okada_man:

I will proudly snitch my way to the top.  

I will religiously rat them out, If they add incentives, I'll be a top snitch money earner, I'll even do free training for whisleblowers.

Put me in charge of propaganda, I'll make snitches look like celebrities. Girls will be throwing panties at them  

This guy, you have serious issues with some of your comments on this thread.

Sagamite:

This guy, you have serious issues with some of your comments on this thread.

Bros. I'm a victim. A victim of corrupt visionless leaders.

A victim of a society suffering from a massiive case of stockholms syndrome.

I'm a victim and many people close to me are victims. It is very personal.

These fooooools should keep praying I never get to power, or get the power to act.

Sometimes I wake up dreaming about how to gut Looters.

I'm a very angry Okadaman.

I have issues. I'm a Nigerian.

logica:

Anybody who knows how the mind of a scientist works will know Abert Einstein will never say such a thing. This actually is slander.

So you think I made that up?

MeandSum:

So you think I made that up?

No you didn't. You are just one of those sheep who simply repeat illogical statements ignorant people make while trying to be prove they are learned or authoritative. You should check your sources. From the moment I first saw that quote, I knew it could not come from ANY scientist. And I was right.

Great idea. I've written an article about this before.


Oyb says it best. Imagine if Obama sent his daughters to China ? and he's there preaching about America's educational system ? lol

I even propose an extreme version of the bill: anyone who agrees to be a public servant should sign a waiver waiving his right to send his/her kids abroad and his right to receive medical treatment abroad; they should also cancel all these generator and diesel allowances given to our public servants.

What if the kids were in schools abroad BEFORE the person takes office?

Kobojunkie:

What if the kids were in schools abroad BEFORE the person takes office?

it would not apply to the kids who were abroad before the public servant takes office.

I don't think this is the way to go about this, given that the easy around to this is that, right before swearing in, they could easily ensure their wards are already enrolled in the schools so they will not be impacted by this law in the end.

Except if they have a school grant or scholarship, If your child was studying abroad before appointment, You must return your kid to a Nigerian school or move over, it's not by force to serve. Plenty experts dey Naija.

No other child will be allowed out, except you resign.

If you don't like it, go and do business.

Wetin be grant? You mean like tuition paid in full? These guys will borrow all the money needed and pay upfront at Harvard or any other school that way. Then you will hear of Nigerians attending harvard with tuition paid for all four/five years upfront.

I mean merit based scholarship from the school they are attending, anything else is No No. It's to protect real smart kids.

Anything else will earn you a sack, if you game the system and you are caught, you will pay a fine and go to jail, that is if you are not shot!

Kobojunkie:

I don't think this is the way to go about this, given that the easy around to this is that, right before swearing in, they could easily ensure their wards are already enrolled in the schools so they will not be impacted by this law in the end. 

I see your point, which makes sense on paper. But in application it would not be that easy to circumvent the law if it were put in place. Given that aspiring candidates have no control over the election calendar and little control over when their kids graduate from secondary school (except they plan their political career decades ahead of time), the law will be an added impediment for aspiring candidates whose kids may be graduating around the time they will be in office or plan to run for office. To circumvent the impediment the aspiring candidate would have to delay his running for office till the next election calendar so that his child would have been enrolled in school abroad by the time he or she runs for office.

Even if the only effect the law has is to create an additional burden for aspiring politicians (assuming the aspiring politicians are able to circumvent the law) then I am OK with it. At least politicians will know that they won't have an easy ride anymore.

And I would draft the law that in such a way that it would affect any candidate who has publicly declared his candidacy.

Taking children abroad for educational reasons is not the problem. The problem actually is making Nigerian schools better and make them to compete favourably with foreign ones.

okada_man:



Bros. I'm a victim. A victim of corrupt visionless leaders.

A victim of a society suffering from a massiive case of stockholms syndrome.

I'm a victim and many people close to me are victims. It is very personal.

These fooooools should keep praying I never get to power, or get the power to act.

Sometimes I wake up dreaming about how to gut Looters. 

I'm a very angry Okadaman.

I have issues. I'm a Nigerian.

Lol

I am a victim too. I dey live for foreign country and always dreaming of having Ghana High rice or White House amala for my lunch break instead of some stewpid sandwich.

Na real Stockholm syndrome this oppressed Nigerians have. Come here when IBB dies and see how the people he ruined their lives will be the ones showering prayers for his soul and attacking anyone insulting him hoping he goes to hell. Mugus!

Princek12:

I even propose an extreme version of the bill: anyone who agrees to be a public servant should sign a waiver waiving his right to send his/her kids abroad and his right to receive medical treatment abroad; they should also cancel all these generator and diesel allowances given to our public servants.

