The Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFUND) is funded through the education tax collected from the profit of registered companies operating in the country . It is to fund infrastructural development and training in the nation’s institutions of higher learning. Inspite of the existence of the interventionist agency, several institutions still suffer from serious infrastructural decay as a result of not being able to access funds. This has prompted the House of Representatives to initiate an amendment to the establishment act that will engineer competition among the institutions, TONY AKOWE reports
What is today known as the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFUND) first came into existence as Education Trust Fund. But it was changed to TETFUND, the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (Establishment) Act 2011. The Academic Staff Union of University (ASUU) and other unions in the education sector pride themselves as being party to the creation of the fund to disburse, manage and monitor education tax to government owned tertiary institutions in Nigeria as one of the ways of addressing the lack of infrastructure. It was also partly to assist in funding research and training in the sector. Across several tertiary institutions today, the only government infrastructural presence in the last 10 years has been those funded by the agency. However, these institutions also have lots of abandoned projects even after accessing funds from the agency, while many others have not been able to access funds. Even though there have been arguments that the agency be allowed to extend funding to private institutions, the change of name from Education Trust Fund, ETF to TETFUND was to target funding solely for tertiary education, while leaving the other segment to the Universal Basic Education Commission(UBEC).
The mandate of the agency is to provide financial support to tertiary institutions for infrastructure development, research, and academic staff training, promote academic excellence and quality education and enhance the capacity of institutions to produce high-quality graduates. Its specific mandate include to allocate funds to tertiary institutions for infrastructure development (e.g., classrooms, laboratories, libraries), research and development, academic staff training and development and acquisition of educational equipment and materials. It is also to provide support institutional capacity building and strategic planning, monitor and evaluate the utilisation of funds by beneficiary institutions and collaborate with other agencies to promote education and research.
Areas of intervention of the agency in tertiary institutions include Annual Direct Intervention (ADI) for infrastructure development, Research and Development (R&D) grants, Academic Staff Training and Development (AST&D) programmes, Library Development and ICT Infrastructure and Special Interventions (e.g., entrepreneurship, skills acquisition). Inspite of these opportunities, there have been concerns about the accessibility and implementation of TETFUND’s interventions. Some studies have highlighted the need for improved funding options and more effective utilisation of its resources.
Conscious of the need to strengthen the agency and make the funds accessible to all benefiting institutions, Speaker of the House of Representatives presented a bill before the House to amend the Tertiary Education Trust Fund Act, 2011 to provide for additional conditions for accessing funds for capital projects by beneficiary institutions. Presenting the bill on behalf of the Speaker, Babajimi Benson representing Ikorodu Federal Constituency of Lagos State said the fund was established because the Federal Government noticed the monumental decay in schools at all levels particularly in the tertiary institutions, adding that there was decay of infrastructure, and there was no conducive environment for teaching and learning leading to very low morale of both academic and nonacademic staff of higher institution. The quest to address the unfortunate problem birthed the TETFUND as an intervention agency to provide supplementary support to all public tertiary institutions with the main objective of using funding alongside project management for the rehabilitation, restoration and consolidation of tertiary education. The major source of income available to the fund is the two per cent education tax paid from profit of companies registered in Nigeria.
Benson argued that constant experience has shown that lack of capacity, lack of integrity, laziness and misappropriation of funds characterised many of the government owned institutions, leaving these projects lying fallow and uncompleted. He argued that the objective of TETFUND is not to takeover infrastructural development in our tertiary institutions, it was however designed to help these institutions such as universities, polytechnics, colleges of education and others address some infrastructural deficits. While several schools have advantage of the fund, many have failed to see the need for that.
“Since one of the very purposes of government is to find solutions to societal problem, this bill seeks to encourage administrators or managers of government institutions to work hard to provide their own infrastructure to enable them access the TETFUND for further development. In other words, any institution that is unable to provide evidence of what it has done in the three preceding years are ineligible to access the fund,” he said.
The bill is aimed at amending section 7 of the existing Act to provide additional conditions for accessing fund for capital projects by beneficiary institutions in order to encourage the beneficiary institutions to embark on their own capital projects instead of relying solely on TETFUND for capital development.
