ASUU strike latest: Lecturers threaten to withdraw from Suswam’s committee

The Academic Staff Union of Universities ,
ASUU, has threatened to pull out from the
Presidential Committee on the
Implementation of the Committee of
Needs Assessment of Nigeria (public)
Universities, CNANU.
The threat was contained in a letter dated
August 20 and signed by the ASUU
National President, Isa Fagge.
The letter was addressed to the Chairman
of the Presidential Committee on the
Implementation of the CNANU report,
Governor Gabriel Suswam of Benue State.
In the letter, seen by PREMIUM TIMES, the
lecturers, who have been on strike for
over eight weeks, alleged a distortion of
the report of the Technical Subcommittee
of the CNANU Implementation Committee;
and cited a number of examples to
support their claims.
“For our union, the setting up of a
committee to implement the
recommendation is a very welcome
development. We are, however, alarmed
by recent development in the work of the
committee. We find it necessary to make
the observations in order to stop the
committee from derailing from its core
mandate and creating even deeper crises
in the university system,” Mr. Fagge said.
Among the issues raised by the lecturers
is that of perceived mismanagement of
funds; with the union saying, “Expending
N50billion to construct 35,000 bed space
hostels across 25 universities will be
ridiculously scandalous since the same
amount can be used to construct 125,000
bed space hostels across 51 universities.”
The lecturers, who have vowed not to
resume work until the government
implements a 2009 agreement it had with
the union, said they would “be unable to
continue in the membership of the
Committee until the issues raised are
properly addressed.”
Below is a text of ASUU’s letter to the
committee chairman:
The Chairman
Presidential Committee on the
Implementation of the CNANU Report
Dear Sir,
DISTORTION OF THE REPORT OF THE
TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF CNANU
IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
Recall that the Committee of Needs
Assessment of Nigerian
(Public)Universities, CNANU, was set up
by Government as a result of the dispute
between Government and ASUU in
respect of the funding requirements
needed to arrest the rot and reverse the
decay in the Nigerian University System.
Recall also that the Committee submitted
its report to Federal Executive Council,
FEC and National Economic Council, NEC
and a Technical Committee was set up by
NEC to draw up the action-plan to guide
government in implementing the
recommendations of the Report. Recall
also that the Technical Committee had
submitted its report to NEC, which was
approved and sent to FEC. Recall also that
FEC had approved the report and the
President had also approved the memo
sent to him in respect of the Report of the
Technical Committee.
For our Union, the setting up of a
committee to implement the
recommendations is a very welcome
development. We are however alarmed by
recent developments in the work of the
Committee. We therefore wish to make the
following observations with regards to the
workings of the Committee. We find it
necessary to make the observations in
order to stop the Committee from
derailing from its core mandate and
creating even deeper crises in the
University System.
ESTABLISHMENT OF OPERATIONAL
FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY
1. We are worried that the Committee is
yet to start working on the Technical
Report of the NEC Committee that was
approved by the NEC and FEC. We believe
that the approved report together with the
Main Report and the Individual University
Report should form the basis of what the
Committee will be doing.
2. We are concerned that the Committee,
four weeks after its inauguration, is yet to
come up with a roadmap for
implementation of the CNANU Report. We
are worried that there is no plan on the
ground on what to do with the other
numerous recommendations besides the
ones that the Committee had chosen to
commence with.
3. While we believe that the committee
must start from somewhere, a general
plan of action is necessary for the
success of the committee.
SOURCE(S) OF THE FUND
4. Our Union is very apprehensive of the
manner in which the sources of the initial
N100billion to be used for the stimulation
of the process are shrouded in secrecy.
We believe that monies that already
belong to the university system should
not be blocked and recycled. This will not
only be counterproductive but will brew
even deeper crises in the system. ASUU
will not accept this.
QUANTUM OF THE FUND
5. We observe that the Committee is so far
mentioning only N100billion. If the
implementation is to be related to the
funding requirements in the 2009 ASUU/
FGN Agreement and the Jan 2012 MoU,
what is due for 2012 and 2013 is
N500billion not N100billion. Only the
provision of this sum will meet the
immediate needs of the universities.
DISBURSEMENT
6. We are also concerned that a clear
procedure or process for assessing the
funds by the universities is yet to be
defined. This concern is even more
germane given the statement of the
Chairman of the Committee (during the
last meeting on Monday 19th Aug. 2013)
that the Committee is taking some
documents to the Due Process Office. We
hasten to add that while due process
must be followed, it is the sole
responsibility of benefitting universities to
respect all the provisions of the
Procurement Act. The meaning of your
Committee going to the Due Process
Office is that it is the one that will be
responsible for awarding contracts.
We want to make it clear that this will
never be acceptable to our Union. We
believe that monies meant to fund
projects in Universities should be sent to
the Universities just as it is the practice
with TETFund, Capital appropriation, etc.
MUTILATION OF THE DISBURSEMENT OF
THE FIRST TRANCHE
6. We are also deeply concerned about the
rationale of mutilating the report of the
technical subcommittee of your
Committee by the Secretariat. For
instance the entire structure of allocation
to universities as well as to projects has
been grossly distorted without any clear
justification. The index of enrolment used
to classify the universities has been set
aside. The number of benefiting
universities has also been changed
without justification. ASUU will not accept
this.
7. We are worried that instead of
allocating N1.2billion each to construct
3,000 bed space hostels to the 10
Category1 universities, N1.0billion for
2,500 bed space hostel to the 16
Category2 universities, N500million to
construct 1,250 bed space hostels in the
12 Category3 universities and
N250million each to construct 625 bed
space hostels in the 13 category4
universities, the Secretariat has changed
that to constructing 1,400 bedspace
hostels in 25 universities at the cost of
N2b each. We see no rationale in this.
Expending N50billion to construct 35,000
bedspace hostels across 25 universities
will be ridiculously scandalous since the
same amount can be used to construct
125,000 bedspace hostels across 51
universities. The standard cost of building
a bed space ranges from N200,000.00 to
a maximum of N400,000.00. This is even
more worrisome given the tangential
suggestions made by the Chairman that
only monies for refurbishment will be
sent to universities while the rest will be
handled centrally.
EXCLUSION OF SOME UNIVERSITIES
8. We are concerned that 22 universities
are excluded from the allocation for
refurbishment of laboratories and
libraries and 3 universities from the
allocation for refurbishment of lecture
theatres and lecture rooms. 24
universities are denied allocation for
construction of libraries and laboratories
while 2 are denied allocation for
construction of new lecture theatres and
lecture rooms. 26 universities are denied
allocation for construction of hostel. This
is in spite of the identified needs in the
individual university report and the
approved criterion that made them eligible
to draw. More worrisome is the fact that
the allocation to other universities does
not seem to be in agreement with the
approved enrolment criteria.
OMNIBUS PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
COST
9. We have also noted, albeit quizzically,
that some N1.975 billion was allocated to
the ‘62nd university’ called ‘Project Admin
Cost’. This makes no meaning to our
Union. The Committee is not supposed to
administer any project. It is supposed to
distribute funds that will finance projects
to universities. We see no justification for
allocating an amount more than what is
allocated to 4 universities put together, to
a bogus ‘Project Admin Cost’. The N100b
meant for universities as first tranche
should go to universities in toto. No
pinching, no pilfering.
In view of the forgoing, ASUU will be
unable to continue in the membership of
the Committee until the issues raised are
properly addressed.
Thank you.
Yours in Struggle,
Dr.Nasir Isa Fagge
President