₦airaland Forum

[size=18pt]
TOPIC: 5,000 stipend payment for unemployed graduate: Reduction of poverty and criminal thoughts among the vulnerable youth[/size]

OAUTemitayo:
5,000 Stipend payment for unemployed graduates:
Reduction of poverty and criminal thoughts among the vulnerable youths.
Temitayo Lasisi representing OAU:
Position: Support.
The functions of government in any sane society must include the welfare of not only the old and retired but also the unemployed youths and graduates who can constitute a nuisance to the peace and development of a country if not properly catered for.
The N5,000 stipend promised unemployed graduates in the country by the President Muhammed Buhari led administration is not only a good sign of positive things to come, it is also a giant mission to create massive employment in an economy suffering from insecurity, non availability of skilled workers and inadequate local and foreign investment in the economy.
A stipend was declared as a fixed and regular payment usually meant for something specific by vocabulary.com.
It is a known fact that an idle hand is a devil workshop; the stipend programme will prevent our youths from roaming the streets because according to the programme details provided by the office of the Vice-president , Professor Yemi Osinbajo, they are expected to be doing varying kinds of part time jobs such as engaging in agricultural and industrial engagements to be spearheaded by qualified and experienced technocrats where they will learn new skills that can eventually make them self employed and even employ more hands since there is a ready market for agricultural produce and industrial products in Nigeria due to our largely unsaturated food supply and industrial market.
This program will enable our youths learn vocational skills according to the programme outlay.
Another positive side is the creation of sense of belonging and patriotism in the unemployed graduates who would not only begin to feel appreciated and loved by the government but also start stop nurturing bad intentions and habit that has led to the destruction of lives and properties across the country in the past. Only countries with patriotic citizens in the world have been known to experience development in all spheres of engagements. United States, Britain, Russia and other developed countries are known for paying their youths monthly stipends which have led to them being more patriotic and dangerous to engage when performing their citizenship obligations like defending their country’s interests, territorial integrity and representing their countries in sport competitions. Have you ever wondered why countries like Russia, United state and Britain have the best fighting forces in the world? It is not because they are rich, it is because in their countries, everybody have a sense of belonging and there is welfarism.
A look at how insurgency became rooted in the north east would lead us to the unarguable fact it was poverty and sufferings of the youths even in the midst of plenty that led to religious fanatics called boko haram being able to manipulate the minds of youth with financial inducements. We have heard of Boko haram members enticing youths with just N2,000 to carry out suicide bombings. Imagine the number of lives that have been lost as a result of the neglect of youths by successive governments in the country.
Taking a cursory look at the Niger Delta amnesty programme initiated by late President Yaradua would corroborate the government stance that the payment of the stipends would lead to a reduction in the crime rate and social vices. Under the amnesty programme, Niger Delta militants were giving the option of surrendering their arms and ammunitions, getting amnesty, getting monthly payment of N75,000 as stipends and also the chance of being rehabilitated and trained in different vocations and programmes that can make them employed or skilled to the level of gainfully employed. This led to hitherto militants being trained as aircraft pilots, engineers, medical doctors and other skilled fields. . Some of this militants are today gainfully employed. Before the amnesty programme was initiated, the Niger delta was the center of kidnappings, bomb attacks on critical national assets like oil stations and oil pipelines, armed robbery and other social vices that not only put human lives at risk but also endanger properties. Such was the negative impacts of the insecurity in the Niger delta then that Nigerian governments at all levels were suffering from decline in revenue and allocations caused by a consistent drop in oil production due to bombing of oil installations by militants agitating for resource control. It was the amnesty programme that stabilized Nigerian oil production and improved government revenue.
By paying stipends to unemployed graduates which past actions like the Amnesty programmed have proven to be a success in changing the criminal disposition of youths, the government would improve the security situation of the country and thereby encourage foreign investments. Foreign investments would in turn lead to creation of job opportunities for the unemployed graduates and youths in the country thereby boosting the economy, increasing the government revenue through the increase in taxation that accompanies the employment of more people by industries and related services.
Moreover, we have been spending a whooping 150 billion naira yearly on ineffective legislators at the National Assembly.
If Niger delta militants are being paid N75,000 monthly justice, equality and fairness demands that unemployed graduates be treated fairly with the huge sums paid to the militants.
If we can afford to pay a few hundreds of people at the National Assembly 150 billion naira, 500 billion naira yearly is not too much for over 25 million people.

