By Raymond Magen
This is not an indictment on the leader nor on the body known as TETFUND! Even if a paradox (judging from the caption), the clarification is needed inorder for a more open minded engagement on the subject.
TETFUND is acronymized from Tertiary Education Trust Fund. The body came into being through a 2011 enactment of the National Assembly. Since then, TETFUND’s impact on Public Tertiary Education has been remarkable!
However, it has failed to have any positive impact on monotechnics. This, contrary to the spirit of the law establishing TETFUND and contrary, also, to the laws repealed in order to enact the TETFUND Act.
We will come back to expanding on that point.
Before that, let’s reassure ourselves of our proper understanding of monotechnics. Essentially, they are institutions that offer a single subject or closely related courses or programmes of study. Mono, draws from the Greek word monos, meaning, alone/single. We have just reassured ourselves of our understanding of monotechnics. It’s clear to all of us what we mean by monogamy versus polygamy. It’s in same sense that we view these institutions.
Let’s quickly go to keeping the promise made in the paragraph before the last one.
Prior to the establishment of TETFUND, the country had the Education Tax Act Cap. E4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and Education Tax Fund Act No. 17, 2003 all of which aimed at developing scholarship and infrastructure across all Public Tertiary Institutions.
Curiously, in Section 7 subsection 3 of the TETFUND Act, there are just 3 categories of tertiary institutions namely Universities, Colleges of Education and Polytechnics. It is for just these 3 that the fund received and managed by TETFUND is to be shared! Universities owned by the Government take 50% while the remaining 50% is shared equally between the other two. Nothing for monotechnics!
However, the TETFUND Act in Section 6 ( e ) that enumerates the functions of the Board of Trustees that would manage the fund, reads as follows : “The Board of Trustees shall- …………(e) ensure disbursement of funds to various public tertiary educational institutions in Nigeria;”
Indeed, Section 7 of the same Act reads thus in sub section 2 (a): “( 2 ) The Board of Trustees shall administer, manage and disburse the tax imposed by this Act on the basis of-
(a) funding of all public tertiary educational institutions;”
All public tertiary educational institutions should mean all of them!
In fact, there’s credible basis to believe that an appreciation of such enormous responsibilities was in the imagination of the law makers which then informed their bold and daring actions on its funding.
The enacting Act of the TETFUND, went ahead in Section 1 subsection 4 of the Principal Act, to set aside Section 60 of the Petroleum Profit Tax Act that specifically restricts any further taxes charged on income or profits as well as dividends in that sector! It was a deliberate effort at ensuring a sizeable pool of resources available to TETFUND so as to fully intervene in public Tertiary education.
Under the current enactment Act which I believe, erroneously excludes monotechnics, there have been a number of repercussions such as the poor quality of instruction materials in many public monotechnics; some of the monotechnics have lost their accreditation due to the repeal of the laws that hitherto guaranteed regular government interventions that ensured they maintained minimum and optimal standards. Most of them are unable to engage in research at levels their counterparts in other countries do.
In fact, some monotechnics have had to halt attachment to their specialty in favour of a broader array of specialties turning them into polytechnics just so they can qualify for federally available gains such as TETFUND interventions. This measure derails from their original basis for being established. A close example is that of the Akperan Orshi College of Agriculture, Yandev in Gboko, Benue State.
Further, Colleges or Schools of Nursing as well as many other specialized institutions scattered across the country and with high value but in need of sponsorship of academic scholarship as well as infrastructure, are left in dire want of such critical support. Their lofty ambitions towards specialty and expertise; their vision to innovating and championing new ideas and methods in their field, have become implausible.
SOLUTION
I have two suggestions. Both on legislation as that is where the problem is.
One, the TETFUND Act should be amended to include monotechnics in the sharing of what is pooled and allocated to Public Tertiary institutions under her mandate.
Such amendment should come as an Executive Bill in order that it carries the required sense of exigency and weight as well as those other paraphernalia that give the necessary push towards legislative success and assure of the Executive Arm’s commitment to prompt execution when passed.
OR
Two, while I strongly favour the first suggestion, I am not unmindful of the obsessive and unwilling disposition of publicly funded bodies to welcoming an additional body that would alter their sharing formula and lessen their share from the pool.
Therefore, a special fund for monotechnics/specialised institutions could be legislated into being or brought to being by Executive fiat – the funding of which would be from one of many sources or funds available to the Presidency.
These would be my suggestions on the matter.
Finally, I agree even before there’s a “nudge” from any of the many perceptive readers out there, that, the caption of this piece could have been more positive than the accusative tilt it preferred. A heading in the words of: “Towards A Broader Impact By TETFUND On Public Tertiary Education”, would have been more positively aspirational in capturing the essence of the write up even if less sensational as negative headlines tend. I apologize for this intentional “wrongdoing”. I seem to have preyed on the insatiable appetite by many for “gbas gbos” episodes online.
Raymond Magen writes from Abuja