Let the bill target education and power and see how fast Nigeria is transformed as these people put pressure on people in the education sector and PHCN.

With Power and quality education, Nigeria will fly!

And some simpletons will open their gob without a shred of thinking to condemn a good thing. Rubbish!

Kobojunkie:

I don't think this is the way to go about this, given that the easy around to this is that, right before swearing in, they could easily ensure their wards are already enrolled in the schools so they will not be impacted by this law in the end. 

That is faulty thinking.

No 1, most times they cannot be sure they will get an appointment and know when to take their kids out, it is all political jostling.

No 2, good foreign schools (which is likely to be private) have periods of enrolment and entry exams or strong criteria. You just don't dictate when you want to slot your kid in one.

No 3, doing such will focus attention on you. Journalists and opposition can make noise and if by chance a good leader heard you did it, you get sacked!

No 4, there might be aspects of the law that requires any appointee that accepts the appointment to return their kids that are not in uni or last 2 years of pre-uni school back to Nigeria within 6 months.

No 5, a leader might even decide anyone with kids out of the country is not eligible for appointment in the first place.

This law is EASY to implement with good, honest leaders because YOU CAN NOT HIDE KIDS LIKE YOU HIDE MONEY! Stop all this "it is not possible"! This appears to be a serious case of "resistance to change for improvement" and/or "Stockholm syndrome".

This is why the world is backwards, you have to struggle with people to even get a good thing done. I hate Democracy!

[size=16pt]If George Bush or  Obama want to send their wards to University of Ibadan or University of Sokoto what stops them, we are in a  democracy normally this kind of law should not see the light of day, but because of the peculiar situation of Nigerian, this kind of law is more than welcome. How does a lowly or poorly paid public officers in Nigeria manage to send their wards abroad on that meagre wage they earn,  but  for some strange reasons beyond human comprehension they seem to find over £20,000.00 per year to pay for their wards school fees abroad.

Where is this money coming from, I know one man whose young sons and daughters have re-located to London recently for secondary schooling, at a whooping and mouth watering school fees of over £20,000.00 per year.

This kind of school fees paying  is the realm of the very well heeled and renowned established Aristocratic families in the UK, to know a commissioner appointed barely 6 weeks ago has that kind of fund available to send his wards to school abroad baggers believe. [/size]

^
Is daddy a government official?

Okada man is a funny dude. LOL --- if many of these people's children got a taste of how bad the educational institution us, they will be invested in wanting to create change --- give them a taste of their own medicine.

okada_man:

^
Is daddy a government official?

More like a victim of the education system and the lack of nutrients for the brain poverty causes.

Sagamite: Only now returning to this thread and seeing your comments on the first page.

In a nutshell, this is a dumb policy. If the idea to prevent people from looting. . . how about you just enforce existing laws?

You cannot restrict a man's rights in this way. Let alone those of his children. It doesn't sound legal or constitutional to me.

Regarding @nuzo's comment, my pops has no connection to the Nigerian FG.

Cure the illness (corruption) rather than treating its symptoms (a man stealing public funds and using them to send his kid abroad).

This reminds me of a comment Shekarau made in a debate a few months ago about the EFCC.

If the existing laws and organizations were strong and functional, would there be a need for the EFCC? If naija courts and police worked, then there would be no need for this redundant organization.

We'll pass 1000 laws dancing around the problem rather than facing it head on.

ekt_bear:

Sagamite: Only now returning to this thread and seeing your comments on the first page.

In a nutshell, this is a dumb policy. If the idea to prevent people from looting. . . how about you just enforce existing laws?

You cannot restrict a man's rights in this way. Let alone those of his children. It doesn't sound legal or constitutional to me.

Regarding @nuzo's comment, my pops has no connection to the Nigerian FG.

Stop chatting utter shyt!

No 1, there is nothing wrong with having a combination of laws to fight corruption.

No 2, this law is far easier to monitor than the other existing laws because it is harder to launder children.

No 3, cut this crap about rights. You have a right not to take a public position. A law to protect the good of the country is legal and constitutional. Please stop chatting such crap. Is it illegal and unconstitutional for the US government to ban US businesses from engaging in business with Cuba? That is abusing rights? Stop chatting tosh!

How on earth can you ban a public officer from educating his child overseas? The premise is that he is earning the money from corruption, right?

Assume temporarily that a given public officer was rich even before he entered office. Why should a guy like that not be able to educate his child overseas?

(Implicitly, I am asking for legitimate reasons related to the quality of him doing his job, not flimsy, arbitrary ones)

Sagamite:

Stop chatting utter shyt!

No 1, there is nothing wrong with having a combination of laws to fight corruption.