Definition of a Stipend. https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/stipend
Unemployed Graduates, Civilian JTF To Benefit From N5,000 Stipend
www.channelstv.com/2015/12/28/unemployed-graduates-civilian-jtf-to-benefit-from-n5000-stipend/
Youth Unemployment Breeds Terrorism And Kidnapping In Nigeria – Uduaghan
https://www.naij.com/65172.html
Osinbajo Clears Misconceptions About Promised 5,000 Naira Stipend
uncova.com/osinbajo-clears-misconceptions-about-promised-5000-naira-stipend
Boko Haram Recruitment Strategies
blogs.cfr.org/campbell/2013/04/16/boko-haram-recruitment-strategies/
Boko Haram and its Economic Impacts
www.fairobserver.com/region/africa/boko-haram-and-its-economic-consequences/
Militancy and Oil Violence in the Niger Delta
www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=211:militancy-and-oil-violence-in-the-niger-delta&catid=98:issuecontent0809&Itemid=349.
COUNTING THE GAINS OF THE AMNESTY PROGRAMME
m.thenigerianvoice.com/news/82773/1/counting-the-gains-of-the-amnesty-programme.html
Dark world of Nigerian jobless graduates
sunnewsonline.com/new/dark-world-of-nigerian-jobless-graduates/
Youth Unemployment in Nigeria - a time bomb waiting to explode
www.marxist.com/youth-unemployment-nigeria-time-bomb.htm
Nigeria: High Crime Rate Could Hinder Foreign Investment - NDLEA
allafrica.com/stories/201210170539.html

[size=15pt]Public-Private partnership in financing infrastructure in Nigeria - arguments for and against

Abuklaw:
Public-private partnership: dead on arrival.
I am using this moment to recognize the indispensable personalities behind the successful organization of this intellectual tussle.
The C.E.O of Nairaland, Mr. Seun Osewa, the ever-reliable coordinators of this debate, untiring and ever-sagacious panel of judges, enlightened co-debaters, perspicacious members of Nairaland intelligentsia.

My moniker is abuklaw, representing the prestigious Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. Today, I shall eruditely discuss the reasons why Nigeria should not adopt Public-Private Partnership (PPP) to finance her infrastructure development.

Before I delve into the subject matter, it is imperative to expound some key terms in the topic of discussion. The terms “public-private partnership” and “infrastructure” need to be diligently explained to aid comprehension of this topic.

Public-private partnership according to Wikipedia is “a government service or private business venture that is funded and operated through partnership of government and one or more private sector companies.”

Infrastructure on the other hand refers to the physical component of interrelated systems providing commodities and services essential to enable, sustain, or enhance societal living conditions. Infrastructure includes pliable roads, bridges, tunnels, water supply, electrical grids, houses, educational institutions etc built by the government to enhance the living condition of its citizens.

PPP as generally called, has different operation mode, of which the most prominent is “Design, Build, Operate and Transfer (DBOT).” This implies that private companies enter concession agreement to design, build, and operate infrastructures on behalf of the public sector for a certain period of time after which it will be transferred to the government.

The question is; should public-private partnership be adopted in financing the development or construction of the above mentioned infrastructure? The answer is NO! I know you will ask Why?

The foundation they say is paramount to the successful erection of a quality building. Inadequate knowledge of the rules guiding concession agreement defeats the good intention of adopting PPP. Nigerian government most time imitate successful initiatives from the international scene without carefully studying the intricacies involve in such initiative. The ignorance of rules and regulations, ethics and practices involve in PPP is an enough reason for Nigerians to campaign against its adoption because the taxpayers are always at the receiving end of government’s inadequacies.

Contrary to the opinion that Government transfer risk and cost of providing infrastructure to the private sector through PPP. Hence, reducing cost incurred by the public sector in managing a country. It is noteworthy that risk and cost can never be completely transferred because government will always be ultimately accountable for delivery public services and infrastructure. Power players in the government should know that incompetency on the part of private partners will generate backlash. A typical example of this was the reaction directed to the then Federal Government of Nigeria in 2013 on the failed concession agreement signed between the federal ministry of works and Bi-Courtney Highway service.

