette. Above all, a federal government lockdown order has been imposed on Lagos, FCT and Ogun states, among other adverse effects of COVID-19 pandemic across the country. As economic livelihood has been hugely affected, there is need for appropriate policy response to alleviate widespread poverty among the most vulnerable members of the society. This is where the extant social protection policy of the federal government as implemented under its Social Investment Programme (SIP) becomes very relevant and exigent.
Consequently, in his address to the nation on the COVID-19 pandemic on Sunday 29th March, 2020, President Muhammadu Buhari rightly described Coronavirus (COVID-19) as both a health emergency and an economic crisis in line with WHO’s earlier declaration. As expected, the president rolled out policy measures to mitigate different areas of COVID-19 negative impact. With respect to the social investment programme, the president ‘instructed the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development to work with State Governments in developing a strategy on how to sustain the school feeding programme during this period without compromising our social distancing policies’. Furthermore, he directed that a three month repayment moratorium for all TraderMoni, MarketMoni and Farmermoni loans be implemented with immediate effect’. Lastly, the president also ‘directed that a similar moratorium be given to all Federal Government funded loans issued by the Bank of Industry, Bank of Agriculture and the Nigerian Export Import Bank’.
The Social Investment Programme (SIP) is an omnibus initiative of the federal government with such components as (a) N-Power: a fixed employment and skills acquisition initiative targeted at Nigerian youths, (b) National Home Grown School Feeding Programme (NHGSFP): targeted at pupils at the universal basic education level, (c) Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT): targeted at the poor and most vulnerable Nigerians, and (d) Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP): business empowerment initiative with various components as TraderMoni, MarketMoni and Farmermoni, which are targeted at the micro and small enterprises. Following the president’s directives, how will these various initiatives of the SIP be implemented under the COVID-19 public health emergency without violating the lockdown order and the social distancing etiquette?
Regrettably, one feels scandalized to say the least, seeing officials of the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development disbursing money to beneficiaries of the CCT initiative on Wednesday, April 1, 2020, in a manner that flagrantly violated the social distancing etiquette and its concomitant government order against large gathering of people. During this activity in FCT, 100 beneficiaries as reported (in addition to government officials) were gathered for the disbursement. This is a violation of the social distancing etiquette, as it is akin to complying with one presidential directive and at the same time disobeying another one that prohibits gathering of a large number of people. This was not only unnecessary but completely avoidable, as the disbursement of money to CCT beneficiaries has been ICT-compliant over the years. The question now is: why was direct disbursement of cash to beneficiaries chosen for the exercise? Has the electronic register of CCT beneficiaries disappeared? And even if it is so, why was there no social distancing-compliant alternative method explored and chosen?
On homegrown school feeding initiative, the presidential directive is a bit challenging in view of the fact that schools have been shut down. Perhaps as a poverty alleviation measure also, the government probably wants to go ahead with disbursing the school feeding funds more so when there are many low income earners employed in the food supply chain. But the question is: how will the funds be disbursed? My take is that this is still possible if honestly carried out. The school records of the pupils are there and so are records of school food vendors unless one can show that ghosts have been supplying the needed food items over the years. The question that then arises relates to the most social distancing-compliant strategy to be adopted. The Federal government in collaboration with the participating states (and through the school authorities) may choose to remit the equivalent of feeding money to the pupils through their parents. The school registers of these pupils are there. The school authorities can invite the parents without compromising the social distancing order. This suggested modality is not rocket science if corruption is removed in the implementation process
With respect to N-Power, if the contracts of the participants have not expired, the ICT-compliant modality for paying their stipends should be strictly followed without also violating the social distancing order of the federal government. Again, with respect to the CCT and GEEP initiatives, an ICT-compliant modality should be followed in relating with the beneficiaries.
The greatest threat posed by COVID-19 pandemic to the social investment programme is the drastic reduction in oil prices and its consequent reduction of government earnings. However, the government can use a small percentage of the various donations from individuals and corporate bodies to enhance its ability to meet its commitment to the social investment programme.
Finally, the twin-pronged government approach of attacking COVID-19 disease and at the same time improving economic livelihood of the people is good and deep thinking, as neglect of each leads to death either through disease or through hunger. Since none of these is desirable and acceptable, the government is on good and solid ground to continue to give priority to its social investment programme. In doing this however, the social distancing etiquette should not be violated.
•Prof. Obasi teaches Public Administration at the University of Abuja. Email: nnamdizik@gmail.com