Fighting corruption with a law like this is using a sledgehammer to kill an ant. Laws should be targeted and precise. This law is not.

No 2, this law is far easier to monitor than the other existing laws because it is harder to launder children.

It is dead easy to launder children. I can just transfer custody of them if necessary, for example. Or have him change his name before he enters the school abroad. Or lie about having 'em. Or substitute a look-alike. Etc, etc

No 3, cut this crap about rights. You have a right not to take a public position. A law to protect the good of the country is legal and constitutional. Please stop chatting such crap. Is it illegal and unconstitutional for the US government to ban US businesses from engaging in business with Cuba? That is abusing rights? Stop chatting tosh!

False. Not every law that protects the "good of the country" (whatever the hell that means, as if there is some uniform, universal standard on what the "good of the country" is) is legal.

Wth does a US feud with Cuba since Castro have to do with this? Please don't bring up irrelevant examples like that.

ekt_bear:

It is dead easy to launder children. I can just transfer custody of them if necessary, for example. Or have him change his name before he enters the school abroad. Or lie about having 'em. Or substitute a look-alike. Etc, etc

are you sure u didn't consult for our transgendered minister when she schooled in howard?

And to pre-empt the stupid argument someone will no doubt make about, "Well, even if the public officer is not corrupt, he should suffer along with us who must also go to bad schools". . .

Is it the fault of the minister of defense that the school system is bad? Or the guy who is an accountant for some local government?

Very silly to prevent someone from improving the lot of their family just because they work for the gov't.

Now if it turns out that the guy is corrupt, by all means punish him heavily. And if the guy is incompetent, by all means sack him.

But there is no reason to mix up someone's private life with their own career, even if they work for the gov't.

What is next, no public officials should buy foreign-made computers? Instead they must patronize Zenox?

Sorry to side track but I am drawing an inference from the thread so far. Something I seem to have noticed in Nigeria and governance in particular. There appears to be a constant divide between what we consider to be desirable and what we may or not find possible. This debate fall and this category. On the surface the bill appears to be well meaning. Okay there are other pressing issues, but there are also other Senators and Legislators to push them.

Taking this debate purely on its merit won't we all sort of agree that the privileges these folks enjoy are unwarranted. I mean what incentive will they have to fix our local institutions with any sense of haste when their wards escape. Isn't the reason for their ineptitude partly because they have alternatives, air travel to roads, foreign medicare to our consulting clinics (much used cliche), the use of armed police escorts whom are supposed to be involved in our collective security, etc. Don't we think if this Bill can go through it can start an avalanche of repudiations of all things feudal, autocratic and patronizing. Isn't it a wake up call coming from a House member and why on earth will anyone on this forum oppose it.

On the other hand perhaps people just feel it is just impractical to execute and hence a waste of time and resources. A Bill that is doomed to fail hence should not even be contemplated.

I think we are entering a dangerous phase in Nigeria, a psychological one (me included) that perhaps things are so bad that they are irrecoverable. I sure hope we are not losing our humanity here. A classic example is the polity itself. The last elections were an example. I just felt the only reason I would stick with the present government is that the pro's were more than the con's and the so called change the opposition pandered was just impracticable in Nigeria and could result in more damage. I still feel the same. If you understand let's debate please. Desirability Vs Practicability.

ekt_bear:

Fighting corruption with a law like this is using a sledgehammer to kill an ant. Laws should be targeted and precise. This law is not.

So saying public officials known for escaping the nightmare of the country (which they caused with their looting) by going to another country with the loot to stay behind and face the nightmare everyone else is facing is a sledgehammer?

Really?

The law is not targeted and precise?

Edjucate me!

ekt_bear:

It is dead easy to launder children. I can just transfer custody of them if necessary, for example. Or have him change his name before he enters the school abroad. Or lie about having 'em. Or substitute a look-alike. Etc, etc

What utter tosh!

Before I even bother with this, let me be clear, are you saying it is harder to launder money than to launder kids?

ekt_bear:

False. Not every law that protects the "good of the country" (whatever the hell that means, as if there is some uniform, universal standard on what the "good of the country" is) is legal.

Wth does a US feud with Cuba since Castro have to do with this? Please don't bring up irrelevant examples like that.

Amsorry!

You said telling public officials to use public facilities they are responsible for is abuse of rights, illegal and unconstitutional, and you don't think telling US citizens they can not do business in Cuba is similar?

You think telling US citizens that they are not allowed to visit Cuba is less of abuse of so-called "rights", is more legal, more constitutional and more precise and targeted?

Please edjucate me!

oyb:

are you sure u didn't consult for our transgendered minister when she schooled in howard? 

hehe

what can I say, whenever I see a law/rule, I look for loopholes/flaws in it