23 Jul 2004 |
|
| THE UNDP DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING SIMILAR TO THE NIGERIAN DIASPORA TRUST FUND ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD The Minister for the Federal Capital Territory, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai attempted in his advertorial titled, "Leave Okonjo-Iweala, Adeniji Alone", published in early March, to make Nigerians believe that the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund from which the two Ministers are being paid in dollars "is an international fund similar to that which many other countries are using to attract highly qualified nationals home to contribute to the advancement of their nation". "This is not something that Nigeria invented, it is a popular international practice", he said. "From Yugoslavia to China, and even Afghanistan, nations are benefiting immensely from similar arrangements. So, what is wrong with Nigeria doing the same? Are critics suggesting that Nigerians abroad should be kept away in deference to some obscure notion of naira patriotism?" This particular portion of my piece is in response to the above claims by Mallam El-Rufai. The minister was only being clever by half by implying that critics were at anytime suggesting that Nigerians abroad with expertise to contribute to national development be kept away in deference to any notion of what he uncharitably described as "naira patriotism" (what a term to come out of the mouth of a supposed super-patriot! He obviously prefers dollar-patriotism!). What we are saying is that what was done does not in any way represent any attempt to involve Nigerians abroad, even though the Fund was set up in their name! For one, there was no consultation with Nigerians abroad generally or with even the government-controlled NIDO; it was not an open process, so Nigerians abroad were unaware that such a thing is in place talk less of being beneficiaries or participants in any way. They, like their counterparts at home only got to know this after the successful sniffing campaign of The Guardian forced the Secretary to the Government of the Federation to finally divulge that such a Fund paying dollars to ministers is in place. So, why the secrecy and why did the supposed beneficiaries, Nigerians abroad, not know about this until it was scandalously divulged in that manner? Secondly, the beneficiaries as far as we know are only ministers (and four other top persons the President talked about without revealing who they are). That Okonjo-Iweala and Adeniji came from abroad to take up their posts does not mean they represent Nigerians in Diaspora in any way. They were not even members of NIDO! It is ludicrous to assume that these six persons represent the expertise we have for national service in Diaspora and more absurd that such a Fund is being set up only for their own interest. Thirdly, even if this were to be all-inclusive, transparent and open to many more, there's nothing that says they have to be paid in dollars or any foreign currency. Multinational companies routinely send home from abroad their Nigerian workers, paying them in naira while they serve in Nigeria. Some even cut the emoluments in such a way as to reflect the disparity in cost of living. However, the most scandalous claim here is to tell us that what is being done in Nigeria has been done elsewhere. Now, when the minister talked about "similar arrangements" elsewhere, how similar is this similar? The truth is by giving the examples of China, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, our dear minister was being very economical with the truth. Let us look at these examples. China and the UNDP collaborate on a lot of things just like any other member nation of the UN, but nothing, absolutely nothing of the sort we speak of here; so to that extent, this is a wild fib by our desperate minister. The other two were countries just coming out of war which needed some kind of special help to find their feet and it was in that context that some funds were established; but again, nothing in the nature of what we have in Nigeria. The UNDP funds in Afghanistan and Yugoslavia are so different in nature, execution, expectations and goals from the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund that it will be well worth our time to look deeper into some of these. First, in an obvious attempt to obfuscate issues, the minister did not specify exactly which UNDP funds in these countries he's referring to. In the case of Afghanistan there are two - one solely set up by the UNDP to meet specific emergency needs and the other an initiative of the international community generally, but with the UNDP amongst its managers. The first one I refer to here is the UNDP Afghan Interim Authority Fund (AIAF) established in December 2001. This was a fund operational only for six months and limited only to short term government support. This was informed by the need to have a semblance of government on the ground after the Taliban were driven out in the desperate state that was Afghanistan. The AIAF was to help the interim authority cover the general management of administrative affairs for that six months period before the convening of the Loya Jirga the next year. It was to cover administrative costs for each of the country's 