Another important point is the politicization of concessions. The fact that corruption is entrenched in our political system is another reason why I am saying “NO” to PPP. Many people were surprised that bi-Courtney got the concession to build Lagos/ Ibadan expressway considering its problem and controversy with Murtala Muhammad Airport terminal 2 concession. It is a known fact that someone only needs to be “connected” to get concessions agreement. Thus, the vicious circle of corruption continues. From the tendering, bidding and negotiation process to the selection of companies to participate in concession’s agreement, it is corruption all through. Why then should any rational Nigerian have hope in the ability of PPP to deliver state of the art infrastructures?

Furthermore, poor evaluation of the outcome of PPP agreement on the part of Nigerian government will continue to drag this initiative in the mud. The government of Nigeria in August 2013 entered a PPP agreement aimed at providing affordable, low cost housing for low income and no income earners. This initiative was a nice trend to uplifts the social wellbeing of the targeted groups. But ironically, till date glaring evidence shows that people for whom the scheme was targeted have ended up being totally disenfranchised from the scheme. A supposed development for low income group ended up in the hand of high income and ultra-rich people in Nigeria. The public sector should have thoroughly evaluate the outcome of such agreement in other to silent the complaints of developers on high cost of building materials and disbursement of funds from mortgage and commercial banks as the reasons behind the high cost housing units. This is another reason why pro-low income earners will never support PPP as solution to Nigeria’s infrastructure problem, particularly housing.

In conclusion, it is noteworthy, that private companies participating in PPP have the ultimate objective of “profit.” Thus, if they are not adequately monitored and their operation tracked diligently by the government, they will do everything to maximize profit at the detriment of the taxpayers. Sadly, the Nigerian government has poor record of enforcing performance on her partners entrusted with the responsibility of infrastructural development.

Until all the glaring weaknesses of the government as discussed above are taken care of, I will continue to debate anywhere that PPP is not meant for Nigeria, that it is an initiative that is dead on arrival.

REFRENCES
Nkasiobi oluikpe. PPP: a failed initiative at affordable housing. Retrieved at www.dailyindependentnig.com/2015/07/ppp-failed-initiative-affordable-housing/

Admin (2012). A failed romance: why public private partnerships do not work in Nigeria. Retrieved at www.icirnigeria.org/a-failed-romance-why-public-private-partnerships-do-not-work-in-nigeria/

www.wikipedia.org

[size=15pt]The removal of fuel subsidy is not Justified. [/size]

obiZEAL:
Good evening equitable judges, hardworking coordinators, fellow debaters and all knowledge seeking Nairalanders, I also want to send my unreserved appreciation to the creator of this forum, Mr. Seun Osewa, whose ingenuity has provided us with this platform to debate on pertinent issues surrounding our country’s development.

My Name is ObiZEAL and I am representing the noble students of UNIVERSITY OF JOS, my colleague and I will be answering the question; Is (the removal of fuel) subsidy justified in Nigeria?
Before I make known my answer, I will like to bother intellectuals following this debate with a few definitions as it concerns this debate and the Nigerian situation;
Fuel Subsidy: in the simplest terms, means the government is paying part of the cost of you purchasing a liter of petrol so that it will be affordable for you and other average Nigerians.
Secondly, justice (adjective: Justified) can be defined as the state of being fair.
With perfect understanding of the defined terms, I think it will be safe to rephrase the debate topic as thus: Is the act of government halting the reduction of fuel pump price so as to make it affordable for average Nigerians fair?
Well, my answer is No; the removal fuel subsidy is not justified in Nigeria. I will be rationalizing my position with the following points:


Firstly and simply too, the problem that led to the introduction of fuel subsidy have not been addressed, so it unjustifiable to halt the payment of fuel subsidy without addressing the problem that led to it’s inception in the first place. Fuel subsidy was introduced to Nigerians in the year 1986 and the reason was because our refineries where in a state of unrepair and could no longer produce enough fuel for our domestic consumption, the fuel subsidy was designed to last 6 months so as to give time to fix our refineries, but it have lasted for over 29 years and the refineries have still not been fixed. As at September 2015, our faulty refineries were producing a total of 6.76 million liters of petrol per day for a country which needs over 40 million liters of petrol per day, leaving the country with a deficit of about 33.34 million liters of petrol to be imported. Following the sanctity of this fact, one can authoritatively conclude that the removal of fuel subsidy will be justifiable only when Nigeria’s refineries start producing enough fuel for the daily consumption of Nigerians. I know my opponents might want to say that the money saved from the removal of fuel subsidy will be used to repair the refineries, well, I want to state succinctly that the reason why our refineries have been in a comatose state for over 27 years is because of the lack of political will and not the lack of funds.


To further fortify my position, which is to prove the unjustifiability of fuel subsidy removal, I will like to have us all look at the prospects of this action, it’s obvious to the informed that the reason why the discomfort caused by the removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria is still latent is because of the global fall of oil price. With oil selling for about $27.67 per barrel (as at 18th of January 2016), the average Nigerian can, after much struggle, manage to squeeze out 87 Naira to buy a liter of petrol. But by the other half of this year, when the price of oil increases (as predicted by BP's CEO, Mr. Bob Dudley) the pump price of petrol will consequently increase and it will become impossible for average Nigerians to survive, this will be made so because the government have removed fuel subsidy without putting in place any palliative measures, neither have they increased the minimum wage! The second half the year, which will come with an increased fuel price, will see the cost of transportation sky rocket and the cost foodstuff increase, consequently having a multiplier effect on every aspect of our daily lives which will eventually throw the citizenry into unimaginable hardship. Surely from the above point, it is not justifiable for a government to take away the only social benefit its people gets from it (which is petrol subsidy) without providing any welfare package, palliative measures or any form of increase in salaries.

Finally, for those who may have not yet been convinced that the removal of fuel subsidy is not justified in Nigeria, I will crave your indulgence to join me in looking at this fuel subsidy issue in retrospect. The immediate past government of Nigeria in January of 2012 took an action of totally removing fuel subsidy, this actions was met with a defiant reaction by the people who demanded, and rightfully so, that the payment of fuel subsidy be continued. After a historical drag between the government and the people, a compromise was reached, which consequently saw fuel subsidy partially removed. The government promised immediate provision of palliative measures to cushion the effect of the partial removal of fuel subsidy and also promised to reinvest the funds into the economy which will provide immediate and remote benefits for the country. I'm certain that 90% of the followers of this debate will agree with me that those palliative measures never went beyond our television screens, also if those funds where ever reinvested into our economy is an issue that have been widely debated. Considering this fact; that the money gotten from the partial removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria was unaccounted for, how does one intend to justify the total removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria? I hope my opponent will not make the error of saying that we are in a new political dispensation, because governance as we all know, is a continuous process.
However, if the government can fix our refineries, provide welfare packages and restore the lost trust, only then can the removal of fuel subsidy be justified in Nigeria.


References
http://www.ocnus.net/artman2/publish/Editorial_10/The-Full-Story-of-Fuel-Subsidy-Crisis.shtml
http://www.nnpcgroup.com/PublicRelations/NNPCinthenews/tabid/92/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/618/Refineries-Producing-676-Million-Litres-of-Petrol-per-Day-NNPC.aspx
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/2016/01/crude-oil-price-plunges-to-27-67-per-barrel
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35363066
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/fue,-subsidies-should-go/215710

To join the munificent in ensuring the participant instigation, kindly send a mail to.. nairalandinterschooldebate@gmail.com.[/b]

sammyscholar:
Overall score shouldn't be the criteria for judging the best essays. I guess you know what I'm saying, finestboi. You look at what our presentations garnered. I only had low scores in my rebuttals which I still find shocking. Essay wise, you and I know whose essays is the best in the intellectual fiasco between TPI and OAU. That said, I will nominate Abuklaw's essay anytime, any day for the best essay.

Joejonah:
I'm surprised you kept quiet to the daylight robbery.
Even in tribunals, the average of the judges opinions stand sure, in that case, no one judge will bring you down BECAUSE OF PERSONAL REASONS.

I'm still observing.....