Why exactly is ASUU on strike?
We are on strike because we want government to honour the agreement it had with the union, which is the second agreement. We had an agreement in 2001 and in that agreement there is a clause that the agreement should be reviewed every four years. That means after operating the agreement for four years, we would sit again to renegotiate the areas that are problematic. The idea behind the agreement is that prior to that period, we discovered that our universities were in a bad shape, in terms of the lack of quality staff, poor infrastructure; there was population explosion in the universities, so facilities were stretched, students were listening to lectures through windows and under trees. Because of the economy, a lot of foreign lecturers left; the Britons, the Indians, the Ghanians, gradually left because of staff policies and other policies of government.
Due to these, ASUU decided to call government to the table to talk about how we can turn the universities around. We sat with government and the problems were listed and we agreed on the solution to the problems.
In 2006, the agreement was due for renegotiation. We also sat with government to do that and that is what led to the 2009 agreement. After the agreement, there was the need to implement the agreement. But from 2009 till date, nothing substantial has been done about the agreement. Government just picked out the salary scale and that is what they are implementing. We’ve had series of meetings; written series of letters and had series of interventions through several people, and today we are on strike over that matter.
Can you spell out the main content of that agreement?
If you look at the agreement, page 3, was very clear that the single term of reference was to renegotiate the 2001 ASUU/Federal Government agreement and enter into a workable agreement. It said the essence of the renegotiation was; one, to reverse the decay in the university system in order to reposition it for greater responsibility and national development. Secondly, to reverse brain drain not only by enhancing the remuneration of academic staff, but also by detaching them from the encumbrances of the unified civil service structure; thirdly, to restore Nigerian universities through immediate massive and sustained financial intervention; and fourthly, to ensure genuine university autonomy and academic freedom. These were the four principles that guided the agreement. Every other thing was geared towards making these four principles workable. If somebody says these are unrealistic, then why are we still keeping the universities? If these four things are spelt out to the public, I’m sure they would know that there was an element of patriotism in those that fashioned out the agreement. To show you that it was done meticulously, the renegotiation lasted three years, from 2006 to 2009.
Who were those that signed the agreement?
The agreement had a composition of people who made up the renegotiation committee. There was the government renegotiation team. There was the ASUU renegotiation team. There were advisers and there were observers. We also had a joint secretariat. That was the team that worked out the agreement. It might interest you to note the government negotiation team was headed by Gamaliel Onosode. The government negotiation team also had advisers who were highly experienced people including Prof. Julius Okojie from the National Universities Commission, Prof. Chinedu Nebo, who is currently a minister. The others were former and current vice-chancellors and former registrars.
There were observers from the Federal Ministry of Labour; NUC; Special Services Office, Presidency; Federal Ministry of Education; National Salaries, Income and Wages Commission; Ministry of Justice; Office of the Secretary to the State Government; Federal Ministry of Finance; and Budget Office. These were the observers. Why were they observers? It was because we were dealing with the issue of finance. It was not a negotiation by ignorant people, it was a negotiation brokered by all relevant ministries that have to do with finance, budget and even the ministry of justice, which was to ensure that whatever agreement was reached did not contravene the laws of the country.
Government had its negotiation team, it had advisers and observers and it took three years because there were a lot of moving to and fro; confirming of facts. In fact, the father of the current minister of finance, Prof. Chukwuka Okonjo, was part of the ASUU team. So, when David Mark said negotiators did not know their left from their right, is he saying a renowned professor, whose wife is also a professor, whose daughter is the finance minister does not know his left from his right? He is currently the chairman of the governing board of the University of Ilorin and a traditional ruler, the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku. These are laughable statement made to rubbish the agreement before the public. It is surprising that from 2009 till date, it was only recently, about two weeks ago, that the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was just reading the document and it came into a quick judgment. ASUU agreement is what produced the Education Trust Fund. Is ETF not workable? The agreement gives room for renegotiation. If government feels that there are aspects it thinks are not workable, what the union is saying is that the agreement is already due for renegotiation; implement it before you talk about workability. We are appealing to government that turning the universities around is possible and we believe the funds are there.
Considering the plea to lecturers to return to the classrooms for the sake of the students, is there any compromise possible on the part of ASUU?Education is not so much a question of a compromise, unfortunately. These students are our students and they are our children. We don’t want them to be victims of bad educational system. The people who plead do it sometimes out of ignorance. If a student graduates and he is labelled half-baked graduate, that student will remain a victim of the education system for life. These people in government do not want their children to be victims of such a system, that is why they send them abroad. When a student that is supposed to learn with a Bunsen burner is learning with a kerosene stove, that student is already a victim of the system. It is better for the students to be victims of ASUU strike than to be victims of a bad educational system. Why should 16 students live in a hostel room built for two students? Why should somebody learn from the window? Is it not a professional insult on me to know that the person paying me does not send his children to the school I teach and he wants me to award certificate to other people’s children? It is not a question of appealing to ASUU.