The amendment states that “in the case of regular intervention, the Board of Trustees shall not disburse any amount for any capital project unless: a. in three years preceding the year of application, the beneficiary institution has executed capital projects worth at least N500 million the type, quantity, quality and standard of the capital project executed meets the type, quantity, quality or standard prescribed by the Act or its regulations; the beneficiary institution shows verifiable evidence of the existence of the capital project in the institution; and the total cost (including variations) of the capital project is verified and certified by the Auditor General of the federation in case of federal institutions or the Auditor General of States in case of states owned institutions.
It also suggests that any institution that fails to meet up with the conditions prescribed in the law shall forfeit an amount proposed for the defaulting institutions and the amount forfeited shall be disbursed as first option as additional allocation to any institution within the same state or same geo-political zone provided the institution meet the requirement set out under this Act.
But some members of the House are concerned about the import of the bill when passed into law. While praising the spirit behind the bill, Dagomie Abiante (PDP, Rivers ) wondered what will happen to new universities who wish to apply for the funds from the agency, adding that with the new amendments, such universities may not have such required track record of developmental feats to access the fund, thereby leading to the disenfranchisement of such universities who might have genuine reasons for seeking to access such funds. Also, Mark Esset (PDP, Akwa Ibom) and a member of the House Committee on TETFUND said many universities are unable to access the funds due to the many bureaucratic conditions. He argued that if the amended is passed, the law will make it even more cumbersome for universities to access such funds. He, however, called for a relaxation of some of the rules to aid universities.
Speaking along the same line, Peter Uzokwe (YPP, Anambra) argued that the provisions of the bill will make accessing funds more difficult for the institutions, suggesting that the supervisory agencies and the relevant Committees of the House should ensure strict oversight instead of making more cumbersome laws. Several other lawmakers believe that while there is the need to ensure a competitive atmosphere for public universities to develop their facilities, the conditions being proposed in the amendment will negatively affect some institutions who may not have the deserved push. This class of lawmakers argued that the law be allowed to exist the way it is, while the supervisory ministry should intensify monitoring efforts to ensure that these institutions live up to expectations. Like Abiante, they argued that amending the law to provide stringent conditions will affect the growth and development of new universities.
But Ahmed Satomi (APC, Borno) agrees with the provision of the bill, stressing that the provisions will promote healthy competition in the tertiary education sector and encourage self-sufficiency, financial discipline, accountability and drive internally generated revenue. Other members argued that most universities fail in the implementation of TETFUND as well as such other intervention funds due to lack of capacity from bill of quantity, procurement, adequate appropriation procedures and required supervision of utilising intervention funds. However, those who believe that the amendment will spur competition among all the institutions argued that many institutions have not been able to access funds from the agency because of lack of ideas, laziness and corruption. They argued that if the new conditions are attached, institutions will plan to advance their development efforts. They gave examples of some institutions with numerous TETFUND funded projects attributing it to the foresight of those heading the institutions. According to them, the new law will encourage infrastructural development in the institutions as they will not be competing for available funds.
Chairman of the House Committee on TETFUND, Mariam Onuoha said the act establishing the agency already has lots of stringent measures for accessing funds from the agency, but lamented the inaction on the part of several institutions. She said most institutions are unable to meet up with some of these conditions which seem a bit stringent, stressing that poor performance is also a reason for the inability to access the funds. She, however, called for proper oversight so that the aims of the bill can be achieved.
Deputy Minority Leader, Ali Isa however, said issues relating to the bill should be sent to the TETFUND committee for determination as the committee is empowered to receive input from stakeholders. Also, Olumide Osoba (APC, Ogun) said the bill seeks to ensure that the intervention funds are well accounted for.
Speaking further on the bill, Benson said the amendment was initiated by the Speaker after a meeting with a former Pro-Chancellor of a university who confided in him regarding a lot of abandoned projects and wasted funds.
This, he stated, necessitated his desire to propose the bill to ensure only institutions with capacity and serious notions access funds.
Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu called for more seriousness on the part of TETFUND to ensure strict compliance to the rules governing the funds and hoped the provisions of the bill will not disenfranchise new and genuine institutions that seek to access the funds. The passage of the bill for second reading has now opened it to stakeholders engagement on the merits and demerits of the amendment. Tertiary institutions in the country and other stakeholders will be given the opportunity to state their views on the bill and its implication on the development of infrastructure. A closer look at the amendment sought revealed that it only dwelt on conditions for accessing funds for infrastructural development, while other sections still remain.
