ACF carpets FG over unscientific distribution of N5bn palliatives

Tinubu.
Tinubu
ACF carpets FG over unscientific distribution of N5bn palliatives

The recent allocation of N5 billion in palliatives and grants by the Federal Government to various state governments has come under scrutiny, as the Spokesman of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Professor Tukur Muhammad-Baba, expresses concern over its shambolic and unscientific nature.

A review of $800m budget for subsidy removal palliative

In an interview, the Professor of Sociology highlights the inadequacies of distributing the same amount to states with varying populations and demographics.

Also read: $800m Palliatives: APC chieftain warns Tinubu against repeating Buhari’s mistakes

Professor Muhammad-Baba raises a pertinent point about the lack of focus in the distribution of N5 billion to each state, emphasizing that a one-size-fits-all approach is not suitable when populations and the number of eligible beneficiaries differ vastly among states.

Also read: Kano rejects lopsided distribution of N500bn palliatives in favour of Lagos

He aptly questions the rationale behind providing equal amounts to states like Lagos, Oyo, Kano, and Bayelsa, which vary significantly in terms of population and poverty statistics.

Sen. Girei lauds Tinubu for putting up fair, balanced cabinet

The Professor criticizes the distribution method as akin to a “hunter’s pack” strategy, where planning and strategy seem to be lacking.

This approach, he argues, fails to make a significant impact on poverty reduction and demonstrates a lack of thoughtful consideration.

Professor Muhammad-Baba emphasizes that the government’s intervention should be well-planned and targeted to truly aid the poor, rather than being a mere announcement.

Highlighting the fundamental flaw in the government’s strategy, Professor Muhammad-Baba points out that poverty is not a uniform issue across all states.

With over 140 million poor people in Nigeria, the variation in poverty levels between states like Lagos, Oyo, Kano, and those like Bayelsa, Taraba, or Jigawa is substantial.

The lack of consideration for this disparity undermines the effectiveness of the palliative measures.

The criticism extends to the government’s accompanying offering of 30,000 bags of rice, with the Professor questioning the reach and effectiveness of such a gesture.

He cites the example of Sokoto, a state with a population of over seven million people, indicating that 30,000 bags of rice would barely scratch the surface of the state’s hunger problem.

This reinforces the argument that a more nuanced and targeted approach is necessary to make a substantial impact.

Professor Muhammad-Baba underscores the importance of scientific intervention in poverty alleviation.

While acknowledging the necessity of aiding the poor, he reiterates that the strategy must be meticulously planned and executed to prevent the government’s efforts from being a mere drop in the ocean.

By employing data-driven analysis, the government can tailor its interventions to the unique needs of each state, thereby maximizing their impact.

“The concerns raised by Professor Tukur Muhammad-Baba shed light on the inherent flaws in the N5 billion FG palliative distribution.

“His critique underscores the need for a more thoughtful and scientific approach that accounts for the varying degrees of poverty across different states.

“By embracing a targeted strategy, backed by accurate data and analysis, the government can ensure that its efforts truly alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable populations, creating a meaningful impact in the fight against poverty,” a socio political analyst, Mohammed Tanko said.

__________________

We do hope that the information we were able to provide you are helpful. Checkout out other unique articles on our blog for more detailed information and do well to share with your friends and family. Follow us on our Twitter and Facebook to stay updated with premium information.

Please leave any comments or questions in the area given below.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in Fact Check are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Fact Check. Any content provided by our bloggers or authors is of their opinion and is not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual, or anyone or anything.

Information is presented to the best of our knowledge and while we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability concerning the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Therefore, any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here