Government had its negotiation team, it had advisers and observers and it took three years because there were a lot of moving to and fro; confirming of facts. In fact, the father of the current minister of finance, Prof. Chukwuka Okonjo, was part of the ASUU team. So, when David Mark said negotiators did not know their left from their right, is he saying a renowned professor, whose wife is also a professor, whose daughter is the finance minister does not know his left from his right? He is currently the chairman of the governing board of the University of Ilorin and a traditional ruler, the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku. These are laughable statement made to rubbish the agreement before the public. It is surprising that from 2009 till date, it was only recently, about two weeks ago, that the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was just reading the document and it came into a quick judgment. ASUU agreement is what produced the Education Trust Fund. Is ETF not workable? The agreement gives room for renegotiation. If government feels that there are aspects it thinks are not workable, what the union is saying is that the agreement is already due for renegotiation; implement it before you talk about workability. We are appealing to government that turning the universities around is possible and we believe the funds are there.
Considering the plea to lecturers to return to the classrooms for the sake of the students, is there any compromise possible on the part of ASUU?Education is not so much a question of a compromise, unfortunately. These students are our students and they are our children. We don’t want them to be victims of bad educational system. The people who plead do it sometimes out of ignorance. If a student graduates and he is labelled half-baked graduate, that student will remain a victim of the education system for life. These people in government do not want their children to be victims of such a system, that is why they send them abroad. When a student that is supposed to learn with a Bunsen burner is learning with a kerosene stove, that student is already a victim of the system. It is better for the students to be victims of ASUU strike than to be victims of a bad educational system. Why should 16 students live in a hostel room built for two students? Why should somebody learn from the window? Is it not a professional insult on me to know that the person paying me does not send his children to the school I teach and he wants me to award certificate to other people’s children? It is not a question of appealing to ASUU.
When they are appealing to ASUU they should also add a caveat: ‘please ASUU, call off this strike and give them bad education’. We have been getting support from the public who want this to be the last strike. But the issue is that of insincerity on the part of government. Why will they wait till now to start rubbishing the agreement? It shows that from the first day they signed it, they were not sincere about it. When we signed the Memorandum of Understanding in 2012, we called off the strike because it was their own blueprint on how to solve the problem, we said let us allow them to solve the problem. It was their own their own document. It was written to ASUU and signed by government. We took them in confidence and what did we get; infidelity. Government was quick to release end allowances but the N100bn it promised universities, they did not release a dime. Release the money to the universities and let the universities repatriate after expenditure. Tell us how you are going to do the implementation scheme, they are not forthcoming. Now, they have resorted to rubbishing the agreement and parading lies before the public. But the lecturers are resolute.
What should government do now to get ASUU to call off the strike?
We want government to implement the agreement; the aspects that have to do with law and university autonomy. Why should government give design of roads to foreign firms when there are universities that can do it and the money would be kept within the country? Why would government give review of laws to private hands when there are big legal departments in our universities that can do it? These are some of the ways government can bring in money for research in the universities. Now, the same government that said it did not have money to implement the agreement went ahead to create 12 more universities. In 2009, when the agreement was signed, these 12 universities were not there.
How much did government agree to inject into the university system?
In 2006, we looked at the university system and we said, to bring the universities to world standards, they require N400bn to be injected into them yearly and we made projections for three years. We had the MoU and it specified the same amount and government said no, there must be a needs assessment. Government carried the assessment of the needs of the universities. The experts that government employed said the government needs to pump in N400bn yearly for two years.
What should government do now to get ASUU to call off the strike?
We want government to implement the agreement; the aspects that have to do with law and university autonomy. Why should government give design of roads to foreign firms when there are universities that can do it and the money would be kept within the country? Why would government give review of laws to private hands when there are big legal departments in our universities that can do it? These are some of the ways government can bring in money for research in the universities. Now, the same government that said it did not have money to implement the agreement went ahead to create 12 more universities. In 2009, when the agreement was signed, these 12 universities were not there.
How much did government agree to inject into the university system?
In 2006, we looked at the university system and we said, to bring the universities to world standards, they require N400bn to be injected into them yearly and we made projections for three years. We had the MoU and it specified the same amount and government said no, there must be a needs assessment. Government carried the assessment of the needs of the universities. The experts that government employed said the government needs to pump in N400bn yearly for two years.
Now if government can’t inject up to N400bn in a year, it can say, let us inject N200bn yearly for four years, I don’t think ASUU will say no to that. It would only take a longer time to turn around the universities. It is not a question of pleasing ASUU but a question of improving on the educational system.
No comments:
Post a Comment