29 ministers and a new head of government, Hamid Karzai. The ministers were to use their share to hire a small staff of 10 each, while some of the administrative costs included acquisition of vehicles and office space, supplies and equipment. In line with the Bonn Accord, the Fund was also to support the establishment of the civil service, judicial and human rights commission and also to pay teachers' salaries (to ensure the schools opened in March 2002). It was also projected to pay police salaries once that was established. It was a UNDP-sponsored fund, managed by the UNDP under the direction of the Algerian, Lakhdar Brahimi (the man who later went to Baghdad to negotiate the handover). He was the UN man on the ground in Afghanistan after the war and all he did was to request this as an interim measure to get a semblance of government going. The second fund, which is possibly the one our minister had in mind but which is nothing similar to the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund, is the bigger international effort known as the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF) with support from 24 donors and managed by a Management Committee comprising of the Asian Development Bank, Islamic Development Bank, UNDP and the World Bank. It "provides a mechanism for coordinated funding of reconstruction activities in line with agreed priorities of government" (quoted from Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund Report to Donors, Third Quarter of the Afghan Fiscal Year, September 23 to December 21 2003). Section 4 of the Report (pp19-20) deals with the subject of "RETURN OF EXPATRIATE AFGHANS" and reveals that only the sum of $5 million is committed to this with a closing date of June 30, 2006. Its objective is to support the Afghan Expatriate and Training Component by recruiting expatriate Afghans with requisite skills for a period of between 6 and 12 months (or more in some cases). The Component Objectives as stated are: (1) to enhance the contribution of expatriate professional Afghans living abroad in reconstruction efforts by enhancing policy and institutional capacities within the public sector; (2) to fill skill gaps in specific areas such as IT, engineering and teaching with well trained overseas Afghans; (3) to provide Afghans in the country with opportunities for structured on-the-job training and enhance their technical skills; (4) to contribute to the reconstruction efforts of Afghanistan by placement of Afghan-expatriate professionals with significant development experiences to fill critical skill gaps in ministries and non-governmental sectors; and (5) to contribute to the capacity building of the Afghan national counterparts through structured on-the-job training. So, up to this point at least, we realize that this is an open, transparent and all-inclusive affair and that it is not meant for ministers of government, but ordinary Afghans abroad who have the requisite skills needed at home. The key point however for contrasting must be in compensation. The Fund understood what the problem would be as expressed in this observation below: "There are a number of issues related to implementation of this component including appropriate compensation levels - attractive enough to recruit Afghan overseas, but reasonable enough to minimize friction with existing civil servants, and to ensure the establishment and adherence to transparent and clear guidelines". To meet the challenge, a Coordination Committee (CC) was mandated to provide guidelines for recruitment and compensation. The UNDP advertised in the local press in Afghanistan for a "programme administration contractor" to recruit at least 30 senior-level Afghan expatriates "to contribute to policy reform and institutional development" and at least another 50 technical-level Afghan expatriates to fill skill gaps in critical areas and to train Afghan national counterparts. Compensation was based on "an equitable structure of compensation in line with relevant principles embodied in a code of conduct". So, it is obvious that the Afghan Fund the minister purported to use as an example is not the same as or similar in any way to the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund. Its operation is open and transparent with information available to the Afghan people; it is not a Fund to pay salaries of ministers but one to recruit ordinary Afghans with the relevant skills outside the country. The thought and consideration put into the compensation scheme and the fact that they did not need to break any law even in war-ravaged Afghanistan says enough about the noble intentions here. Also, unlike ours, the 2001 Yugoslav Capacity Building Fund was launched openly and jointly with a non-governmental organization in Yugoslavia known as Fund for an Open Society Yugoslavia. Kalman Mizsei, Assistant UN Secretary General and a host of other UN and Yugoslav officials publicly declared its aim as supporting the return of overseas-based Yugoslav professionals. This was also the case with another related initiative which involves UNDP "helping Yugoslavia's new democratic leadership energize reforms by networking with international experts" through putting in place a high calibre "brain trust" of policy advisors, "a step requested by Yugoslav Federal Deputy Prime Minister Labus, and Serbian Finance Minister Bozidar Djelic". In all these, as we've noted, there was information and openness - the UNDP, along with Yugoslav officials saw the need to do it openly, informing the Yugoslav people who are supposed to be the beneficiaries every step of the way. With the Nigeria Diaspora Trust Fund, the opposite was and still is the case. Secondly, while the Yugoslav Fund was used to assist Ministries and the Civil Service Council "in formulating and carrying out strategies to improve performance and the delivery of public services" and also "public agencies and municipalities in articulating reform priorities and finding national experts in think tanks, higher education institutions, civil society organizations and the private sector to help carry them forward", at no time was this Fund used to pay salaries or used to offset personal financial commitments of serving ministers, as is being done in the Nigerian case. Thirdly, from the little we've said so far, it is obvious that the Yugoslav Fund was more inclusive. While it is quite possible that this is more so because, like Afghanistan, we are talking of after the war and the need to rebuild on a massive scale, that does not justify the fact that till this day, even as the debate rages, we are only aware of two beneficiaries - the Minister of Finance, Mrs Okonjo-Iweala and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Olufemi Adeniji benefiting from the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund, apart from some other unnamed four the President spoke about. How anyone can justify this when there's a vast pool of high-achieving Nigerians in Diaspora ready, able and willing to join the national development effort baffles me greatly. Fourthly, in terms of funding, we have to point out that the Yugoslav non-governmental organization, Fund for an Open Society Yugoslavia, at the onset contributed almost two-third of the Fund, while the UNDP, apart from administering it, contributed the rest. But all we know with the Nigerian one, even after the UNDP's so-called clarification is that the UNDP is only administering the Fund. It said in its "fact sheet" that "the Diaspora Trust Fund is not related to any other UNDP Thematic Trust Funds or program funds as implied by some reports" and that no UNDP -core or non-core resources are used for the Fund nor is it part of the UNDP Country Program resources earmarked for Nigeria and that no fund is diverted from its ongoing development program, yet the fact remains that while we are aware of all these other Funds, we weren't aware of the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund. This is indeed the truth, which no one, either from the UNDP side or from the side of the Nigerian government is disputing. No Nigerian outside the very few at the top, and perhaps maybe only those directly involved knew of this Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund until the Secretary to the Government of the Federation made the startling revelations after being prodded by The Guardian. Now, we need more than just to know that it is "a joint endeavour by the government and its development partners". The whole funding arrangement is still shrouded in secrecy and Mallam El-Rufai obviously prefers to keep it so. Fifthly, we must also note that in relation to the Yugoslav experience, while the "brain trust" was something UNDP got involved in as a result of invitation by the government, the Yugoslav Capacity Building Fund itself was its own initiative. Unlike in Nigeria, where we're being told that our government actually came up to them to ask that they fashion a solution for us for the peculiar problem of attracting these high-achieving Nigerians, they went out there on their own in Yugoslavia to initiate the Yugoslav Capacity Building Fund, involving civil society organizations like the Fund for an Open Society Yugoslavia and all segments of the populace, home and abroad. Finally, and more importantly, on this comparison with the Yugoslav Fund, it is to be observed that neither the UNDP nor the Yugoslav government had to break any national law to get the programme going. To conclude, it is obvious that the minister's claims bother on outright lies or half-truths and these are delivered with the aim of deceiving Nigerians into believing that what they have is what obtains elsewhere. We, members of Concerned Nigerians have seen through this and have insisted and continue to insist that the Nigerian government and the UNDP come up with full disclosures. As I write, Mr Mark Malloch Brown, the UNDP Administrator has in front of him 19 questions to answer regarding the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund. These questions have been sent to him between Monday, March 8, 2004 and Wednesday, March 10 2004. If the UNDP is actually prepared to be open and transparent about the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund as it's promised, then Mr Brown needs to address those questions. While we patiently wait for him to do so, it is important to meanwhile address the misinformation that is being championed by Nigerian officials led by Mallam El-Rufai. Kennedy Emetulu, Kenn@nigeriavillagesquare.com London
|
|||||||||
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.